EU, Arab nations locked in dispute over anti-terrorism code - Haaretz

[Coastie for Truth]

The EU was locked Monday in a dispute with Arab nations over an anti-terrorism code of conduct it hopes to publish later in the day at the end of a two-day Euro-Mediterranean summit.

Sources said the dispute was jeopardizing plans to issue the anti-terrorism declaration - and two other statements - by the 25 EU nations, Israel and its Arab neighbors.

The draft text of the "Code of Conduct on Countering Terrorism" declared "all peoples have the right of self-determination," but that "terrorist attacks cannot be justified or legitimized by any cause or grievance."

Arab delegates sought to add an important qualification, proposing text that said nothing in the anti-terrorism code contradicts "the right of peoples under foreign occupation to strive to end it in accordance with international law."

The EU and Israel objected, insisting terrorism can never be justified. Diplomats worked into the night of Sunday to Monday. When the leaders returned for a second day of talks Monday, there was still no agreement.

---snip---

[tinnypriv]

1. Hmmm

"Israel insists terrorism can never be justified"

I doubt it - the Prime Minister is a former terrorist commander and he counts murderous terrorists as amongst his "close friends". Also, a convicted terrorist stood for election in a settlement recently and got quite a few votes (about 33%). I think the qualifier is that Israel (and the EU) object to terrorism against them.

[Wordie]

5. Israel has elected former terrorists as Prime Minister in the past;

Menachim Begin was a member of Irgun and took part in the bombing of the King David Hotel. So you're right there. Apparently to the Israelis, terrorism was once OK, but when it had accompished the desired goals, in Israel's favor then all of a sudden it was not ok.

[Violet_Crumble]

7. They spent two days arguing over the definition of terrorism...

No surprises there. Israel's definition of terrorism appears to include legitimate attacks on it's occupying forces, and of course Israeli former terrorists are just misunderstood 'freedom fighters'.

Which explains this bit of the article:

The talks almost collapsed when Arab delegates pushed for language that effectively said those living "under foreign occupation" might legally resort to force to gain freedom - a thinly veiled reference to the Israeli presence in the West Bank.

The spat was resolved by removing a contentious section dealing with the right to self-determination and the fact that "terrorist attacks cannot be justified or legitimized by any cause or grievance."

Great to see you again, tinnypriv! :hi:

Violet...

[tinnypriv]

11. Thank you

Nice to see you too :hi:

In response to what you write, it is not surprising that Israel considers attacks on its occupying forces to be terrorism, because in the minds of quite a few of the soldiers, and certainly the leaders (especially the Likud Central Committee and the nutcases affiliated with them), there is no occupation. "The territories" are, in essence, Israel. Therefore, attacks in the territories are attacks in Israel.

If I believed that, I'd think that legitimate resistance was terrorism too, and it is hard to fault Israelis for thinking as much. One of the reasons why it'd be a good idea to get out, although the psychological and physical connections in many areas are probably permanent by now (like Ariel and Ma'ale Adumin).

[eyl]

18. Can you point to any case

where a state considered attacks by non-state actors* against it's troops not to be terrorism?

This issue is unclear in international law; and both states and terrorists prefer to keep the question murky.


*As opposed to irregulars, who may be soldiers

[Violet_Crumble]

19. Sure can...

Indonesian militias initially attacked Australian troops in East Timor. I don't ever recall those being described as terrorist attacks...

I'm quite aware of the habit of the US to try to claim attacks on its occupation forces in Iraq as being terrorism, but that's every bit as ridiculous as the Israeli claims that attacks on it's occupying forces is terrorism...

Violet...

[eyl]

20. see

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x105866#105946

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Hmmm...

Not unlike the terrorist, Arafat and the current thugs running for office. Seems terrorism is only applicable when applied to the group in question.

[Englander]

9. Dude, have you heard?

http://www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org/node.php?id=1454

[Behind the Aegis]

12. Guvn'or...is he now absloved of being a terrorist? n/t

[Englander]

16. No, is Jabba? n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

17. Can you point to the post where I said he has been absolved?

[tinnypriv]

10. Well

I'm not sure what relevance this reponse has to what I posted, but for the record, I agree with you that Arafat was a terrorist and a thug. I've used those very words in fact - try a search if you're so inclined.

As for "current thugs running for office", I'm not sure who you're referring to, but I don't keep up with internal Palestinian politics. As far as I know, one of the crowd is a holocaust revisionist (Abbas) and a bunch of others probably have a terrorist history (or current role in terrorism). That's rather like Israeli politics, as I mentioned. Note that one of the current Israeli ministers is a straight-up Mengles-style supremacist - not even concealed. One tiny part of a sorry story.

In general (this is not a response to your post), one of the amusing ironies of the Middle East is that Israel and the US protest about "thugs" and "killers" in the Palestinian Authority, when neither of them had any problem when one of their favourite Palestinians was running a "Death Squad", and another was raping children in Gaza (according to Ben Kaspit in Ma'ariv anyway).

[tocqueville]

2. Israel was the only country that rejected the final resolution

It made the Arab countries very happy.

But the code of conduct passed through, so Haaretz is a little late.

[papau]

4. Do you have a link to the code "passing" today?

thanks,

:-)

[tocqueville]

6. here

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051128/wl_mideast_afp/euromedsummit_051128183651

But for the Europeans the centrepiece of the summit was the anti-terror code of conduct.

"We will condemn terrorism in all its manifestations without qualification (and) reject any attempts to associate terrorism with any nature, culture or religion," said the two-page pact.

"The threat that terrorism poses to the lives of our citizens remains serious and terrorist attacks seriously impair the enjoyment of human rights," the pact said, and the summiteers agreed "our determination to eradicate it."

Blair said the announcement "is as strong a statement as you could possibly have on a unified determination to fight terrorism in all its forms."

[papau]

3. The top Arabs did not even show up - only Abbas and Erdogan

Leaders from Egypt, Algeria, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Tunisia and Morocco all stayed away from the meeting -"the resistance of some Arab countries to enacting democratic and economic reforms have left the vision of a peaceful, prosperous Middle East in shambles."


http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/28/news/summit.php

Impasse over code to fight terrorism
The Associated Press

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2005


BARCELONA The European Union was locked in a dispute with Arab nations over an antiterrorism code of conduct that it hoped to release late Monday at the end of a two-day summit meeting between European and Mediterranean leaders.

Sources said the dispute was jeopardizing plans to make public the antiterrorism declaration, and two other statements, to be issued by the 25 EU countries, Israel and its Arab neighbors.

The draft text of the "Code of Conduct on Countering Terrorism" declared that "all peoples have the right of self-determination," but that "terrorist attacks cannot be justified or legitimized by any cause or grievance."

Arab delegates sought to add an important qualification, proposing text that said nothing in the antiterrorism code contradicts "the right of peoples under foreign occupation to strive to end it in accordance with international law."

The EU and Israel objected, insisting that terrorism can never be justified.

Diplomats worked into the night on Sunday and early Monday. When they returned for talks later Monday there was still no agreement.

Participants planned to issue a "Common Vision" declaration on the need for economic and political reforms in nations on the Mediterranean's eastern and southern rims. These nations have received 20 billion, or $23.5 billion, in grants and soft loans from the EU since 1995 but remain mired in poverty.<snip>
===========================================================

As an aside - a by the way - it seems Bush's MidEast suggestion has also gone down in flames

Forum for the Future Ends in Discord
http://www.pinr.com /

Intended to promote Washington's policy of democratizing the Middle East through encouraging economic and political reforms, the Forum for the Future was held in Manama, Bahrain on November 11-12, 2005. The meetings were attended by the foreign ministers of 30 states in the immediate and surrounding regions and the G8 industrial powers, and representatives of international and nongovernmental organizations. Within the immediate region, only Iran boycotted the Forum.

Washington had anticipated confidently that the meetings would produce a joint declaration committing the participating Middle Eastern states to its reform program, but its expectations were dashed when Cairo refused to sign on, objecting to a provision in Washington's package of financial incentives that would have permitted funds to flow to N.G.O.s that were not registered with governments. With Egypt -- which has more than half the population of the Arab world, is a key strategic ally of the U.S. and a major power center in the region, and receives the most foreign aid from the U.S. (US$2 billion per year) after Israel -- bailing out of the bargain, there could be no credible declaration, so the document was shelved.

Coming on the heels of the failure a week earlier of the Summit of the Americas to produce a joint statement endorsing Washington's vision of a Free Trade Area of the Americas, the collapse of the Forum confirmed a pattern of setbacks for U.S. foreign policy engineered by rising regional power centers. In the case of the Summit, failure resulted from Brazil's objections to U.S. agricultural subsidies and its interest in protecting its leadership of the Mercosur trading bloc. <snip>

[Wordie]

13. The Guardian: Blair accused as summit on anti-terrorism ends in failure

http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,7369,1653045,00.html
<snip>
Ewen MacAskill in Barcelona
Tuesday November 29, 2005
The Guardian

A Spanish foreign policy adviser was caught on an open mike yesterday accusing Tony Blair of preparing to "throw the towel in" and blaming the Israelis for being intractable at a summit on countering terrorism which ended in failure.

...He added: "The Israelis are being intractable ... The others are sitting back because they say it is the Israelis' fault." The Syrian foreign minister, Farouk al-Shara, said: "Success in confronting terrorism on regional and international levels is contingent upon addressing its root causes and protecting the rights of people under foreign occupation to resistance."

...Although all those present, including the Arab countries and Israel, signed up to a code, it was much weaker than the EU had hoped. The code condemned terrorism and promised to fight it. But they failed to agree a definition of terrorism.

The Euromed summit brought together the 25 EU states plus 10 others, mainly Arab, bordering the Mediterranean. Many Arab countries did not send leaders because they did not want to be lectured on terrorism. Arab representatives wanted to insert into the definition of terrorism qualifications exempting those engaged in fights against occupation, specifically against Israel in the West Bank. The EU was opposed to any qualification.<unsnip>

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Coastie for Truth]

15. Well the diplomats and the journalists and bloggers

who insist on pouring gasoline on the flames will have a lot of innocent Israeli - and Palestinian (yes, there are actually, factually, non-stereotypical innocent Israelis and Palestinians - they just don't make for good blogging and scapegoating and journalism) - and European - and American blood on their hands when they finish pouring the gasoline.

But the journalists and bloggers and diplomats don't care ; they just want the Israeli and Palestinian untermenchen and their kinsmen to go away as long as the "good people" journalists and bloggers and diplomats have their oil (Engdahl, "A Century Of War : Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order"; PNAC, " Rebuilding America's Defenses").