SNP Friends for Peace in the Middle East member Sammy Stein says responsible media reporting is essential in helping to resolve conflict
MICHAEL GRAY in his article ‘SNP conference condemns illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine’, reports that the SNP has overwhelmingly backed calls for Palestinian justice in the campaign against occupation and for a two-state solution in the Middle East.
Furthermore, Gray reports that “the vote was overwhelmingly in support of the show of solidarity – and the call for an independent Scotland to show global leadership as part of the peace movement.”
This is hardly a major surprise or an unexpected outcome. Most fair and balanced people support justice for the Palestinians, including members of the SNP Friends for Peace in the Middle East, who in their manifesto declare that the group supports the party’s policy of two states for two peoples and justice for both the Israeli and Palestinian people.
Most fair and balanced people support justice for the Palestinians, including members of the SNP Friends for Peace in the Middle East, who in their manifesto declare that the group supports the party’s policy of two states for two peoples and justice for both the Israeli and Palestinian people.
In the original article published by Commonspace there was a misquote from my summary speech of the remit back when I referred to Palestinian refugees. The report originally stated my quote as: “Why do they have to stay the Palestinians?”
In fact, I actually said in support of the Palestinian people: “Why do they have to stay Palestinian refugees?” And, indeed, after 60 years, why do many Palestinians still live in refugee camps?
Why are 400,000 Palestinians still kept in Lebanese refugee camps and are not allowed to work in many professions? Why do Palestinians live in refugee camps in Syria and Jordan rather than being allowed to live in freedom as Palestinians?
Why was it possible to resettle and provide homes for 14.5 million refugees after the partition of India and yet not do the same for 700,000 Palestinians? Why was it possible to resettle and provide homes for 800,000 Jewish refugees who arrived in Israel from Arab countries following the 1948 war and not do the same for the Palestinians?
Why are the Palestinians still refugees and why are they not being supported by their Arab cousins (many of whom reside in some of the wealthiest countries in the world)?
Why are 400,000 Palestinians still kept in Lebanese refugee camps and are not allowed to work in many professions? Why do Palestinians live in refugee camps in Syria and Jordan rather than being allowed to live in freedom as Palestinians?
The SNP Friends for Peace in the Middle East believes that the best way to help the Palestinian people is to advocate for a secure and lasting peace – peace for both sides, as there cannot be peace for just one side.
And just for absolute clarity and to ensure there are no misunderstandings, our group does not support the building or expansion of illegal settlements. These are an obstacle to peace. But settlements are not the only obstacle to peace and the remit back was aimed at ensuring that resolution 4 proposed at the conference should include all the important aspects of 2334.
It was therefore encouraging to hear from Tommy Sheppard MP in his summary that although the text of resolution 4 omitted parts of 2334 (2334 refers to the United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 which was approved in New York on 23 December 2016), the conference should understand that he supported all of 2334 and that if the conference passed the resolution, it was accepting all of 2334.
It was therefore unsurprising and perfectly logical to find that the remit back was rejected and the resolution overwhelmingly passed.
Our group’s strong view is that as the whole of 2334 is the message for Peace from the United Nations, it should also be the peace message from the SNP conference.
The SNP Friends for Peace in the Middle East believes that the best way to help the Palestinian people is to advocate for a secure and lasting peace – peace for both sides, as there cannot be peace for just one side.
It was disappointing, however, to see that the Commonspace article quoted Mick Napier of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPC) who decided to criticise the SNP by saying that resolution 4 “is terrible”.
This is a quote from an individual who recently pleaded guilty in Glasgow Sheriff court to a charge of aggravated trespass by organising demonstrations to close down legitimate businesses in Scotland with the subsequent loss of Scottish jobs. Is this really the kind of person that the SNP should even remotely consider taking advice from?
Commonspace articles about our group have in the past included inaccuracies that have led to apologies and retractions from this publication. It is encouraging to see that following contact with Commonspace, inaccuracies that were included initially in this article have now been quickly corrected.
If Commonspace is looking for a scoop, I can confirm that during the conference, numerous SNP party members approached us to advise that they supported our remit back and desire for balance but were afraid to do so openly. It is clear therefore that some party members are afraid to express their real views about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Surely this is an issue to be addressed by senior members of the party.
I believe that negative reporting can drive wedges between people who should work together. I strongly urge all members of the SNP to welcome our group and work with us to advocate for a secure and lasting peace for both the Israeli and Palestinian people.
Picture courtesy of Sammy Stein
Check out what people are saying about how important CommonSpace is: Pledge your support today.
