Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-24-Speech-3-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020424.3.3-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, yesterday, with 18 other Members of the European Parliament from six different parliamentary groups, I was in the refugee camp in Jenin. Last night, as we were leaving Jerusalem, when we found out that Ariel Sharon was opposed to a fact-finding mission to the Jenin camp, despite the fact that this mission would be UN-led and made up of such figures as the former president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the former High Commissioner for Refugees, we immediately understood the reason behind the new challenge that the Israeli prime minister had placed before the international community. A third of the town of Jenin, which last month still had a population of 15 000 inhabitants, is in ruins. Buildings have been blown apart, families gather together in the parts of blocks of flats which are still standing, seeing what remains of their houses collapse around them. In one part of the camp, a huge area stretched before us, where, just last month, dozens of three- or four-storey blocks of flats stood. All that is left of these are the ends of the metal scaffolding sticking out of the ground. It is difficult to know exactly how many bodies are buried in the rubble beneath your feet. A total of 47 bodies have been recovered from the debris so far. This figure will, unfortunately, have to be revised when a proper search can be conducted.
The accounts given by inhabitants, backed up by shreds of evidence, are horrifying. Many of the soldiers, who surrounded the camp on 2 April, showed no pity for the civilian population, regardless of whether they were children, the elderly, the disabled or the injured.
We heard of some shocking examples of this totally unacceptable attitude when we met the medical staff of the camp hospital who gave detailed accounts of the awful events. They told us that at 3 p.m. on 4 April, the army surrounded the hospital with 22 tanks. They said that they were told to stay where they were. The Israeli army general, himself a doctor, said that if an ambulance moved, they would fire. They opened fire on the Red Cross, which was trying to gain entry to the camp. The doctors told us that they were not allowed to save the injured survivors. A doctor, who asked for news of his mother, was told that she was injured and could not be seen. She was later found riddled with bullets. On the same day, the tanks attacked the hospital and destroyed an oxygen reserve. A doctor told us that to stop an injured man bleeding, whose throat had been pierced by a bullet, the only thing they had to hand was wire. They begged the soldiers to allow them to treat him. The doctor shouted that he would lose his arm and the soldier replied that he might as well lose his life. They took away the injured man and two other people, having waited for six hours in the sun. We do not know what happened to them. A young man came to the hospital to collect medicine for his mother. When he entered the hospital, a tank fired, injuring him. A nurse tried to pull him inside and was told that if she touched him, she would be killed. Then a soldier killed the injured man before calling the nurse forward to come and recover his body.
There is a name for this sort of violence. It bears all the hallmarks of war crimes. This has nothing to do with the legitimate defence of the security of Israel. This is the reason why Ariel Sharon is now trying to do everything possible to prevent a UN-led committee from finding out the truth. On the front page of this morning’s Jerusalem Post, an Israeli official is reported to have said that ‘we are a sovereign country, we do not have to accept this type of command. It is better for us to suffer a few days of poor publicity than to live with the consequences of a biased report.’
The conclusion that we should reach, in my view, is that the international community must, first and foremost, remind these people of the difference between a sovereign country and an occupied territory. Then, we must make them understand beyond a shadow of a doubt that the age of impunity is over. There will no longer be just a few difficult days to get through.
Sooner or later, Mr Sharon will have to explain his actions. Yes, it is time to react much more firmly. We must react, because if we fail to do so, we risk collusion with the unacceptable. We must react, it is all the more important to do so because Jenin is not an isolated case. We must ascertain what happened in all the towns which were re-occupied, particularly Nablus where further atrocities cannot be ignored. We must react, because impunity encourages arrogance. Many of our counterparts – Palestinian but also Israeli – including a Deputy Speaker of the Knesset, Mrs Chazan – have told us that they fear a possible attack on Mr Arafat’s headquarters. Furthermore, what consequences will result from the arrest of Marwan Barghouti, the Palestinian commander and MP? The situation in Bethlehem is still unresolved, although discussions are underway. Ariel Sharon has also announced the stepping-up of military operations in Gaza. He also stated that he did not contemplate the evacuation of any settlements. Yes, we must react, without waiting for a response – which is, unfortunately, hardly likely – from the United States, whose President is insulting the Palestinians and is making himself look stupid by depicting Mr Sharon as a man of peace.
To respond and shoulder our responsibilities, must, I think, for us MEPs mean, apart from sending urgently needed relief, making an unwavering commitment to send the peacekeeping force, not to wage war but to contribute to peace. And this also means bringing to bear as much pressure as possible in the spirit of the resolution that we adopted two weeks ago on the members of the Council who are blocking the necessary revision of EU-Israel relations. And lastly, we must respond and shoulder our responsibilities, Mr President, as Europe's Parliament, something which directly depends on us. In this respect, I wish to repeat an appeal made to us by Abu Ala, the Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council. He said that it is in times of crisis that you find out who your friends are and that he will gladly receive an official delegation from Parliament as well as our President. In my view, the time has come to respond to this invitation and, at the same time, return the visit of Avraham Burg, the Speaker of the Knesset. We shall therefore clearly show that we are not criticising Israel but that we condemn Mr Sharon.
What we want is a lasting peace with justice and dignity, because, for the first time since 1948, this prospect is being held out by all the Arab countries. It is an historic opportunity which we must not allow to pass by. It would be to Europe’s credit if it made every effort to save this unique hope."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples