21 sept 2017
The Popular Conference of the Palestinians Abroad, in cooperation with other pro-Palestine groups, has launched a popular campaign under the title “Balfour: Centenary of a Colonial Project.”
According to the organizers, the campaign aims to raise the Palestinian voice worldwide on the centenary of the Balfour declaration and to emphasize the Palestinian people’s right to return to their homes.
The campaign will promote public awareness about the meaning of this declaration historically, politically and legally and unveil hidden details about it.
It also seeks to confront the events held by Israel to mark the Balfour declaration and to highlight the responsibility of western colonial states in general and Britain in particular for the Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe) that resulted from this declaration.
For this purpose, the organizers created the hashtag “#Balfour 100” on Twitter as well as the website “www.balfour100 colonial.org” and called for active participation in their campaign.
According to the organizers, the campaign aims to raise the Palestinian voice worldwide on the centenary of the Balfour declaration and to emphasize the Palestinian people’s right to return to their homes.
The campaign will promote public awareness about the meaning of this declaration historically, politically and legally and unveil hidden details about it.
It also seeks to confront the events held by Israel to mark the Balfour declaration and to highlight the responsibility of western colonial states in general and Britain in particular for the Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe) that resulted from this declaration.
For this purpose, the organizers created the hashtag “#Balfour 100” on Twitter as well as the website “www.balfour100 colonial.org” and called for active participation in their campaign.
8 sept 2017
Europal Forum declared intention to lead a delegation from Jerusalem to the UK, which will take place between 11 and 15 September 2017, with the aim of raising concerns on the Palestinian suffering and expose the Israeli crimes against the Palestinians.
The delegation will consist of several members of community leaders including human rights activists, NGOs representatives and a catholic Christian figure from Jerusalem.
The delegation is set to meet with a number of Parliamentarians and lords from several parties in the House of Commons as well as a few politicians from the Irish parties.
The delegation will also meet with several NGOs, solidarity groups and religious Christian leaders in both London and Belfast, Northern Ireland.
The delegation will also conduct two seminars aimed at the British public where Pro-Palestine activists as well members of the Arab, Muslim and Palestinian communities have been invited.
Zaher Birawi, the chairman of EuroPal Forum, stressed the importance of such delegations to convey the reality of the suffering of the Palestinians under occupation.
Zaher Birawi stressed that delegates can play an essential role in conveying the reality witnessed on ground to other parliamentarians and decision makers in the West, which would contribute towards ending the suffering of Palestinians, which has been ongoing for the past seven decades.
This visit came in line with the recent dangerous escalations against the Palestinians in Jerusalem and extra security measures imposed such as metal detectors installation outside Muslim's third holiest site which was ceased by the immense efforts of the Palestinian protestors.
The delegation will consist of several members of community leaders including human rights activists, NGOs representatives and a catholic Christian figure from Jerusalem.
The delegation is set to meet with a number of Parliamentarians and lords from several parties in the House of Commons as well as a few politicians from the Irish parties.
The delegation will also meet with several NGOs, solidarity groups and religious Christian leaders in both London and Belfast, Northern Ireland.
The delegation will also conduct two seminars aimed at the British public where Pro-Palestine activists as well members of the Arab, Muslim and Palestinian communities have been invited.
Zaher Birawi, the chairman of EuroPal Forum, stressed the importance of such delegations to convey the reality of the suffering of the Palestinians under occupation.
Zaher Birawi stressed that delegates can play an essential role in conveying the reality witnessed on ground to other parliamentarians and decision makers in the West, which would contribute towards ending the suffering of Palestinians, which has been ongoing for the past seven decades.
This visit came in line with the recent dangerous escalations against the Palestinians in Jerusalem and extra security measures imposed such as metal detectors installation outside Muslim's third holiest site which was ceased by the immense efforts of the Palestinian protestors.
3 sept 2017
Labour’s National Policy Forum (NPF) plans to present proposals to the Party conference, later this month, which dramatically alter the current position on Israel/Palestine.
As recently as June, the election manifesto called for an end to Israel’s blockade, illegal occupation and settlements.
These have been dropped from the policy proposal, as has the pledge that “A Labour government will immediately recognise the state of Palestine.”
According to the PNN, all that remains in the NPF’s report to conference is the statement that, “In Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution: a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.”
“The NPF seems to be asking Labour to abandon its support for Palestinian rights,” said Jenny Manson, chair of Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL), a new organisation established in July for Jewish members of the Labour Party.
JVL is calling for the relevant section of the National Policy Forum report to be remitted, i.e. not put to a vote at Conference.
In a statement the group asks: “What has happened since Jeremy Corbyn presented the overwhelmingly popular 2017 Manifesto to the electorate, for the party to abandon its commitment to immediate recognition of Palestinian aspirations?”
The statement notes a media report indicating that the policy shift has the support of pro-Israel lobbyists within the party.
Manson said, “Most party members, including many Jewish ones, will be alarmed at this apparent surrender of the party’s principles.
They have not been consulted about it and we believe they will support our call for this section of the NPF report to be remitted.”
JVL (Jewish Voice for Labour) notes with concern that the National Policy Forum report (p. 56), to be presented to Brighton conference, departs significantly from the Party’s Manifesto commitments (p.117-18) to a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
NPF Chair Ann Cryer says, in her introduction to the report, that it is the result of “consultation with Party members, and a series of manifesto priorities meetings with NPF representatives and stakeholders.”
But, there is no sign on the NPF website of a groundswell of opinion requiring the party to ditch the commitment to recognising the state of Palestine and an end to illegal settlement building and occupation.
It is noted, however, that an article in the pro-Israel Jewish Chronicle applauds the report for avoiding “any direct criticism of Israel” and quotes a “senior Jewish Labour source” saying the wording was “better than the election manifesto and a bit of a success.”
The source is presumably aligned with the Jewish Labour Movement, which has acquired considerable influence in the Party while deploying allegations of antisemitism against those who persist in upholding their legitimate right to express “direct criticism of Israel.”
As members and supporters of JVL, a newly-formed organisation representing Jewish Labour Party members, we fully recognise Israel’s responsibility for the oppression of Palestinians and urge the NEC to seek remittance of this section of the NPF report and to ensure genuine consultation with members representing a wider range of opinion on this crucial international policy issue.
The 2017 Labour Party election manifesto contained the following statement: “Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on a two-state solution – a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.
“There can be no military solution to this conflict and all sides must avoid taking action that would make peace harder to achieve. That means both an end to the blockade, occupation and settlements, and an end to rocket and terror attacks. Labour will continue to press for an immediate return to meaningful negotiations leading to a diplomatic resolution. A Labour government will immediately recognise the state of Palestine.
“The National Policy Forum Report to the forthcoming Annual Conference says this (only) on Israel/Palestine:
In Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution: a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.”
As recently as June, the election manifesto called for an end to Israel’s blockade, illegal occupation and settlements.
These have been dropped from the policy proposal, as has the pledge that “A Labour government will immediately recognise the state of Palestine.”
According to the PNN, all that remains in the NPF’s report to conference is the statement that, “In Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution: a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.”
“The NPF seems to be asking Labour to abandon its support for Palestinian rights,” said Jenny Manson, chair of Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL), a new organisation established in July for Jewish members of the Labour Party.
JVL is calling for the relevant section of the National Policy Forum report to be remitted, i.e. not put to a vote at Conference.
In a statement the group asks: “What has happened since Jeremy Corbyn presented the overwhelmingly popular 2017 Manifesto to the electorate, for the party to abandon its commitment to immediate recognition of Palestinian aspirations?”
The statement notes a media report indicating that the policy shift has the support of pro-Israel lobbyists within the party.
Manson said, “Most party members, including many Jewish ones, will be alarmed at this apparent surrender of the party’s principles.
They have not been consulted about it and we believe they will support our call for this section of the NPF report to be remitted.”
JVL (Jewish Voice for Labour) notes with concern that the National Policy Forum report (p. 56), to be presented to Brighton conference, departs significantly from the Party’s Manifesto commitments (p.117-18) to a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
NPF Chair Ann Cryer says, in her introduction to the report, that it is the result of “consultation with Party members, and a series of manifesto priorities meetings with NPF representatives and stakeholders.”
But, there is no sign on the NPF website of a groundswell of opinion requiring the party to ditch the commitment to recognising the state of Palestine and an end to illegal settlement building and occupation.
It is noted, however, that an article in the pro-Israel Jewish Chronicle applauds the report for avoiding “any direct criticism of Israel” and quotes a “senior Jewish Labour source” saying the wording was “better than the election manifesto and a bit of a success.”
The source is presumably aligned with the Jewish Labour Movement, which has acquired considerable influence in the Party while deploying allegations of antisemitism against those who persist in upholding their legitimate right to express “direct criticism of Israel.”
As members and supporters of JVL, a newly-formed organisation representing Jewish Labour Party members, we fully recognise Israel’s responsibility for the oppression of Palestinians and urge the NEC to seek remittance of this section of the NPF report and to ensure genuine consultation with members representing a wider range of opinion on this crucial international policy issue.
The 2017 Labour Party election manifesto contained the following statement: “Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on a two-state solution – a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.
“There can be no military solution to this conflict and all sides must avoid taking action that would make peace harder to achieve. That means both an end to the blockade, occupation and settlements, and an end to rocket and terror attacks. Labour will continue to press for an immediate return to meaningful negotiations leading to a diplomatic resolution. A Labour government will immediately recognise the state of Palestine.
“The National Policy Forum Report to the forthcoming Annual Conference says this (only) on Israel/Palestine:
In Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Labour is committed to a comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution: a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable state of Palestine.”
24 july 2017
from New York University where she specialised in the politics of tourism development in the occupied West Bank.
TRNN transcript:
Sharmini Peries: It’s The Real News Network. I’m Sharmini Peries coming to you from Baltimore. In the 50 years that Israel has occupied the Palestinian territory, the Israeli military has used a variety of ways and means to repress Palestinian resistance. Israel not only imports weapons and ammunition, but it also developed a massive arm’s industry to do this. Keeping millions under control is a costly endeavor and would not have been possible without billions in foreign investments. Many of those investments are made by British banks and this is the topic of a new report published by War On Want titled, “Deadly Investments: UK bank complicity in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people.”
This report deals not only with the military occupation of Palestinians, but also with other means of repression, including Israeli apartheid policies toward Palestinians. The report was written by Michael Deas and Ryvka Barnard. Ryvka Barnard joins us today from London to discuss the report. She is the Senior Global Justice Campaign’s officer and Senior Campaigner on Militarism and Security at War On Want. Thanks for joining us, Ryvka.
Ryvka Barnard: Thanks for having me.
Sharmini Peries: Ryvka, War On Want has been following the corporate complicity of UK, particularly the Israeli violations of international law for many years. Now what did you find in this report that was a bit unique, or different?
Ryvka Barnard: Right. Well, this report is about UK bank and financial institutions that are investing in companies, selling weapons, and military technology to Israel. In the past, we’ve looked at some of those companies that are directly supplying equipment and technology to Israel used in violence against Palestinians. The banks and financial institutions is in some ways another piece of the puzzle. It’s a nodal point in the chain of complicity that we’re looking at.
Sharmini Peries: The focus of this report being banking, banks invest in order to generate profit usually. Not out of political interest or political agenda. Are there laws in the UK that legislate against this kind of investment?
Ryvka Barnard: Right. Well, one of the things … I mean, one of the pieces of the report is a new set of guidance that was released by the UN high commissioner for human rights just in June of this year, June 2017, clarifying that banks have the same responsibilities as other businesses under the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. That’s a set of criteria that businesses around the world are supposed to adhere to in respect of human rights. It’s also integrated into UK policy, so the UN guiding principles are promoted by the UK as the standard for how businesses should act in regard to human rights.
Banks, historically, have said, “Well, we’re not the same as other kinds of businesses,” for the reasons that you mentioned, saying, “We don’t make political decisions. This is just about our clients.” The UN guiding principles, this new set of guidance, said that banks have responsibilities through its business relationships also. That indicates very clearly that banks and financial institutions have a responsibility, a legal responsibility for the actions of their clients as well. If their clients are investing in the arm’s trade, the bank has a responsibility to distance themselves from those clients.
Sharmini Peries: Right. These guidelines that have been issued, which is obviously a good thing, is there anyone monitoring the compliance with such guidelines?
Ryvka Barnard: Well, the new set of guidance in relation to banks just came out a few months ago. There’s some good non-governmental organizations that look specifically at banks. One to mention is BankTrack, which has actually identified HSBC, which is one of the banks that we looked at as a laggard. That’s their term as a bank that has policy in place. HSBC, for example, which has over 830 million pounds invested in companies that are selling weapons to Israel. HSBC says, “Well, we have a defense policy and we can’t be responsible for what our clients do.” We’re saying, and other NGO’s have been saying, “Actually, banks have responsibility not only to have policy towards human rights, but to do monitoring and checks.” That’s what we’re asking HSBC to do, to look at its relationships with these arm’s companies and to divest from them immediately, because we know that arm’s companies like BAE Systems are supplying weapons that are used by Israel in attacks on Palestinians that violate international law.
Sharmini Peries: Right. One interesting fact about HSBC is that it has about 3.6 million pounds invested in Israeli arm’s company, Elbit Systems. You look into this example. Now, this is not a hell of a lot of money when it comes to the arm’s industry. Why is this a unique example for us to look at?
Ryvka Barnard: Well, for us here in the UK especially, Elbit Systems is, first of all, it’s one of Israel’s largest arm’s companies. It’s most known for producing, manufacturing drones, which are not only used by the Israeli military, but also used by militaries around the world. Elbit Systems has four factories in the UK. It co-owns four factories in the UK making drone parts, which are then sent to Israel and were used, for example, in Israel’s 2014 attacks on the Gaza Strip. Elbit Systems is one of the companies that HSBC is invested in. That’s a clear violation of the UN guiding principles and HSBC should be held to account for that. That’s why we’re doing this research, and why we’ve embarked on a campaign telling HSBC that it needs to divest from companies selling weapons to Israel or Israeli arm’s companies themselves.
Sharmini Peries: Now Ryvka, British arm’s companies like BAE Systems, as well as, US arm’s companies Boeing and Raytheon, are some examples listed among the companies which British banks invest in, which are complicit in Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians. These are international companies, which are also selling arms in other regions of the world, such as Saudi Arabia, which is fighting a proxy war in Yemen at the moment. Are there reports coming out of War On Want that focuses on these other such conflicts with these kinds of roles being played by international arm’s manufacturers, or is Israel, Palestine a particular example that you wanted to highlight?
Ryvka Barnard: Well, I think the … It’s not surprising at all that those companies, for example, BAE Systems are also, as you mentioned, completely complicit in war crimes in other parts of the world also, particularly in relation to Saudi Arabia and its war on Yemeni people. For us, we were looking at the chain of complicity in Israeli’s violation. We can look at the arm’s companies, we can look at the violations themselves, then we think it’s important also to look at the banks. Part of that is inspired by our work as a part of the boycott divestment and sanctions movement, which has called on people around the world to look at examples of complicity in our own communities and that’s what we’re doing, but certainly we support campaigns and research looking into these arm’s companies complicity in other places too. In fact, one of our closest allies here of the campaign against arm’s trade has been doing a lot of work on BAE Systems and UK companies arming Saudi Arabia.
Sharmini Peries: All right. Ryvka, thank you so much for joining us today. Looks like a very interesting report. We’ll put a link to it below this interview for those who might be more interested in reading the full report. Thank you so much.
Ryvka Barnard: Thank you very much.
Sharmini Peries: Thank you for joining us here on The Real News Network.
TRNN transcript:
Sharmini Peries: It’s The Real News Network. I’m Sharmini Peries coming to you from Baltimore. In the 50 years that Israel has occupied the Palestinian territory, the Israeli military has used a variety of ways and means to repress Palestinian resistance. Israel not only imports weapons and ammunition, but it also developed a massive arm’s industry to do this. Keeping millions under control is a costly endeavor and would not have been possible without billions in foreign investments. Many of those investments are made by British banks and this is the topic of a new report published by War On Want titled, “Deadly Investments: UK bank complicity in Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people.”
This report deals not only with the military occupation of Palestinians, but also with other means of repression, including Israeli apartheid policies toward Palestinians. The report was written by Michael Deas and Ryvka Barnard. Ryvka Barnard joins us today from London to discuss the report. She is the Senior Global Justice Campaign’s officer and Senior Campaigner on Militarism and Security at War On Want. Thanks for joining us, Ryvka.
Ryvka Barnard: Thanks for having me.
Sharmini Peries: Ryvka, War On Want has been following the corporate complicity of UK, particularly the Israeli violations of international law for many years. Now what did you find in this report that was a bit unique, or different?
Ryvka Barnard: Right. Well, this report is about UK bank and financial institutions that are investing in companies, selling weapons, and military technology to Israel. In the past, we’ve looked at some of those companies that are directly supplying equipment and technology to Israel used in violence against Palestinians. The banks and financial institutions is in some ways another piece of the puzzle. It’s a nodal point in the chain of complicity that we’re looking at.
Sharmini Peries: The focus of this report being banking, banks invest in order to generate profit usually. Not out of political interest or political agenda. Are there laws in the UK that legislate against this kind of investment?
Ryvka Barnard: Right. Well, one of the things … I mean, one of the pieces of the report is a new set of guidance that was released by the UN high commissioner for human rights just in June of this year, June 2017, clarifying that banks have the same responsibilities as other businesses under the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. That’s a set of criteria that businesses around the world are supposed to adhere to in respect of human rights. It’s also integrated into UK policy, so the UN guiding principles are promoted by the UK as the standard for how businesses should act in regard to human rights.
Banks, historically, have said, “Well, we’re not the same as other kinds of businesses,” for the reasons that you mentioned, saying, “We don’t make political decisions. This is just about our clients.” The UN guiding principles, this new set of guidance, said that banks have responsibilities through its business relationships also. That indicates very clearly that banks and financial institutions have a responsibility, a legal responsibility for the actions of their clients as well. If their clients are investing in the arm’s trade, the bank has a responsibility to distance themselves from those clients.
Sharmini Peries: Right. These guidelines that have been issued, which is obviously a good thing, is there anyone monitoring the compliance with such guidelines?
Ryvka Barnard: Well, the new set of guidance in relation to banks just came out a few months ago. There’s some good non-governmental organizations that look specifically at banks. One to mention is BankTrack, which has actually identified HSBC, which is one of the banks that we looked at as a laggard. That’s their term as a bank that has policy in place. HSBC, for example, which has over 830 million pounds invested in companies that are selling weapons to Israel. HSBC says, “Well, we have a defense policy and we can’t be responsible for what our clients do.” We’re saying, and other NGO’s have been saying, “Actually, banks have responsibility not only to have policy towards human rights, but to do monitoring and checks.” That’s what we’re asking HSBC to do, to look at its relationships with these arm’s companies and to divest from them immediately, because we know that arm’s companies like BAE Systems are supplying weapons that are used by Israel in attacks on Palestinians that violate international law.
Sharmini Peries: Right. One interesting fact about HSBC is that it has about 3.6 million pounds invested in Israeli arm’s company, Elbit Systems. You look into this example. Now, this is not a hell of a lot of money when it comes to the arm’s industry. Why is this a unique example for us to look at?
Ryvka Barnard: Well, for us here in the UK especially, Elbit Systems is, first of all, it’s one of Israel’s largest arm’s companies. It’s most known for producing, manufacturing drones, which are not only used by the Israeli military, but also used by militaries around the world. Elbit Systems has four factories in the UK. It co-owns four factories in the UK making drone parts, which are then sent to Israel and were used, for example, in Israel’s 2014 attacks on the Gaza Strip. Elbit Systems is one of the companies that HSBC is invested in. That’s a clear violation of the UN guiding principles and HSBC should be held to account for that. That’s why we’re doing this research, and why we’ve embarked on a campaign telling HSBC that it needs to divest from companies selling weapons to Israel or Israeli arm’s companies themselves.
Sharmini Peries: Now Ryvka, British arm’s companies like BAE Systems, as well as, US arm’s companies Boeing and Raytheon, are some examples listed among the companies which British banks invest in, which are complicit in Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians. These are international companies, which are also selling arms in other regions of the world, such as Saudi Arabia, which is fighting a proxy war in Yemen at the moment. Are there reports coming out of War On Want that focuses on these other such conflicts with these kinds of roles being played by international arm’s manufacturers, or is Israel, Palestine a particular example that you wanted to highlight?
Ryvka Barnard: Well, I think the … It’s not surprising at all that those companies, for example, BAE Systems are also, as you mentioned, completely complicit in war crimes in other parts of the world also, particularly in relation to Saudi Arabia and its war on Yemeni people. For us, we were looking at the chain of complicity in Israeli’s violation. We can look at the arm’s companies, we can look at the violations themselves, then we think it’s important also to look at the banks. Part of that is inspired by our work as a part of the boycott divestment and sanctions movement, which has called on people around the world to look at examples of complicity in our own communities and that’s what we’re doing, but certainly we support campaigns and research looking into these arm’s companies complicity in other places too. In fact, one of our closest allies here of the campaign against arm’s trade has been doing a lot of work on BAE Systems and UK companies arming Saudi Arabia.
Sharmini Peries: All right. Ryvka, thank you so much for joining us today. Looks like a very interesting report. We’ll put a link to it below this interview for those who might be more interested in reading the full report. Thank you so much.
Ryvka Barnard: Thank you very much.
Sharmini Peries: Thank you for joining us here on The Real News Network.
22 apr 2017
Isam Yousef, head of the Popular International Committee for the Support of Gaza, said the UK's refusal to apologize for Balfour declaration constitutes a renewal of the ill-famed promise.
In a press statement on Saturday, Yousef said “We adhere to our land and right of return. We promise our current and coming generations to liberate our lands”.
“Every Palestinian refugee, who was displaced because of Balfour Declaration, will return to his homeland Palestine and Israeli occupation will be brought to an end”, he underlined.
In a press statement on Saturday, Yousef said “We adhere to our land and right of return. We promise our current and coming generations to liberate our lands”.
“Every Palestinian refugee, who was displaced because of Balfour Declaration, will return to his homeland Palestine and Israeli occupation will be brought to an end”, he underlined.
12 apr 2017
The former mayor of London Ken Livingstone was suspended from the British Labor Party because of the statements he made a year ago describing the Nazi leader, Adolf Hitler, as a Zionist.
Following the ruling, Livingstone said that the Labor Party Committee suspended his membership for another year because of his political views, adding that he will launch a campaign to have the suspension overturned.
The left-wing opposition party was harassed during a debate about anti-Semitism in April 2016 after the Muslim MP Naz Shah had published social media posts criticizing Israel.
In an interview with the BBC, Livingstone defended Shah saying that her statements were criticizing the Israeli government not the Israelis or Jews in general.
Livingstone's membership was suspended at that time for two years and the decision was signed by the party's committee last Tuesday. He will be able to resume his work in the party in April 2018.
"Let's remember, when Hitler won the elections in 1932, his policy at that time was to transfer Jews to Israel. He supported Zionism before he got mad and ended up killing six million Jews," Livingstone said.
Following the ruling, Livingstone said that the Labor Party Committee suspended his membership for another year because of his political views, adding that he will launch a campaign to have the suspension overturned.
The left-wing opposition party was harassed during a debate about anti-Semitism in April 2016 after the Muslim MP Naz Shah had published social media posts criticizing Israel.
In an interview with the BBC, Livingstone defended Shah saying that her statements were criticizing the Israeli government not the Israelis or Jews in general.
Livingstone's membership was suspended at that time for two years and the decision was signed by the party's committee last Tuesday. He will be able to resume his work in the party in April 2018.
"Let's remember, when Hitler won the elections in 1932, his policy at that time was to transfer Jews to Israel. He supported Zionism before he got mad and ended up killing six million Jews," Livingstone said.
11 apr 2017
A petition urging the British government to apologize for the tragic fallouts of the Balfour Declaration received over 11,000 signatures, the Palestinian Return Center (PRC) reported.
According to the London-based PRC, the UK government is duty-bound to respond to the campaign in three days as any petition signed by more than 10,000 people will have a government response released alongside it.
PRC’s Executive Director, Tareq Hammoud, said the move is a sign of the increasing popularity garnered by the Balfour Apology Campaign.
“The fact that the petition reached a 10,000-signature threshold heralds a significant shift in public opinion vis-à-vis the Palestinian cause over the past decade,” said Hammoud.
Efforts have, meanwhile, been in full swing to reach a 100,000-signature threshold in an attempt to make the petition eligible for a House of Commons debate.
The petition makes part of PRC’s underway endeavors to urge the British government to make an apology over the Balfour pledge and to backtrack on its intent to mark the centenary of the declaration.
The Balfour Declaration was a letter dated November 2, 1917 from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community. The text of the letter gave, one hundred years ago, green light for the establishment, in Palestine, of a national home for the Jewish people.
According to the London-based PRC, the UK government is duty-bound to respond to the campaign in three days as any petition signed by more than 10,000 people will have a government response released alongside it.
PRC’s Executive Director, Tareq Hammoud, said the move is a sign of the increasing popularity garnered by the Balfour Apology Campaign.
“The fact that the petition reached a 10,000-signature threshold heralds a significant shift in public opinion vis-à-vis the Palestinian cause over the past decade,” said Hammoud.
Efforts have, meanwhile, been in full swing to reach a 100,000-signature threshold in an attempt to make the petition eligible for a House of Commons debate.
The petition makes part of PRC’s underway endeavors to urge the British government to make an apology over the Balfour pledge and to backtrack on its intent to mark the centenary of the declaration.
The Balfour Declaration was a letter dated November 2, 1917 from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community. The text of the letter gave, one hundred years ago, green light for the establishment, in Palestine, of a national home for the Jewish people.
22 mar 2017
The International Relations Council - Palestine voiced sorrow at the loss of key figure in the Northern Ireland peace process Martin McGuinness, who has been a long-time 'friend of Palestine.'
The Palestinian people lost a leading figure in Northern Ireland who had fought for justice, peace and the rights of the Irish people, the council said in its statement on Wednesday.
The council expressed sincere condolences to McGuinness’s family, Sinn Féin party, and the Irish people over their loss.
McGuinness was always keen to stand behind the Palestinian people’s just rights, the statement concluded.
The Palestinian people lost a leading figure in Northern Ireland who had fought for justice, peace and the rights of the Irish people, the council said in its statement on Wednesday.
The council expressed sincere condolences to McGuinness’s family, Sinn Féin party, and the Irish people over their loss.
McGuinness was always keen to stand behind the Palestinian people’s just rights, the statement concluded.
21 mar 2017
A parliamentary inquiry committee at the British House of Commons has acquitted Baroness Jenny Tonge of anti-Semitism claims made previously by the Israeli embassy and some media outlets in the UK.
The Israeli embassy accused Tonge, a member of Britain's House of Lords, of anti-Semitism following a symposium organized by the Palestinian Return Center (PRC) under her sponsorship on October 25, 2016 at the British House of Commons to announce the launch of the Balfour Apology Campaign.
In a report, the parliamentary inquiry committee announced the Israeli claims against Tonge were incorrect and affirmed that the event staged by the PRC was not anti-Semitic but rather a campaign to demand an apology for the Balfour Declaration.
The report listed a number of facts clearing the Baroness of violating the code of conduct followed at the House of Commons and refuted all Israeli allegations against other participants in the symposium.
The Israeli embassy accused Tonge, a member of Britain's House of Lords, of anti-Semitism following a symposium organized by the Palestinian Return Center (PRC) under her sponsorship on October 25, 2016 at the British House of Commons to announce the launch of the Balfour Apology Campaign.
In a report, the parliamentary inquiry committee announced the Israeli claims against Tonge were incorrect and affirmed that the event staged by the PRC was not anti-Semitic but rather a campaign to demand an apology for the Balfour Declaration.
The report listed a number of facts clearing the Baroness of violating the code of conduct followed at the House of Commons and refuted all Israeli allegations against other participants in the symposium.