According to Wikipedia: The crime of Apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime. On November 30, 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.[1] It defined the crime of apartheid as inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid. Wikipedia also writes the following: Israel and the apartheid analogy is a comparison between Israels treatment of the Palestinians and South Africas treatment of non-whites during its apartheid era.[1] The analogy has been used by scholars, United Nations investigators, human rights groups and critics of Israeli policy, some of which have also accused Israel of committing the crime of apartheid.[2][3] Critics of Israeli policy say that a system of control in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, including Jewish-only settlements, the ID system, separate roads for Israeli and Palestinian citizens, military checkpoints, discriminatory marriage law, the West Bank barrier, use of Palestinians as cheap labour, Palestinian West Bank enclaves, inequities in infrastructure, legal rights, and access to land and resources between Palestinians and Israeli residents in the Israeli-occupied territories resembles some aspects of the South African apartheid regime, and that elements of Israels occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law.[4] Some commentators extend the analogy, or accusation, to include Arab citizens of Israel, describing their citizenship status as second-class.[12] Opponents of the analogy claim that the comparison is factually,[13] morally,[13] and historically[14] inaccurate and intended to delegitimize Israel.[1][15][16][17] Opponents state that the West Bank and Gaza are not part of sovereign Israel. Though the internal free movement of Palestinians is heavily regulated by the Israeli government, the territories are governed by the elected Palestinian Authority and Hamas leaders, so they cannot be compared to the internal policies of apartheid South Africa.[18][19] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy So long as Israel claims authority to send its military forces into the occupied territories of the West Bank and Gaza and to control the movement of Palestinians through checkpoints, and all the other relevant descriptors enumerated here, it seems very clear the line has been crossed a long time ago, and that there is no better word to describe it. A spade is a spade. It is hard to be diplomatic about this, as we are seeing. The point is not what we call the status quo, it is that this horribly unjust status quo must be changed.
Posted on: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:33:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015