Former Pacific leaders challenge PIF Israel partnership
The chair of the Pacific Elders’ Voice (PEV) says the argument that religious affinity justifies the Pacific Islands Forum’s (PIF) partnership with Israel does not stack up.
The Forum’s recent decision to make Israel a sectoral partner has drawn widespread criticism by civil society in the region, and is described as being in conflict with the Pacific’s commitments to human rights, self-determination and international law.
The Pacific Elders’ Voice – a group of former Pacific prime ministers, presidents, senior diplomats and academics – has also come out strongly against the move.
According to PEV chair and former Kiribati President Anote Tong, their position has been informed by a recent report from a Middle East fact-finding mission by the global Elders Group, including former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark and Pakistani human rights advocate Hina Jelani.
Their report concluded that Israel’s conduct was driving systematic occupation, annexation, and forced displacement of Palestinians amidts a prolonged campaign of violence.
“The mission also cited reports of genocide, killings, and the harassment [of Palestinians],” Tong told RNZ Pacific.
“These are not speculative, these are reports coming from the people who actually went on the ground, people who have absolute credibility. These are leaders, former leaders.”
Israel’s President Isaac Herzog has categorically rejected what he called the one-sided criticism of Israel’s conduct by the Elders.
As a PIF partner, Israel will support Pacific development priorities in areas such as water management, desalination, agriculture and climate change adaptation.
Pacific Islands Forum
However, deep division over the Forum’s move has been reflected in the reaction to the Pacific Elders’ stance. While many took to social media to applaud the call, others were critical of it.
For some Pacific Islanders, Israel’s partnership with the Forum makes sense because many of them are influenced by Judeo-Christian, biblical narratives and Christian Zionism, and consider the Middle Eastern country as the Holy Land.
But for the Pacific Elders’ Voice, this does not justify bringing Israel into the Forum.
“To say that we have an affinity with Israel because of religion … there is nothing morally defensible by the actions that are being described, and so that kind of an argument supporting Israel against a very clear report doesn’t really stand in any way.”
Consistency
The Pacific Elders Voice said the Forum’s decision raised questions about the consistency of the region’s positions on colonialism, human rights and self-determination.
Tong said he believed the Pacific Elders represent the views, principles, and moral standards common to Pacific Islands people.
“This is also important because in our advocacy on climate change, we’ve always emphasised the moral and the ethical perspective, which we are asking the world to step forward on climate action.
“I read the arguments that we need the technology that Israel is putting forward, but that does not give them the permit to do what it is that they are doing.
“We’re arguing exactly the same thing that the countries which are benefiting by the fossil fuel industry need to make sacrifices because what they are doing is immorally destructive.”
Kiribati president Anote Tong
AFP
Tong said the Pacific Islands region should put substance to its new Ocean of Peace initiative.
“I don’t think we should be saying one thing and doing very opposite the next moment. I think it’s counterproductive.
“I guess as a non-political group of elders, we are not constrained by the political or the diplomatic constraints, and I think we can speak our mind, hopefully from from a moral perspective, more freely.”
Timing
A number of Pacific countries have recently forged closer ties with Israel’s Netanyahu regime, but Anote Tong says the Pacific should not be endorsing a government like that.
“I think it’s really the wrong time, given what is happening in that part of the world. It’s really the time to be very cautious to how we get involved with that region, particularly with some a country that is very much at the forefront of the conflict.”
Tong said that from his own experience, he knows of the strong lobbying that is levvied against Pacific governments.
“There is no doubt at all in my mind that this has been the case because there is no reason why we all need now to establish relations and put offices in Israel at this time.
“We should be very cautious about getting closer to a country that is now being declared a criminal administration.”
Churches
The Forum’s move has been met with strong criticism from civil society groups in the region, including the Pacific Council of Churches (PCC).
Tong said the PCC’s strong rebuke represented a different position from those arguing the Pacific’s religious connection to Israel justifies stronger ties to the Israel state.
“That kind of argument doesn’t stand in the face of what is happening, in the face of the findings that the Elders have come up with,” he said.
“I cannot imagine any moral human being saying that religious affinity is what needs to guide our decision.”
The Pacific Elders’ Voice said the PIF should review and reverse its partnership with Israel.
