A ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas in the Gaza Strip started on Friday after 11 days of bombardment and firing of rockets.
Within this period, the Palestine Health ministry says at least 243 people, including more than 100 women and children, were killed in Gaza. Israel, on the other hand, says it killed at least 225 militants.
The Star's Eliud Kibii spoke to Palestine Ambassador Hazem Shabat about the recent conflict.
The Star: There is a lot of focus on Gaza, particularly by the media. What is the situation in other parts of Palestine?
Amb Hazem Shabat: This is deliberate. The conflict does not exist in Gaza and did not start with Hamas. This is a 100-year-old conflict. Israeli actions, measures, brutality and illegal measures did not start with the existence of Hamas. It preceded it by decades.
How can Israel cover its illegal actions? By bringing the attention of the world to Hamas, and how Hamas is defying Israel and trying to harm it using military means. Okay, but what happens in Hebrew, Jericho, Ramallah or Jerusalem for that matter? Are there any rockets in these areas? No. Is there Hamas dominance in these areas? No. And why are the measures almost equal?
People are getting killed daily in these cities in the clashes. They are using the most severe and harmful measures on unarmed people. And then you say you're using the international measures? All of this is documented by Israeli and UN organisations. I'm not referring in any way to any Palestinian means of documenting the Israeli actions. So Israel provoked East Jerusalem with a logic and a story that I think can only be described as shameful.
What is the trigger of the latest conflict?
Israel is evicting people from East Jerusalem, who have been living in their houses for over a century, on the basis that there is suspicion these plots or areas once belonged to a Jewish organisation in the year 1870, which is preceding the existence of Israel by almost half a century. And failing to recognise that the people living there are the people who have been driven out of their homes in the other cities of what is now Israel.
And these people have plots and houses and stretches of land they owned before they became refugees who took refuge in Jerusalem. So you're blaming a refugee that you have stripped out of his home and property, and you sent him away to come and take shelter in another city. And he stays there for 100 years. And you're coming now to tell him that oh, sorry, what you owned in historical Palestine has no value, you should not be claiming it.
So basically, the message that was sent by this action across Palestine, and even inside Israel for the Arab component, is that the rights in Israel will only exist for its Jewish component. That the State of Israel will only seek justice for the Jewish component of its society and no other component. This, in my definition, is apartheid.
There are streets today in which only as a Jew are you allowed to use. That’s apartheid. And that's why Palestinians are feeling the international community has failed them
Do Palestinian authorities recognise Hamas as a legit liberation movement?
Hamas is a component of the Palestinian social structure in the sociopolitical structure. They are not aliens who came in, they are not foreign combatants who have found shelter in territory. They are Palestinian.
So it exists, it's consulted, yes. There is a drift between the PLO, the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, but yes, you have a component that exists in your society that believes the ending of the occupation should be done by military means. And this conviction is because after 30 years of negotiating with Israel, the situation has not only stayed the same but also deteriorated beyond redemption, beyond salvation. So basically, the signal that is given is that these negotiations or the political cause will not yield any results. And by so doing, we're just prolonging the misery of the Palestinian people as Israel only understands the language of power. And this is how we should speak to Israel. This is the position of Hamas.
Now, how can we convince them that no, this is not entirely true, that there are other ways to reach the same goal? This is the responsibility of not only Israel but also the international community, which has the duty to force Israel into compliance with international law just like it does with any other country that breaks international law. The international community, the Security Council, have a duty to bring Israel to compliance one way or another. Be it by economic sanctions, military options like we've seen in other countries, by diplomacy which we prepare and speak to them, this impunity cannot continue.
What is the future of the peace talks?
The peace process was intended to be for a transitional period of five years, and it should have ended in a permanent status with a situation where we have two states living side by side. But this interim period is dragging on now for 30 years without any scope of ending. So it's an open-ended process that, once you stop being a part of it, or you find that it is not bringing any results, then you become the troublemaker or you become the one who's not seeking peace.
How come I can be negotiating for 30 years, accepting all international parameters — we had the Mitchell plan, the Tentative plan, the roadmap, the international quartet overseeing the peace process — and with all this, the result is zero.
When the peace process started, there were 200,000 settlers in West Bank and Jerusalem. Today, as we speak, there are more than 700,000. So the number has trippled during these negotiations. What message does that send to me as a negotiator? If every time we are negotiating you claim more, what am I negotiating exactly?
There's something called the status quo. When negotiation starts or truce starts or peace, you have a point where you say things will stop at this, my forces will not move, I will refrain from unilateral actions. We freeze the situation as it is now. We will negotiate until we will finish the talks, then we'll see how we are going to settle this dispute. But you do not engage in negotiations when you are not respecting the status quo, and you're changing the reality on the ground, every day, demographically, economically, militarily. How exactly am I supposed to negotiate and on what prospects if I don’t know what I will end up with? Then there is no point for negotiations because it's not negotiation but bring into submission. So that's a different discourse.
There has been talk of exchange of land for peace. This is the principle on which the negotiations were built. How practical is it now?
It is not and this is what we are saying. They have emptied the whole peace process. We are saying we will establish peace based on the fact that you're returning back the land we have accepted to be the remaining of Palestine. In 1948, they ended up with 78 per cent of historical Palestine and we only remained with 22 per cent. From that, they want the 11. And people are not speaking about the annexation plan anymore as if Israel never thought of it. They are implementing it without declaring it now. They're confiscating territory, they're emptying houses, they're moving demography from one place to another and evacuating people. He still wants half of what is mine, not by Palestinian aspiration.
The international community through the Security Council and the General Assembly have said we will settle this conflict on the basis of Israel and Palestine, Israel being 78 per cent, Palestine 22 per cent and, this 22 per cent includes East Jerusalem. This is not the Palestinian demand or wish. This is what the international community has convinced us to accept. And we accepted it for the sake of achieving peace and bringing this conflict to an end. We accepted this 30 years ago. What do I have now in my possession? Even that 11 per cent that is remaining, the Israeli military forces storm in day and night just to prove that we don't have any sovereignty.
The Human Rights Watch in a report described Israeli activities in Palestine as apartheid. Is the Palestinian Authority pursuing this matter further?
We have approached the ICC and we have established an open investigation on the actions of Israel in the occupied territory because we are part of the Rome Statute. Israel is not, which is in itself an indication they want to tolerate impunity and not have any form of control or scrutiny on their actions on this. So we have done this with the help of all our partners, including the European Union and European human rights organisations, including Israeli-based. We have B’Tselem, which is very prominent. And they have been very instrumental in documenting all the illegal actions of the Israeli forces in the occupied territory and East Jerusalem.
We are calling on all the responsible countries, that you have a duty and responsibility towards what's happening in Palestine. That having relations with Israel is one thing. But being a responsible member of the international community demands that you take actions towards that friendly country as you advise it, that you encourage and sometimes force it to comply with the parameters of international law and international humanitarian law.
People can blame Hamas for launching rockets at Israel, but where did that come from? Had this peace process ended 25 years ago and we had two states living side by side, there would not have been a need
Kenya has said it supports a two-state solution. But do the close relations between it and Israel and President Uhuru Kenyatta and PM Benjamin Netanyahu make you feel there is some sort of betrayal?
No, but more could be done, especially when we are speaking about a country like Kenya. It is an influential country in Africa, a member of the Security Council and Kenya has good relations with Israel.
All these are factors that should help Kenya to exercise some pressure to bring this madness to an end. We do not see a conflict between people having relations or countries having relations with Israel. We have relations with Israel. My President just sent condolences to the Israeli President when they had a stampede last week. What we're speaking about is the responsibility to condemn the illegal actions.
Israel as a country has the right to exist in peace and security and to have normal relations, but on the condition that they act responsibly, not as illegitimate partners without recognising the parameters that govern all other governments when it comes to human rights.
Kenya abstained from the Jerusalem vote. What did you read from that move?
I cannot speak for the Kenyan government on why they did that, but I don't think it implies what people understood. In international relations and the UN system, things like this can happen. And they happen. Frequently, we see this happen in different files and different issues and different things. Sometimes it's a word, sometimes it's a comment that's in the resolution that a country objects to and would like to see changed or whatever, and so forth. So, there are many things that can go wrong and the explanation does not have to be very convincing sometimes.
But what we know is that Kenya is pro two-state solution and understands that the Palestinian inalienable rights have to be respected.
The Security Council resolutions, which Kenya referred to in its latest intervention, and the importance of respecting them, speaks about Jerusalem as an occupied territory. So Kenya knows exactly what it is saying and what it is doing. Kenya will never be in a position that is in conflict with international law. But this is the dilemma in which Israel has put all its friends: Between balancing a friendship with Israel and violating their obligations under international law.
You earlier mentioned the use of sanctions as a tool that can be used against Israel. What is your comment on the Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement?
It's a respectable and peaceful movement, non-violent. It is trying to bring nonviolent means of actually expressing solidarity and trying to bring about change. Demonising this movement is not understandable, because if you don't want me to use military means, and if you don't want me to use violent rhetoric, and if you don't want me to use the venues of the United Nations and the Security Council, and so forth, and if you don't want me to use peaceful demonstrations in the streets, and if you don't want me to use economic incentives as a means of bringing about change, what exactly are you asking me to do?
Without these actions, none of the African countries would have been liberated or enjoyed freedom or independence. And if refrained from using all these methods, combined, South Africa wouldn't be South Africa today, you know. This is exactly how South Africa ended apartheid by the economic sanctions. Is it not?
Brutally beating peaceful demonstrators is illegal in every word. And we have seen the Black Lives Matter movement and what happened there. Why is it accepted in the US and not accepted in Palestine?
Why is it okay for 24 soldiers to surround a Palestinian child and drag him across the streets of Jerusalem? Why is it acceptable in Jerusalem and not acceptable in the US? This is what we are asking the international community. Have the standards changed? Am I a lesser person than the person who's living in Amsterdam or in Washington or Moscow? If so, then let me know. And let's go change the UN Charter, that there are races that are more supreme than others. There are colours that are more supreme than others. And there are countries that are more supreme. And then we will see what we can do.
But don't tell me that all are equal. And everybody should be equally answerable to international law. And you're changing governments for this purpose. And you're putting governments under sanctions for this purpose. And then in Palestine, oh, no. In Palestine, this is a different situation. No, it's not a different situation. It's exactly the same situation, if not worse.
How does the final agreement look like?
There's only one agreement: The 1967 borders to live side by side in peace and security and good neighbourly relations. Anything other than this will never work. We're speaking about a one apartheid state in which the Jewish are not even majority because we're not going to call it majority in this sense, because we have now five million Jews in Israel, and we have almost an equal figure to that of Palestinians, Muslims and Christians living in Israel and Palestine.
So if we don't have a two-state solution, and we have a one-state solution, then it's going to be an unequal society between Jews and non-Jews, in which the Jews are dominating the lives of the other 45 per cent of the population.
There are streets today in which only as a Jew are you allowed to use. That’s apartheid. So while we were engaged in peaceful negotiations, they were establishing an apartheid system.
That's why the Palestinians are feeling betrayed, that the international community has failed them. And that's why you would see such reactions to any escalations done by Israel.
People can blame Hamas for, for example, launching homemade rockets at Israel, but where did that come from? Because had this process ended 25 years ago, when it was supposed to, and we had two states living side by side, there would not have been a need for this to happen. And if it had happened, it would have happened in a totally different context in which two states are combating each other, and we have international law to govern them.
What is your reaction to the bombing of the building housing media outlets over claims it was a Hamas Intelligence headquarters?
Israel was exercising its power. Let's entertain the idea that one of the apartments in this big building was used for non-civilian purposes. You don't bring the entire building down. Israel has enough military means to surgically deal with that thing, or bring it to the attention of the International Community. You don't give them a one-hour eviction notice. And then you bring the whole thing down with all the properties of the people and the media.
If any other government in the world dares to attack a building or a structure that belongs to a media corporation as big as AP or Al Jazeera or any other, you know what ripple effect that would get.
They are creating a monster and tomorrow, another government somewhere in the world will be doing exactly the same thing to another people. And when we come to bring them into accountability, they will tell us sorry, you did not do this about this case. Why are you coming to us?
Forget that it's about Palestinians. This is about a benchmark. We thought the international community has set this in black and white in the UN Charter, but Israel seems to be out of this mechanism. So the question has to be addressed back to the international community. Why is this allowed to happen? What purpose does it serve humanity?
Edited by T Jalio