YouSaid · the spoken record

Daniel Levy

lines on the record
10
first
2020-07-21
most recent
2020-07-21
sittings or episodes
1
sources
un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

  1. “It would send a strong signal if this body were to explore, together with the Secretary- General, a mechanism to assess and evaluate its record and effectiveness on Israel- Palestine and to examine convening a commission or other appropriate vehicle to appraise anew approaches to resolving this long-standing conflict with its attendant debilitating effects.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  2. “Finally, and as is evident from this briefing, the Palestine-Israel situation is going through a quite profound transition, as indeed is our global geopolitical system. The call of Secretary-General Guterres to avert a great fracture and maintain a universal system should be strongly supported, alongside the Secretary-General’s recognition that the coronavirus disease pandemic has underscored the need for a strengthened and renewed multilateralism, as well as his call to re-examine long- standing assumptions and reconsider approaches that have led us astray.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  3. “As a recent example, I would urge Council members to look at an essay by American-Jewish intellectual Peter Beinart entitled “A Jewish case for equality in Israel-Palestine” and to consider the mobilizing and liberating power now — today — of a narrative of equality over separation — of dignity over real estate — whatever the eventual political dispensation. As some of the options I mentioned are examined, Israelis should be more, not less, engaged. There should be wide-ranging discussions with different sectors of Israeli society, including those supportive of the existing trajectory and those dissenting from it. Similarly, there should be engagement with the varied Palestinian constituencies, both inside and outside the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as with Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  4. “I would draw the Council’s attention to the prospect of the partition question needing to be revisited in the not- too-distant future. Fifthly, with regard to values, we should also look to nurture shared values of equality and humanity in navigating a way forward. For instance, we should try to understand and mutually engage with the experience and dispossession of Palestinian refugees, on the one hand, and with the Jewish impulse for a shelter of last resort, on the other hand. At this time where historic issues of racial justice have belatedly come to the fore, and as we mourn the death of American civil rights leader John Lewis, it is important to remember the many Palestinian and Israeli voices that have stood up for and continue to stand up for justice and equality.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  5. “Fourthly, going beyond partition, and given the gap between what is necessary for a genuine two-State outcome that could emerge by mutual consent and what is the reality on the ground as dictated by Israel, it might be necessary for members of this body to consider, alongside expressing a preference for two States, acknowledging a readiness to engage with other ideas so long as any alternatives respect one irrevocable standard, namely, full enfranchisement and equal and democratic rights for all those who are within the political and physical space in question. In 1947, it was the United Nations that determined in favour of partition. However, there were majority and minority positions and even an abstention.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  6. “Thirdly, the two-State outcome is not an infinitely elastic concept. There is no “State-minus”, which is tantamount to continued occupation. A plan that empties the yet-to-be established State of all attributes of sovereign statehood cannot offer a path to peace. Pre-emptively normalizing regional relations with Israel while occupation continues is to indulge maximalism.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  7. “While it should be costly, the occupation has become cost-free for Israel. Secondly, with regard to rights, human rights and international legality should be our guiding star and no longer be subordinated to maintaining a peace process that has so palpably failed to deliver. That means, for instance, supporting Palestinian and Israeli human rights defenders, backing serious investigations into grave human rights violations, including at the International Criminal Court, and prioritizing a permanent ceasefire to protect civilians, in particular in Gaza and southern Israel. To place issues of human rights and international law front and centre is not to hark back to the stale and boring; it is to insist on the timeless and necessary. That includes the right to be free from anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  8. “This is not a conflict of two equal parties pursuing equally destructive unilateral actions. Focusing primarily on the Israeli side reflects the relationships of power and of an occupying party whose actions pre-eminently determine outcomes on the ground. I would therefore humbly propose the following items for the consideration of this body. First, with regard to accountability, if the unlawful and peace-negating policies of Israel continue to be met with impunity, then there should be no expectation of positive change. It is that simple. Israel pursues policies in violation of international law and United Nations resolutions because it can; no tangible cost or consequence is attached. Rhetorical condemnation unmatched by real accountability and sanction invites derision.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  9. “The collective challenge is not just how to prevent annexation, but how to address occupation and these deeper entrenched structural problems. The peace process as currently framed and pursued offers a place of refuge from hard choices, a comfort zone where the law of diminishing returns has a lock hold. It has brought us to the brink of annexation, and the Palestinian Authority to the precipice of financial collapse. It is not a question of trying harder or of resuming negotiations. More of the same guarantees further deterioration; it is a failure of learning, politics and imagination. We must look not to quick fixes but to creating the conditions and the building blocks for future progress that can deliver equality, dignity and security for Palestinians and Israelis alike.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source

  10. “I would like to thank the Security Council and the German presidency for giving me this opportunity to brief the Council today. As of today, there has been no further Israeli annexation on the West Bank. That does not translate into this being a moment for self-congratulation — we should keep the champagne on ice. Refraining from de jure annexation must of course carry no reward; avoidance of criminality is normative, not prizeworthy. De jure annexation would exacerbate and accelerate existing negative trends. But whether it happens or not, annexation is a symptom of a deeper crisis: the permanent denial of freedom, rights and equality to Palestinians. The annexation focus also ignores and neglects the 2 million Palestinians in Gaza living under permanent conditions of inhumane enclosure.”

    2020-07-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/2020/736 (2020) · source