GUEST BLOG: Ian Powell – A sinking heart over Palestine non-recognition decision

After a period of political ‘game playing’ over making an announcement, insensitive given the tragic circumstances of the genocide in Gaza and increasing Palestinian expulsions on the West Bank, the Government has advised the United Nations General Assembly that it is not recognising Palestinian statehood.

The decision was announced by Foreign Minister Winston Peters on 27 September as reported by Radio New Zealand: Winston Peters’ non-recognition announcement.

His rationale was that with Hamas in place as the de facto government of the Gaza Strip and no clarity on next steps, there is not a fully legitimate and viable State of Palestine for New Zealand to recognise.

The decision leaves New Zealand with a handful of countries, including Singapore, Japan, South Korea and the United States, who do not recognise Palestine.

Many of these countries, like New Zealand, have rightwing governments and have, until recently, been strong unconditional backers of Israel.

Why Palestinian recognition is important

On the one hand, recognition of Palestinian statehood should have occurred years ago, well before Israel’s escalated genocide in Gaza began. If it had then the genocide, and what triggered it, would have been much less likely to have happened.

Recognising today’s Palestine earlier might have obstructed Israeli genocide

On the other hand, as important as recognition is, the greater imperative is to pressure Israel to end the genocide, withdraw from Gaza, and agree to a ceasefire, including the release of Israeli and Palestinian hostages (the latter are called ‘detainees’).

This includes actions like arms embargoes and boycotting Israeli products and companies. Some of the countries now recognising Palestine, such as France and the United Kingdom, have shamefully been among Israel’s biggest arms suppliers and continue to be.

Ultimately, however, it requires pressuring the United States to require its genocidal ideological appendage to recognise that Palestinian and Israeli lives and rights are of equal value.

Even though it is much too late in the process, the more countries who recognise Palestine the greater the pressure on the Trump regime to do what needs to be done. This has been made more difficult by the New Zealand government’s decision.

Palestine can’t materialise without recognition

Among the strengths of former Prime Minister Helen Clark are intelligence, frankness and conciseness. She would make an excellent orthopaedic surgeon; absolutely no concept of ambiguity!

Former Prime Minister Helen Clark describes announcement as a “sad charade”

As it happened Clark was also in New York at the time of Peters’ announcement and was quick to forthrightly express her views on TVNZ’s 1 News (27 September): Need to recognise Palestine to give it a chance to materialise.

In her words:

I’m very disappointed at the statement.

Disappointed at the substance because New Zealand is really being left well behind other countries we would normally associate ourselves with. And secondly, disappointed that the truth wasn’t told after the Cabinet decision. Why drag it out to late Friday night here in New York? Not a good look.

It seems to me that the New Zealand government’s almost embarrassed by the decision.

You’ve got a divided government – you’ve clearly got minor parties who don’t want recognition. So, I think they just didn’t want the Kiwi public to know last Monday and have it play out all week. Instead, there was this hide and seek game as to what the decision would be and when just about every other delegation has gone home, New Zealand announces this rather sad decision.

Clark was also on the mark in rejecting Peters’ reasoning for the Government’s decision:

The missed opportunity is to be part of the growing consensus that Israel is completely out of court in what it is doing – particularly with the situation of creeping annexation of the West Bank, the chances for a two-state solution are being lost.

Many states have come to the conclusion that they need to recognise the state of Palestine to give it a chance of ever materialising. That’s the issue, and New Zealand hasn’t put its weight behind that.

A sinking heart and torturous logic

In previous posts I have expressed strong empirically based opinions on Israel’s ethnic cleansing strategy which has escalated from expulsions of Palestinians since 1948 (the Nakba) to today’s genocide in Gaza.

This has reached a point when it can justifiably be called a holocaust. I discussed this in my latest post (28 September): Rhyming holocausts. Links to earlier relevant posts can be found in this post.

As much as I agree with Helen Clark’s firm response to the recognition refusal, what struck me even more was the response of former race relations conciliator and South African honorary consul to New Zealand, Gregory Fortuin.

[A quick disclosure: Gregory Fortuin is a friend. To complete the picture Helen Clark is a friendly acquaintance.]

His response was reported by journalist Pheobe Utteridge in Stuff (28 September):  Apartheid victim’s view on NZ’s Palestine stance. This followed an earlier article by Fortuin published in Indian news link the same day: New Zealand must not sleep through injustice.

Nelson Mandela was strongly critical of Israel’s apartheid system for Palestinians; today he would be called antisemitic by Israel

Nelson Mandela was South Africa’s first post-apartheid and democratically elected president. He appointed Fortuin South Africa’s honorary counsel to New Zealand.

Mandela was also a strong critic of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians describing Israel’s apartheid system as even worse than South Africa’s under which he suffered decades of cruel harsh imprisonment.

Fortuin said that “his heart sank” when he heard of the Government’s decision. It was a “torturous logic” to use the consequences of Israel’s attacks in Gaza as the reason for deferring recognition.

Gregory Fortuin: recognition should not have to wait until the genocide is completed

In his words:

To refuse to provide a symbol of hope and promise during these dark days is akin to arguing that we need to wait for the genocide to be completed before we recognise the place Palestinians can bury their dead.

Shame on us.

For Fortuin, growing up under apartheid in South Africa had made what he was seeing in Gaza personal. At the time he had resented the people who were in positions of power who failed to act.

With his sinking heart he added:

We are now seeing a genocide occurring in front of our eyes as it meets all of the legal requirements.

We need to act because of our common humanity and because of moral convictions, not what’s politically expedient.

Put moral convictions before political expediency

This is a call that the National-ACT-NZ First government should respect and act on. When Nazi Germany successfully invaded several European countries, their governments fled mainly to the United Kingdom.

The UK government didn’t stop recognising them because they were no longer viable governments of their countries. It didn’t stop recognising them because their futures were unknown.

In the case of France, its government collaborated with Germany in Vichy (in southern France). The UK didn’t recognise this government. Instead it and its allies recognised the General Charles de Gaulle ‘Free French’ opposition.

Christopher Luxon’s government needs the moral courage to put it right

The only thing that is allowing Israel’s genocide to continue is the support of the United States. If Donald Trump said ‘stop’, it would stop.

Christopher Luxon’s government had the opportunity to add to the pressure on the US to make this call. Instead his government has de facto chosen to support Trump’s and Israel’s position.

This is the kind of leadership you have when you are not having leadership. To put it another way, it is leadership by cowardness at a juncture in history when we need leadership by courage and moral conviction.

Ian Powell was Executive Director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, the professional union representing senior doctors and dentists in New Zealand, for over 30 years, until December 2019. He is now a health systems, labour market, and political commentator living in the small river estuary community of Otaihanga (the place by the tide). First published at Political Bytes