Michael Ignatieff's statements on Israel

I am deeply disturbed at the statements attributed to Michael Ignatieff in the article below.
Mr. Ignatieff appears to be emulating Mr. Harper by implying in his response to a question from the audience that party policy prohibits any criticism of Israel .
More troubling is his following statement “We stand shoulder to shoulder with the democratic state of Israel . End of story.” Again Mr. Ignatieff appears to be echoing Mr. Harper’s stand of blindly supporting Israel whether it is right or wrong.
In a true democracy the rights of minorities are protected and there is equality of all citizens regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, gender or sexual orientation. Democracy does not entail that the majority tramples on the rights of minorities.
To claim that Israel is a "Jewish and democratic state" is an oxymoron. By defining itself as a Jewish state, Israel clearly signals that it is only a democracy for Jews but not for the 25 percent of its citizens who are Muslims and Christians. Would Mr. Ignatieff stand shoulder to shoulder with Mr. Harper if Mr. Harper declares Canada to be a "white, Christian and democratic state"?
Israel's citizenship laws, immigration laws and land ownership laws discriminate against non-Jews. Only Jews are allowed to immigrate to Israel while 6 million Palestinian refugees who were dispossessed in 1948 are denied the right to return. New non-Jewish newcomers who marry Israeli citizens are forced to take a racist loyalty oath to a "Jewish and Democratic state." Only Jews can lease or rent on 93 percent of Israel 's land that is administered by the Jewish National Fund and the Israel Land Authority.
A true democracy does not continue for 43 years to occupy and oppress 4 million Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza . It does not violate the Geneva Convention by transferring 500 thousand Jewish colonists into these occupied territories and creates a Separation Wall, twice as high as the Berlin Wall and three times longer, inside those occupied territories. It does not lay a brutal siege to the 1.5 million inhabitants of Gaza , 50 percent of who are children, preventing the entry of needed medical supplies, food, and electricity, water and construction material.
A true democracy would not be accused by renowned Justice Richard Goldstone, a Jewish South African who conducted a UN inquiry into Israel ’s assault on Gaza , of having committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. It does not implement a system in those occupied territories which was described by South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former US president Jimmy Carter, and various Israeli journalists and politicians, as similar to that of apartheid South Africa .
Ironically, while Israel’s Labour Party Minister Isaac Herzog warns that with the passing of the loyalty oath “Israel has taken another step towards fascism,” and while 500 Israeli academics and public figures declare they “will not be citizens of a country purporting to be Israel and which violates its basic commitment to the principles of equality, civil liberty and sincere aspiration for peace.” that we have political leaders like Mr. Ignatieff who attempt to suppress party candidates from any criticism of Israel and declare unabashedly that Israel is a "democracy."
Khaled MouammarDifferent party, same mistakes

By Michael Harris, Ottawa Sun

I have no idea who will finally broker a peace deal in the Middle East , but it is safe to say it won’t be a Canadian.

Stephen Harper’s approach is old hat. He casts the appropriate lights and shadows over the world’s most volatile conflict in Israel ’s favour.

Always has, always will.

He was the first leader to suspend ties with Hamas after it was elected in Gaza .

He announced a boycott of the human rights conference in Durban , South Africa 15 months before it was held because he believed there might be criticism of Israel .

Harper diplomats also walk out on anyone who might do the same thing in the UN.

And how does the federal government deal with the other side of the dispute?

As former Canadian ambassador to the UN Paul Heinebecker points out in his new book, Getting Back in the Game, Harper’s Ottawa has remained “largely silent” on illegal settlements going up on Palestinian land, the location of the Israeli security barrier going up inside Palestinian territory, and the demolition of Palestinian homes in Jerusalem — all things that violate the Geneva Conventions that Canada has signed and ratified.

So there should have been no surprise at the UN rebuke of Canada .

Unhelpful in the search for a solution in the Middle East, unhelpful in the fight against climate change, and unhelpful in lifting Africa out of the world’s worst poverty, Canada was paid back in kind by foreign diplomats who somehow resisted all that beer and maple syrup.

The Harper government protested that its belly flop at the UN had nothing to do with its policies. Rather it was Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff’s fault — a dubious theory at best, at worst, a shameless exercise in petty, domestic politics.

While the government tried to shift blame for the debacle, the political opposition was quick to seize on this “Hindenburg Moment” for Canada ’s international reputation.

They said our foreign policy was in shambles, our good name was sullied, and we faced 10 more years in the wilderness outside the Security Council — all because of Ottawa ’s unilateralism and the politicization of the diplomatic process.

But no sooner had Ignatieff intoned his condemnation of the government’s foreign policy than he endorsed it with respect to the Israeli/Palestinian standoff.

Speaking at Beth Emeth Synagogue this week, he said that he was “caught by surprise” when a Liberal candidate said that Canada shouldn’t be afraid to criticize the government of Israel .

After throwing his party member under the bus, Iggy made his point loud and clear: “We stand shoulder to shoulder with the democratic state of Israel . End of story.”

Really? In Israel itself, the debate rages on about how the democracy is doing. Jewish editorialists wonder what sort of government legislates a loyalty oath for its non-Jewish citizens? What sort of government tries to deport 400 children of foreign nationals who want to be Israelis? What sort of government expels, bars or jails Nobel Peace Prize winners?

And here is another question. When criticism is no longer welcome on the voyage, where is democracy?

As for Pearsonian diplomacy, it has been gutted like a 50-cent fish.

Does it matter? Well, imagine Suez without the little guy with the lisp.

mharris@cfra.ca