One of many letters to the Globe & Mail that were never published.
Canada
Palestine Association,
P.O.Box, 1085
Halifax, NS. B3J 2X1
July 14,2003
Dear Editor:
Your editorial:{ "Refugees of 1948" July 14} evades basic elemental principles and facts.
The Zionist movement,
throughout its history, and as articulated by all its leaders from Theodor
Herzl to Ariel Sharon, planned and effected, through massacres,
intimidation and psychological warfare, a process of ethnic cleansing to
expel the Palestinian people from their native land.
Theodor Herzl wrote in his diaries in 1896, “We shall try to spirit the
penniless population [the Arabs] across the border ... Both the process of
expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly
and circumspectly” (from R. Patai ed., The Complete Diaries of Theodor
Herzl,Vol. 1).
David Ben-Gurion, in a letter to his son Amos in 1937, confided that when
the Jewish state came into being, “We will expel the Arabs and take their
places". Later, Ben-Gurion, while visiting the newly conquered city of
Nazareth in July 1948, exclaimed, “Why are there so many Arabs left here?
Why didn’t you expel them?”
Joseph Weitz, the Jewish Agency chief representative, also stated that he
and other Zionist leaders concluded in 1940 that there was “no room for
both peoples together in this country”. The achievement of Zionist
objectives, he realized, required “a Palestine or at least Western
Palestine (West of the Jordan River) without Arabs”. He wrote that it was
necessary “to transfer
the Arabs from here to neighbouring countries – to transfer all of them,
and only after such transfer would the country be able to absorb millions
of our brethren”.
The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 brought about the
expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians from their historic homeland. This
calculated policy was followed by the destruction of over 400 Palestinian
towns and villages, so as to prevent the return of the refugees to their
homes. These refugees, together with their children and grandchildren,
number around 4 million people, living mostly in intolerable conditions in
refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip
for the last 54 years. Their determination to return to their homes has
not waned or faltered. They constitute the largest and most persistent
refugee problem in the world.
The Right of Return (ROR) is sacred and legal. It is enshrined in
international law and repeated UN resolutions. Article 13 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights states: “Everyone has the right to leave any
country including his own, and to return to his country”. On December 11,
1948, The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted resolution #194,
of which paragraph 11 states that the General Assembly:
“Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at
peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest
practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of
those choosing not to return and for the loss of or damage to property
which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made
good by the governments or authorities responsible ….
It is vital to observe that the ROR is an individual right, with emphasis,
in these UN resolutions, on the free choice for each refugee to exercise
this right. This point is fundamental in the current political context,
making it illegal and unacceptable for any other body, be it the U.S.,
Israel or the Palestinian Authority (PA), to bargain away this
individual
right.
Furthermore, the emphasis in this resolution is that the refugees have the
free choice to return to their homes, and not merely to a future
Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, as some political maneuvers
may imply.
In the context of Resolution #194, the international community felt a deep
responsibility for this tragedy, as expressed by the UN Mediator in
Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, who stated, “It would be an offence
against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of
the conflict were denied the right of return to their homes” (UN Doc. A.
648, 1948). Tragically, Count Bernadotte, a man of nobility and honour,
paid dearly for making this point of elemental justice. He was
assassinated on
September 17, 1948 in Jerusalem, by the terrorist “Stern gang”, on the
orders of its leader (and later prime minister of Israel) Yitzhak Shamir.
It is interesting to note that Resolution #194 has been reaffirmed by the
UN over a hundred times, but “the earliest practicable date” has not yet
arrived, 55 years later.
It is of relevance to point out that the implementation of Resolution
#194, as well as the Partition Resolution #181, was a condition stipulated
in the admission of Israel to the UN, as per Resolution #273, of May 11,
1949. Thus. it can be reasonably argued that Israel’s UN membership is
illegitimate, given its refusal to implement these conditions.
The process of ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians was continued in 1967,
when Israel expelled another 300,000 Palestinian refugees from the West
Bank, many of them expelled for the second time. The UN Security Council
ordered their return, as per Resolution #237 of June 14. 1967. Thirty six
years later this resolution remains unimplemented.
Another incredible aspect of the Israeli creation of refugees and denial
of their ROR is the experience of Palestinian Israeli citizens. Of the 1.2
million Palestinian citizens of Israel, approximately 250,000 are to this
day refugees in Israel. They are called, in the Orwellian Zionist lexicon,
“present absentees”. They acquired this label for having been away from
their homes in 1948 – even if only for a single day – yet still remaining
within the (pre-1967) boundaries of Israel. On the basis of this lsraeli
determination, their homes and land have been illegally confiscated for
the benefit of Russian and other immigrants of Jewish religion or origin.
Israel, we are told, is a “Jewish state”, not a state of all its citizens.
You refer to the " subsequent attack on the newborn state by Arab armies" , implying a cause and effect to the refugee problem. In fact over 350,000 refugees were expelled or fled, and scores of cities, like Jaffa and Acre, towns and villages, that were allotted to the Arab state, as per the UN Resolution #181, of Nov. 29,1947, were occupied by the Zionist forces, before a single Arab army soldier entered Palestine on May 15,1948. The entry of Arab armies was thought to bring to an end this process of ethnic cleansing.
You speak of the Jewish refugees from Arab countries, stating : " And they fled amid an atmosphere of anti-Jewish incitement and violence." Believe it or not, the incitement and violence against Jewish citizens of Arab countries came from Israeli politicians. Mordechai Ben Porat, an Israeli agent, is quoted to have been sent in 1950 by Yigal Allon to Iraq to 'bring about' the emigration of these citizens to Israel. Hand grenades were tossed into Masouda Shem-Tov synagogue, in Baghdad, killing and injuring many innocent worshippers, so as to blame it on the Iraqi Arabs. The operation succeded in bringing many thousands of immigrants to Israel.
Be that as it may, these Jewish refugees have, too, the perfect right to return to their homes in Arab countries and receive compensation. In fact, Arab countries, unlike Israel, have declared their willingness to allow their Jewish citizens to return to their homes.
Finally, it is important to emphasize that securing this elemental principle of justice for the refugees – the free choice to return to their homes – is a vital element in obtaining peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians in this tortured land.
Yours sincerely,
Ismail Zayid,M.D.
President, Canada Palestine Association.
P.S. Dear Editor: I recognise this contribution is far too long for a letter to Editor, and I would request if you would consider it as an opinion piece.
Canada
Park:
Canadian Complicity in a War Crime
By Dr. Ismail Zayid
"Here is our house", says Ibrahim Elsheikh, the 75-year-old mukhtar (village headman) of Imwas (Emmaus), pointing to the rubble of his home which stood there until June 1967, when Israel invaded and occupied Sinai, the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights. Thousands of villagers, from Imwas, Yalu and Beit Nuba-my own hometown-still cry remembering their homes that stood there until Israel erased them from the face of The Holy Land, when they were systematically dynamited and bulldozed. In Beit Nuba alone, 18 old or disabled men, who were unable or unwilling to leave their homes instantly, were buried under the rubble.
No fighting took place in these villages when they were occupied in the early hours of June 6, 1967. The three villages were once part of what was called the Latrun salient. Over 10,000 people lived there; they had schools, mosques, agricultural land and many centuries of history. It was in Imwas (Emmaus) where Christians believe that Jesus Christ first appeared after the Crucifixion.
The destruction of these villages was witnessed and described by the Israeli journalist Amos Kenan, who was a reserve soldier in the occupying force in Beit Nuba. He gave this account to the Israeli newspaper Ha'Olam Hazeh, which was prohibited by the censor from publishing it. It was sent to all members of the Knesset, and to the Prime Minister and Defence minister, but no response was received.
"The unit commander told us that it had been decided to blow up three
villages in our sector; they were Beit Nuba, Imwas and Yalu ... We were told
to block the entrances of the villages and prevent inhabitants [from]
returning .... The order was to shoot over their heads and tell them not to
enter the village.
"Beit Nuba is built of fine quarry stones; some of the houses are magnificent. Every house is surrounded by an orchard, olive trees, apricots, vines and presses. They are well kept. Among the trees, there are carefully tended vegetable beds.
"At noon the first bulldozer arrived and pulled down the first house at the edge of the village. Within ten minutes the house was turned into rubble. The olive trees and cypresses were all uprooted. After the destruction of three houses, the first refugee column arrived from the direction of Ramallah. We did not fire in the air. There were old people who could hardly walk, murmuring old women, mothers carrying babies, small children. The children wept and asked for water. They all carried white flags.
"We told them to go to Beit Sira. They told us they had been driven out. They had been wandering like this for four days, without food, some dying on the road. They asked to return to their village ... Some had a goat, a lamb, a donkey or a camel. A father ground wheat by hand to feed his four children ... The children cried. Some of our soldiers started crying too.
We went to fetch the Arabs some water. We stopped a car with a major, two captains and a woman ... We asked the officers why these refugees were sent from one place to another and driven out of everywhere. They told us that this was good for them, they should go. 'Moreover', said the officers, 'what do we care about the Arabs anyway?' "
"We drove them out. They go on wandering like lost cattle. The weak die. Our unit was outraged. The refugees gnashed their teeth when they saw the bulldozers pull down the trees. None of us understood how Jews could behave like this. No one understood why these fellaheen [villagers] shouldn't beallowed to take blankets and some food.
"The chickens and doves were buried in the rubble. The fields were turned into wasteland in front of our eyes. The children who went crying on the road will be fedayeen [freedom fighters-I.Z.] in nineteen years, in the next round. Thus we have lost the victory." (From Israel Imperial News, March 1968.)
Uri Avneri, then a Knesset member, described the destruction of these villages as a definite war crime. This was carried out on the direct orders of Yitzhak Rabin, then Chief of Staff of Israel's armed forces. These acts are in direct violation of The Fourth Geneva Convention, 1949, to which Israel is a signatory. Article 53 of the convention states: " Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the state, or to other public authorities or social or cooperative organizations is prohibited".
It is now difficult to spot the ruins and the rubble. Today there stands on the spot the infamy called "Canada Park", with picnic areas for Israelis, built with Canadian tax-deductible dollars provided by the Canadian Jewish National Fund (JNF).
It was in 1973 that Bernard Bloomfield of Montreal, then President of the JNF of Canada, spearheaded a campaign among the Canadian Jewish community to raise $15 million to establish Canada Park, so as to provide a picnic area accessible to Israelis from Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
At the entrance of Canada Park, just off John Diefenbaker Parkway (opened by Diefenbaker himself in 1975), is a sign that reads: "Welcome to Canada Park in Ayalon Valley-a project of the Jewish National Fund of Canada."
The JNF, responsible for the upkeep of the park, has removed all signs of
the villages and their inhabitants from the area. It would seem that only
the Canadian donors are worthy of being remembered; their names are engraved
in the bronze plaques which cover an entire wall. Interestingly, these
donors are not directly informed that the park is built on the site
of the demolished villages. The Director of the American JNF stated that,
"It is a delicate situation, and one cannot expect an institution [such as
the Canadian JNF] which gathers money from abroad, to publicise the issue
[of the demolition of these villages]." ("Canada Park: A Case Study," by
Ehud Meltz and Michal Selah, Kol Hair, Aug. 31, 1984.)
The glossy guidebook, published by the JNF of Canada, has an entire page devoted to the history of the area, including the biblical, Roman, Crusader and British periods, but has no mention of these villages or their destruction. Another step in the obliteration of the villages from memory can be seen in their absence from Israeli maps.
As a new Canadian, my personal pain was compounded when I read on Dec. 4, 1978, in our local newspaper, The Halifax Herald, that Peter Herschorn, a prominent Halifax businessman and past chairman of the Atlantic branch of the JNF, was honored by the JNF for his humanitarian work and "choosing the right goodness" in his participation in the building of Canada Park. The Lieutenant-Governor of Nova Scotia, the Premier of N.S. and the Mayor of Halifax were in attendance and offered their greetings. I was mortified that political leaders in my new country, Canada, would consider the erection of recreation centres on the site of ruins of criminally demolished peaceful villages, illegally occupied, as a humanitarian act.
Canada continuously brags about its reputation for upholding the UN Charter, international law and human rights, yet allows its taxpayers' dollars to sponsor such a war crime. Over many years, I have written repeatedly-supported by some honourable politicians like Senator Heath Macquarrie and Mr. R.A. Corbett, MP-to successive Revenue Canada Ministers, expressing concern about this, and receiving only vague unhelpful answers.
Father Louis, who worked at the Latrun Franciscan Monastery for 40 years, said, "Every time I go by Canada Park, I still get angry. Why does the Canadian government allow it to be called Canada Park? It is built on the ruins of people's homes".
Every Canadian should be asking: why should our country's name be associated with this infamy?
|
||||||||
