Sunday, November 12, 2006

US vetoes 'biased' UN resolution

This kinda raised my hackles this morning when I read this. The States have vetoed a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel in the wake of the artillery attack which killed 18 Palestinian civilians last week in the town of Beit Hanoun. Britain abstained by the way while, France and Russia voted in favour.

US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, said “does not display an even-handed characterisation of the recent events in Gaza, nor does it advance the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace”.

Even-handed? The Palestinians are under occupation or hasn't Mr Bolton woken-up to that fact. The States continue to prop up the Israeli State as it has a vested interest in doing precisely that.

The vetoed text substituted the word “massacre” to describe the shelling with “military operation”. Again this shows how words can serve to dehumanise and minimise the reality of what happens to people. A massacre is a massacre which ever way you slice it and no mealy-mouthed changes will alter that.

Both Human Rights Watch and the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem have called for a fuller investigation into Wednesday’s killings.

Oh and there is a mention of a two-states solution by Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni. Is she serious? Two States = Bantustan for the Palestinians. Some blinking solution.

Here's a thought, she should read the excellent book, A Civilian Occupation (which was censored when it was first published) about the politics of occupation in relationship to architecture and the continued expansion of the Israeli State.