Labourhome - Back to the roots...

[Blogs] Ceasefire now: Europe's centre-left united over Gaza

2009-01-09T08:18:49-05:00

As President of the Party of European Socialists, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen has written to Ehud Barak, on behalf of Europe’s social democrats to express his dismay at the appalling loss of life from the “hugely disproportionate” Israeli military response, calling for an immediate ceasefire and a comprehensive political agreement between Israel and Palestine.

Our modest Fabian blog Next Left is a newcomer to the progressive blogosphere, but we have recruited an ex-Prime Minister to write regularly for us this year, in Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, who was Prime Minister of Denmark for eight years in the 1990s and who remains among the most significant voices in shaping the European social democratic agenda.

As President of the Party of European Socialists, Rasmussen reports that he has written to Ehud Barak - Leader of the Israeli Labour Party and Defence Minister - on behalf of Europe’s social democrats to express his dismay at the appalling loss of life from the “hugely disproportionate” Israeli military response, calling for an immediate ceasefire and a comprehensive political agreement between Israel and Palestine.

Europe’s mainstream social democratic and socialist parties have been strongly united in their approach to the current crisis - unequivocal opposition to the Israeli response and to Hamas’ attacks on Israeli citizens; strong support for an immediate ceasefire and for a comprehensive peace settlement.

This is clearly the correct and constructive approach, and so it is important to state that clearly, even if, given the difficulties in achieving it, it may perhaps seem too obvious, even banal. But less so if we recall that this is a different and much more unified position - within the European centre-left, between different European governments - than was the case even over the Lebanon crisis (to say nothing of Iraq).

This matters particularly as we approach a crucial opportunity to enormously narrow the gap between the mainstream European position and that of the incoming US administration. That has always been an essential foundation for outside diplomatic pressure to bring results for a peace settlement.

[Blogs] The ICRC speaks publicly

2009-01-08T20:47:29-05:00

It is extremely rare for the International Committee of the Red Cross to publicly criticise the governments it works with. It prefers to raise matters privately at high government levels to get them to make lower level staff tow the line.

But today the the ICRC Head of Mission in Jerusalem, Katrina Ritz, spoke publicly. It's at 05:15 in this Channel 4 News item. Just watch.

There is also a Channel 4 summary web news item on it here. In short:

And in unusually strong terms the International Red Cross today criticised Israel after finding four emaciated children among a group of corpses in a house just metres from an Israeli military position.

The ICRC chief in Gaza accused the Israelis of breaching international humanitarian law in what he called this "shocking incident".

In another media report ICRC Head of Mission Katrina Ritz said:

"Which was most shocking from our side is the army knew the civilians were there, and they didn’t assist them in any way, and they didn’t assist us even to evacuate these people"

The lack of assistance given by the Israeli Army is particularly sad, given the WW2 history. An Israeli Army position was nearby. I hope this is an isolated incident, not a general approach by the army to the humanitarian assistance required to be given by the Geneva Convention protocols.

This underlines the need for a ceasefire immediately, so injured civilians can be tended and children reunited with families.

Update: The ICRC Geneva news release on this adds the information that "Israeli soldiers posted at a military position some 80 meters away from this house ordered the [ICRC/PRCS] rescue team to leave the area which they refused to do." It says more wounded are sheltering in other nearby destroyed houses, but the IDF have not permitted access to these so far. Finally ICRC Geneva concludes:

"The ICRC believes that in this instance the Israeli military failed to meet its obligation under international humanitarian law to care for and evacuate the wounded. It considers the delay in allowing rescue services access unacceptable."

[Blogs] BUILD MORE PRISONS

2009-01-08T19:19:48-05:00

A vote winning idea
One of Gordon Brown’s ideas for helping this country to get back on it’s feet is a massive programme of public works and building.

Here’s a novel idea for you Gordon.

BUILD MORE PRISONS

Judges will once again be able to put criminals behind bars, where they belong, not roaming free to prey on the long suffering British public.

Then there will be no more need to release murderers and rapists early to rape and murder again.

Then, instead of giving serious criminals useless, toothless community service, they could all be locked up, because they can’t, rob, mug and assault us while they are in there can they?

I know it’s a revolutionary idea Gordon, but it just might work! It would also be a sure fire vote catcher.

[Blogs] Confessions of a liberal hawk

2009-01-08T17:33:12-05:00

I am what some would call a liberal hawk.

I take the war on religious extremism very seriously, partly because of my views on religion. I believe there are different ways to tackle this.

In some cases it requires tackling poverty. In some cases it requires ending the senseless war on drugs. In some cases it requires ending our addiction to oil and in others it requires empowering Muslim women. In others, when all this fails, it unfortunately can require military intervention.

On a visceral level, I would support Israel. It certainly appeals to me when its record on say, gay rights or women's rights is compared with the record of the rest of the Middle East.

But I can't.

Liberal interventionism is spun by some, unfortunately often by its own supporters to be an advancement of all things America or Britain, or indeed Israel. But just because I am pro-American I can't blindly support Kissingerian foreign policy.

It should actually mean an opposition to all human rights abuses, whether of a "socialist" or a far-right thug. So just because Israel has gay marriage, I can't excuse it when it commits war crimes in somewhere like Qana.

I similarly can't be on the side of Hamas, despite what many pro-Israelis claim. I am on the side of the Palestinian people.

The Palestinian people are generally more secular than many Arabs despite what has happened. I often speak about brave Muslim feminists and there are many Palestinian feminists, empowering women though business micro-loans. When many religious extremists will have a visceral aversion to medicine, the pools of blood in Palestine have started a great tradition in Palestine of blood donation. The vast majority of Palestinians support Israel's right to exist: they know the only way a free Palestine will come into existance is with the help of sympathetic Jews and Israelis.

Ultimately, we have to remove our alliegances to achieve peace. Look at Northern Ireland; it probably helped that Blair had Catholic connections in order to achieve a neutral agreement. If the conflict in Israel comes down simply to that the fundamentalist Jews believe in a "Greater Israel" because the Old Testament says a Jewish state should be located there, or fundamentalist Muslims say Israel should be eliminated, then we will not get anywhere.

In the mean time, while I support the principle of a Jewish state, I can't support Israel. Not when only 6% of Israeli sewers are treated adequately, leading to filth being pumped onto Palestinian land. Not when huge swathes of Gazan children are suffering from malnutrition. Not while Israeli paranoia convinces them against negotiating a safe future for themselves.

If I used my visceral reaction, I would be supporting Israel right now. But there are many liberal interventionists like myself who are looking at the facts, and establishing that we cannot support Israel at the present time.

[Blogs] Boris gets caught. :-)

2009-01-08T11:58:49-05:00

Boris Has been caught in the congestion zone. He says "He forgot to pay". I say Stick to the bike Boris.... Thoughts please.

[Blogs] Staring dumbfounded

2009-01-08T11:53:29-05:00

I am honestly sitting here staring dumbfounded at my PC screen as I write this...

I've just been reading up on the "Pro-Palestine" demonstrations around the place such as here:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/hating-israel-in-trafalgar-square/

Here:

http://blog.newkey-burden.com/2009/01/we-brought-flags-they-brought-knives.html

Here:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/01/08/at-the-israeli-embassy-last-night

And here:

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/01/07/children-dressed-as-hamas-soldiers/

All I have running through my head right now is a phrase I am sure Alex would object to me printing. But essentially it involves the words "The" and "What" as well as a third word.

I also note, that it seems to be a coalition of Muslims and the extreme left that are making up these pictures, hence the Socialist Workers Party flag on the Dublin one.

It's also incredibly worrying that there are reports on these blogs of rucksacks filled with knives and bricks being brought to these events in London, as well as such abusive language being hurled by a large portion of the crowds making up the pro-Palestine camp.

Have we really allowed things to get to this point that such abusive language and thuggish behavior at a protest is so easily tolerated?

[Blogs] SELL BANK BAILOUT BONDS TO ISA SAVERS AT 7%

2009-01-07T17:40:37-05:00

Is a Savers Selling Market the bailed out banks are paying the government 12%. Why not sell this lone bonds to ISA savers at 7%.THE BANKS would get low cost capital and savers would have better savings rates. IF the government garanteed the saving bonds of ISA savers, this would be cheep sourse of capital to the banks. Free the savings market so that savers have achoice. Why should the government get 12% lending to the banks when the robbed saver get 1% or less.