Re: British SWP shift to two-state position on Palestine

["Johannes Schneider" <Johannes.Schneider@xxxxxxx>]

Philip Ferguson wrote:


> On the antiwar/anticapitalist e-list in NZ, there has just been a post
> that the British SWP has changed its position on Palestine.  Namely,
> that from calling for a democratic, secular Palestine it has shifted to
> a two-state position.  Anyone know anything abut this?
>

Philip,

I think the source for this rumour is an article by the British AWL
http://makeashorterlink.com/?S3D221D41
The key passages from that article are:

Begin quote from AWL
"The SWP has launched a new campaign initiative on Israel-Palestine,
circulating a petition produced through the Campaign for Palestinian Rights.
[...]
The petition's first point is that the Israeli army must withdraw from the
Occupied Territories.
[...]
"Two nations, two states", or an independent Palestinian state alongside
Israel, follows immediately from "Israel out of the occupied territories".
The Palestinians have already made it very clear that they will set up a
state of their own as soon as the Israeli army gets off their backs.
The petition accepts that implication by arguing "that the Palestinians have
an equal right to Jerusalem, whether it be the capital of their separate
state (East Jerusalem) or that of a single, democratic, secular state". In
other words, it indicates that the acceptable outcomes from Israeli
withdrawal from the Occupied Territories are either an independent
Palestinian state alongside Israel, or a single democratic secular state
merging both nations, Israeli Jewish and Palestinian Arab.
[...]
The petition text: We call on the British government to break with the
United States' unqualified support for Israel through the following.
1. The British government should call on Israel to withdraw its army from
the Occupied Territories.
2. Britain should call on Israel to dismantle the settlements in the
Occupied Territories.
3. The British government should call on Israel to accept that the
Palestinians have an equal right to Jerusalem, whether it be the capital of
their separate state (East Jerusalem) or that of a single, democratic,
secular state.
4. Britain should make a public commitment to supporting UN resolution 194
calling on Israel to grant the refugees, the Palestinians displaced by them,
the right to return to Israel. Alternatively, the refugees have a right to
compensation if they choose not to return.
5. Britain should impose trade sanctions on Israel, including an arms
embargo, until the above demands are met."
End quote from AWL

I have not seen that petition elsewhere, it is not even at the Campaign for
Palestinian Rights website,
http://www.palestinian-rights.com
but even if you take the AWL report as the fact, I think their reasoning is
not so convincing: To demand an Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied
Territories does not make any statement about what should happen in the
state of Israel itself. So I rather think it is a failed attemp of the AWL
to score a few cheap points at the SWP's expenses.

Johannes


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.