Canada has 'many steps' to take before recognizing Palestinian state: Bob Rae | Power & Politics

Palestinian representative celebrated a win at the United Nations General Assembly [Applause] today in an emergency session the United Nations General Assembly voted to give new rights and privileges to the Palestinians at the UN the resolution also calls on the UN Security Council to favorably reconsider the Palestinian bid for full membership the vote was not received well by Israeli delegates in the 1940s the world United to destroy a murderous regime yet today with sick and twisted irony the very body established to prevent evil is now welcoming a terror State into its ranks the vote passed by a wide margin with 143 in favor nine against and 25 abstentions Canada was one of the Nations to abstain from the vote signaling a significant shift in its position on Palestinian statehood Canada has decided to change our position from no at the UN to abstaining to uh reflecting that our longstanding position that you could only recognize the state of Palestine as an outcome at the end of a process leading to a two-state solution we now recognize that it may happen sooner than at the end of the process as a way of pushing towards that two-state solution Bob Ray is Canada's ambassador to the United Nations Ambassador welcome back to the show thank you very much it's good to be with you David walk me through the decision to abstain on the vote in the past Canada has voted no on similar resolutions what message are you trying to send by moving to the exstension column well you're right to think that it's a message but it's also frankly a matter of substance you know with these things the best thing that the best way to go forward is to look at what the resolution actually says word by word line by line Clause by clause and then say where do we go with this and then frankly I I I would prefer to deal with the comm's aspect after that I think we all recognize that um the the clear common position of Canada over many many years different governments different administrations since 1947 and in preparation for this vote my mission did a complete analysis of the history of every vote taken every speech given in the UN on this issue since 1946 uh and and it's been a very interesting important exercise for us and in doing that we I think clearly showed that the two states position was really developed by Ivan Rand who was the judge who was on the commission that led to the change in the in Palestine as it then was under the British mandate and said okay where do we go with this we go to partition because that's what's required to allow both communities to have their State uh and ultimately that's what the Israelis accept accepted and that's frankly what the Arabs or Palestinians as we now call them uh said no we don't want that we deny it we don't think Israel has a right to exist and that's what led to the wars war of independence in 1948 then the ceas fire then another war in ' 67 then a ceas fire and principle of partition or two states has been key to Canada's position since that time so in a sense you know others have changed their position others have said well we favor this we favor he said no this is where we're going with this the the one time we made exception to to so how we vote is when it looked as if the parties were at least on the edge or in the middle of a discussion about what the negotiations would be like we can't pretend that's happening now and so we have to say well what is our position how do we clearly state it our position is two states we are not yet in a position to recognize Palestine as a state member of the United Nations for the simple reason that the authority does not control all of the country uh and that's is Israel is creating some of that problem but Hamas is creating another part of that problem and the Hamas part when you have a terrorist organization there have to say well what exactly are we recognizing and that's where we kind of hesitated to go to yes on the other hand we couldn't say no because we can't pretend that Israel at the moment is even remotely interested in the two-state solution so while we we we were we want to say we've got to be careful how we say it we also say we've got to be clear with the Israelis about the importance of finding this balance and getting them back on track to recognize the importance of Palestinian statehood as an objective for them as well as for the Palestinians so is that who the message is aimed at then Ambassador Ray because I that's been sort of the analysis I've seen and and my conclusion is that this is sending a message to prime minister Netanyahu that you're shifting Canada's vote from the last couple of times like this has come forward to send a message to Israel that that it needs to get serious about a two-state solution well we said no um in in two you said no various times in terms of the votes on Palestine as an observer and actually my dad was The Ambassador in 74 when yzer Arafat was the head of the PLO the PLO had not yet abandoned terrorism from our perspective there was no question of saying yes we're going to go to statehood the issues have not even come close now in 2012 the Harper government decided to say no still because they didn't want to interfere with any potential negotiations between the the Palestinians and and the Israelis now I think we have to take a position which again the Common Thread throughout them all is two states yes but they have to be Democratic states non-terrorist states states that recognize the existence of the other and that's where we have to be so the Prime Minister said today and this was in the statement that was released as sort of as the rationale as as well for explaining the exstension that Canada is ready to recognize a Palestinian State and not necessarily at the end of the peace negotiations so what it does a moment like that look like because we are seeing this being contemplated out loud in a lot of countries that moving fast on this could be the thing that is required to put pressure on Israel to sort of end the military operations that get there so what is what is the sort of threshold for Canada to make this move if if it's not at the very end of a negotiated peace and two-state solution well I think that the argument that that many make and the Palestinians make themselves is to say well look how are we supposed to deal with this uh we you know the Israelis don't want us to be a state so how are we supposed to become a state and that is actually not an unreasonable position except to say we have to say in return well there's some things you you need to do yourselves you need to create a stronger rule of law you need to create the possibility of a democratic Palestine the world needs to deal with the question of Hamas and with the terrorist organization so I don't think it's a message only to one side I think it's a message to two but I think as far as Canada is concerned we'll be working very very closely with a number of countries some of whom voted yes some of whom voted no some of whom abstained but all of whom have said we're in favor of a two-state solution so we'll be working very closely with all of our partners and parties that are actively engaged in this to figure out what is the right moment some countries uh voted yes and said but that doesn't mean we recognize palestine's a state and you sort of look at the resolution say yeah but unfortunately that's what it says so we couldn't bring ourselves to the yes but we stuck with the exstension but we're just as open as anybody else to discussing with the Palestinians okay how do we get there and we need to talk and that's why we I talked in my speech today very clearly about there are problems the issue of of uh of terrorism in Gaza has to be has to be understood as a problem what happened on October the 7th that's a problem it has to be dealt with has to be understood so this is not a giveaway to either side this is a way of saying we want a two-state solution but we wanted on terms that serve everybody's interest the best and that serve the interests of the charter of the United Nations on the Palestinian side Ambassador does do they need to does it need to be a rejection of terrorism or does it need to be a rejection of Hamas for Canada to get there like where does Hamas fit into this well I mean history has shown that there are organizations that were described or or defined as terrorists that that changed and made a very conscious decision we need to understand that the the PLO signed signed the oso Accords with uh with with with prime minister Rabin that would not have happened if the Israelis felt well you know they're they're just they're nothing but a bunch of terrorists we're not going to negotiate with them um I thought the the Israeli P representative today gave some unfortunate remarks about um describing Palestine the IDE of Palestine as a terrorist State um I think he seriously underestimates the commitment of many many countries including many countries in the region to make sure to say look Hamas as it currently stands as it currently exists what it is currently standing for how it has conducted itself is does not belong in the government of Palestine but people can change and so that I think there's a lot of things that need conditions that need to be attached to this that will make sense whoever becomes involved in the government of Palestine the state as it as it works toward statehood has to recognize the existence the Safety and Security of the state of Israel that's an absolute requirement by everybody and that has to be very clear to everybody there can be no way to be ambiguous about this and we expect those countries in the region that have still not recognized Israel to do so uh Lebanon Syria Iran I mean name it many countries in region have still not recognized state of isra many countries in ranging you know in in in Africa Tunisia Algeria go through the list there's a lot of countries that still do not recognize Israel and the government of Pakistan made a very unfortunate statement today where they talked about the occupation of of of Palestine starting you know over 70 years ago and you say no as long as you're using that language you're not recognizing the existence and the Integrity of the state of Israel and that's the language that has to change Ambassador people may look at what you just said there about not being a categorical rejection of the participation of Hamas I I get the Nuance that things can change we've seen things change in Ireland we've SE seen change with the Palestinian Authority uh but they might see that and in the current environment uh be alarmed by that and upset by that I what do you no way to be alarmed all I'm saying is all I'm saying is you know look Hamas is not cannot be in its current form cannot be a member of the of any of any government in in Palestine clear Hamas cannot be as an organization let's be precise about that how how one then goes on to say well but whoever joins the government has to recognize the existence of the state of Israel and that's very clear and I I don't think there's any any quible about that on my part I'm absolutely clear on that front and I want to continue to be very clear on it there has been alignment between Canada Australia and New Zealand on a lot of policies and votes at the UN and Joint statements uh throughout this conf since October Australia and New Zealand voted yes today and Canada abstained what why didn't you join them in in going to yes why did Canada choose more of the the middle ground approach instead of uh going all the way as Australia and New Zealand did well I think it's because of the reasons that I've given uh we I can assure you my colleagues New Zealand and and Australia are very close friends of mine we work very closely in our response to this resolution I will continue to work very closely in this response absolutely the we we need to be very precise and very clear about you know what needs to be done and said with respect to going forward They concluded that they could get to yes and say at the same time no we're not recognizing statehood and we said well because we're we are where we are we're going to continue to express that opinion VI an exstension but the fascinating thing about the votes today David for me was you had countries voting yes you had countries voting no you had countries vo yes and if you sat and listened to the speeches as I do and said well where's this going to end up are they going to end up with yes or abstain or no and it's quite interesting to see how the how the votes come out the US delegate was very clear the US wants two states the US is concerned about what's happening with respect to Rafa President Biden has been very clear on that score so we need to continue to be clear on how we how we go forward so I I if Canada is willing to recognize a Palestinian State prior to a fully formulated peace process or an agreed upon two-state solution does that mean Canada is willing to recognize it over the objections of Israel if it comes to that does Israel need to be fully on board before Canada would say yes I I don't know the answer to that question quite honestly David I mean that's a decision the government have to take at a time I mean it's never a good idea to to govern in the name of a theory I think what the government has done today in its statement uh and what the minister has said very clearly is that as many other governments have said we will make our own judgments as to how we go forward on this question of recognition but it has to be based on the the Key conditions does the government actually control does the government actually have the support of its people is there is there a clear movement towards the the kind of statehood that we would all consider to be to be statehood um and and I think those are conditions that some of them are under the control of the Palestinians some of them are not but to the extent to which it's also situations on the ground have to come such as the the position of Hamas uh I think all these things have to be clarified before we would make a step in in that direction but again I think this important to avoid speculation and to focus on what we are talking about today and how we're planning to go forward but but I just wonder as a as a final Point Ambassador if if we should read this uh as it's really the proposition that is on the table uh from the Palestinian people that would determine what what can how Canada makes its decision rather than maybe the political dynamic in Israel that would determine how Canada makes its position if if the Palestinians come with a clear plan uh that that meets sort of the the thresholds you laid out would that Trump uh opposition from Israel there's a lot of things that have to happen if there's a ceasefire when there's eventually there will be a ceasefire when there's a ceasefire and we hope it comes sooner rather than later there will have to be a consideration is well how do we maintain Ain Law and Order in in Gaza and what form will that intervention take um how will the Palestinian Authority be allowed or able to change effectively so that it can play a role in what happens in Gaza and elsewhere would that even be allowed there are many many steps that have to be taken to get to where we need to go but the important part I think of Canada's statement today is that we're saying we we are going to be on this journey together with Israel with Palestine and with a number of other countries uh that are all engaged in this in this issue we're going to be doing everything we can to be significant Partners in that regard in terms of how we Finance how we move forward on security how we move forward in a whole variety of fronts diplomatically Canada is committed to participating and to maintaining its position of full participation in this process Ambassador Bob Ray always appreciate the time thanks for coming on today you

Channel: CBC News

Views: 31,888

Keywords: Israel, Palestine, UN, United Nations, Canada, CBC, CBC News, news

Id: 6EDunh8sspc

Length: 15min 57sec (957 seconds)

Published: Fri May 10 2024