November / December 2000
UN Security Council Resolution 1322 Ignored by Israel (back
to top)
2000 Palestinians and their supporters recently held a peaceful 3 hour march and
rally in Sydney. The March was led by politicians and religious leaders.
Many people carried placards saying "Stop the killing, stop the war, free
Palestine now". Others called for the immediate implementation of UN
resolution 242.
In the final ten minutes of the rally, and against the wishes of the organizers,
about ten people burnt Israeli and US flags outside the American Consulate.
They were distressed by the Israeli's hard-line tactics in Gaza and the West
Bank. They were also angry over the deaths of 100 Palestinians, particularly the
death of a 12 year old boy.
It was unfortunate but typical that this segment of the rally was highlighted in
the news by all 5 TV channels.
The TV presenters descriptions of the rally also concentrated on the
flag-burning incidents with references like "..the development of ugly
scenes and.. organizers fighting to control radical elements who were trying to
hi-jack the rally.". The crowd was said to have erupted with rage, that
chaos grew into a frenzy and that hysteria set in. Viewers were told that it was
feared that Australia would experience
more violent demonstrations following this one.
These comments were far from the truth - but is it any wonder the Palestinians
have lost their patience when resolution 242 has been on the UN agenda since
1967 and resolution 1322 ignored.
Media Release Canberra
From the State of Palestine, Canberra
Despite the passing of the latest UN Security Council resolution 1322 of 7
October which condemned Israel's excessive use of force and called upon Israel
"to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities
under the IVth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War of 12 August 1949", Israeli armed forces and settlers
continue their aggression and killing of unarmed Palestinians for the 13th
consecutive day resulting in the death of over 100 Palestinians, including
children, and the wounding over 3,500 the Head of the General Palestinian
Delegation to Australia, and Ambassador of Palestine to Vanuatu, Mr Ali Kazak
said.
He said Israel's Prime Minister General Barak must end his policy of deceit
and ultimatums and start to comply with UN resolutions and the agreements Israel
signed with the PLO.
Israel is the occupying power. It is the party which is launching its war
against the Palestinian people and the party which carries full responsibility
for the current cycle of violence.
The 30,000 Palestinians in the security forces are exercising tremendous
restraint in the face of Israel's brutal repression. US-made Apache helicopter
gun-ships continue to be used along with tanks
and missiles to destroy civilian and presidential buildings and three days ago
the Alia Hospital in Hebron was also directly hit.
Armed settlers and Jewish hooligans, under the protection of the Israeli army,
are attacking and kidnapping Palestinians, three of whom were tortured to death
and their corpses thrown in the streets. These gangs have also set fire to
Palestinian shops, stores, cars and trucks shouting "Death to the
Arabs". This all looks similar to what the Jews were subjected to by Nazi
gangs in Europe.
What is not needed from Israel is the issuance of ultimatums and the renewal of
these ultimatums. This is totally rejected by the Palestinians; it does not
frighten them nor will Israel benefit from this. Israelis trying to
psychologically defeat the Palestinians so it can achieve its military
objectives. Israel did not learn anything from its history with the Palestinian
people.
What is needed from General Barak is to comply with UN Security Council
resolution 1322 and give orders to his army to stop shooting, withdraw from
surrounding Palestinian cities, towns and villages, disarm Jewish settlers and
gangs, accept an international inquiry, comply with agreements it has signed
with the
PLO and return to the negotiating table. This is what international leaders are
calling on Barak to do, and not as General Barak is claiming, which is to issue
and renew ultimatums.
On the other hand, it seems there are some politicians and commentators who come
out with simplistic statements in which they do not differentiate between the
occupied and the occupier, the victim and the victimiser. By doing so they are
unintentionally or otherwise encouraging Israel to continue its aggression,
crimes and violations of international law which only exacerbates the situation
further.
The collaboration between Generals Barak and Sharon is now clear. Israeli
leaders should be judged by politicians on the grounds of who is ready to comply
with UN resolutions and international law and who is ready to recognise
Palestinian rights, and not by who is willing to give the Palestinians more
crumbs.
The international community has agreed that without solving the Palestine
question, and the Palestinian people gaining their inalienable rights specified
by the internationally-supported UN resolutions such as 242, 338 and 194 which
call on Israel to withdraw from all the Palestinian and Arab territories it
occupied since the 1967 war, including East Jerusalem, and to allow the
Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland and compensate them, there will
never be peace in the Middle East. Indeed the whole peace
process is based on the implementation of these UN resolutions. So why prolong,
delay, spill more blood and further harden attitudes?
Following seven years of Israel's refusal to comply with the agreements already
signed and the deliberate violations of the very principles of peace, such as
the building and expansion of settlements, the blowing up of houses, collective
punishment, ethnic cleansing, confiscation of land and military and economic
siege of Palestinian cities, it is crystal clear that Israel is either not
willing or incapable of solving the Palestine question and achieve a just peace.
The US from adopting Israel's Middle East policy to handling the peace process,
to a team represented by known Zionist activists such as Dennis Ross, Martin
Indyk, and Sandy Berger to name a few, did not help the US play an honest broker
role, added to the problem and encouraged Israel to be defiant as the last seven
years show.
The international community cannot allow Israel to continue to jeopardise peace
and stability in the Middle East. International law and UN resolutions must be
respected by Israel; Israel cannot be allowed to continue to be a law unto
itself. We cannot have one set of principles applied to the whole world and
another set for Israel.
It is now time for all those who are sincerely interested in seeing peace and
justice in the Middle East to speak up in clear and unambiguous language.
12 October 2000
Adopted by the Security Council at its 4205th meeting on 7 October 2000
The Securitv Council,
Recalling its resolutions
476 (1980) of 30 June 1980,
478 (1980) of 20 August
1980, 672 (1990) of 12
October 1990, and 1073
(1996) of 28 September
1996, and all its other relevant resolutions,
Deeply concerned by the tragic events that have taken place since 28 September
2000, that have led to numerous deaths and injuries, mostly among Palestinians,
Reaffirming that a just and lasting solution to the Arab and Israeli conflict
must be based on its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338 (1973)
of 22 October 1973, through an active negotiating process,
Expressing its support for the Middle East peace process and the efforts to
reach a final settlement between the Israeli and Palestinian sides and urging
the two sides to cooperate in these efforts,
Reaffirming the need for full respect by all of the Holy Places of the City of
Jerusalem, and condemning any behaviour to the contrary,
1. Deplores the provocation carried out at AlHaram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem on 28
September
2000, and the subsequent violence there and at other Holy Places, as well as in
other areas throughout the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, resulting
in over 80 Palestinian deaths and many other casualties;
2. Condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against
Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life;
3. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal
obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative
to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949;
4. Calls for the immediate cessation of violence, and for all necessary steps to
be taken to ensure that violence ceases, that new provocative actions are
avoided, and that the situation returns to normality in a way which promotes the
prospects for the Middle East peace process;
5. Stresses the importance of establishing a mechanism for a speedy and
objective inquiry into the tragic events of the last few days with the aim of
preventing their repetition and welcomes any efforts in this regard;
6. Calls for the immediate resumption of negotiations within the Middle East
peace process on its agreed basis with the aim of achieving an early final
settlement between the Israeli and Palestinian sides;
7. Invites the Secretary-General to continue to follow the situation and to keep
the Council informed;
8. Decides to follow closely the situation and to remain seized of the matter.
Resolution No. 242 (1967)
of 22 November 1967 (back to top)
STATING THE PRINCIPLES OF A JUST AND
LASTING PEACE IN THE
MIDDLE EAST
The Securitv Council,
Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East.
Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the
need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can
live in security;
Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of
the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with
Article 2 of the Charter,
1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment
of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the
application of both the following principles.:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent
conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and
acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political
independence of every State in the area and
their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from
threats or acts of force;
2. Affirms further the necessity
(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in
the area;
(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of
every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of de-militarized zones;
3. Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to
proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States
concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful
and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this
resolution;
4. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the
progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.
Adopted unanimously at the 1382nd meeting
New Reactor Project Reaches Interesting Stage
(back to top)
By Michael Priceman
Since the contract between ANSTO and the Argentinian tenderer INVAP was signed
in July the situation has been far more chaotic than was expected. First it was
revealed that the company had no experience in building even small reactors
outside the 'developing world'. Its record was slight, having provided nuclear
plant to Algeria, Peru, Cuba and Egypt. The latter, its most recent, being
commissioned three years ago.
Following the release of this information Dr Raul Montenegro, head of the
leading environmental group in Argentina, FUNAM described the poor record of
INVAP as well as the environmental problems in Argentina associated with the
disposal of radioactive wastes. He suggested that ANSTO had not analysed INVAP's
background sufficiently before deciding on it as the best tenderer. Not
unexpectedly, Senator Minchin was suitably enraged and issued several press
releases defending the Australian choice. (You should get on the list of the
Senator's press releases, they are quite entertaining!).
In August Senator Nick Bolkus announced the formation of a Senate Committee to
inquire into the process leading up to the signing of the contract. It is set to
report in December although it is believed that it may roll over into next year.
Submissions were called for and about 160 were received. They run to five
volumes, the fifth containing that of the Sutherland Shire Council.
The stand out submissions were from Siemens (Germany) and Technicatome (France),
both losing tenderers. Allowing for that
fact their comments were polite, brief but very direct. Siemens suggested that
it "considers the budget allocated to the project forced some bidders to
deviate from the request for tender's maximum requirements." Because of its
wide experience it concluded that "only a highly subsidised offer is able
to meet the ANSTO budget and simultaneously complying with all the details of
the tender requirements". In effect ANSTO wanted more for the money it was
prepared to pay and Siemens declined to construct a bargain reactor.
Siemens also described some of the technical problems that had occurred on the
Peruvian reactor over a ten-year period. Such as corrosion of the main tank,
deformation of the reflectors, failure of the irradiation tubes, the operational
and safety-directed digital electronics and other control issues. Very
reassuring for us locals! Amongst other issues raised by Siemens was that the
new (Argentinian) reactor would be relying on a type of fuel that was not yet
developed and may not be developed by the time it is ready to operate.
Technicatome was equally brief and its main points dealt with the long track
record that it has in the type of reactor required by ANSTO and the unique
safety features that are engineered in that "do not exist in the reference
reactors of their competitors". Their decision to tender was based on
"the clear demand from ANSTO for high performance proven solutions with a
clear emphasis on the availability and proven record of the reactor design
proposed by the tenders".
Whilst it believed that it met all these criteria and was able to supply at the
ceiling price demanded by ANSTO it felt that in the end there was not enough
actual examination of the proven plants made by itself and those of its
competitors. In the end "we noticed that the important questioning was
mainly focused on - The status of compliance based on the demand for formal
written statements of compliance and the theoretical assessments of performances
but mainly based on scientific calculations and not on proven experience as
asked for in the tender documents."
This was confirmed during a debriefing with ANSTO when they were informed that
the tenders were mainly addressed on a paper basis. Reading this reminded us of
the Environmental Impact Study which was full of promises and commitments by
ANSTO which were seized upon by Minister Hill to justify the project. Projecting
the method even further, ARPANSA, the Australian nuclear regulator, uses similar
methods of bits of paper and computer modelling to justify its licence
approvals.
Again Minister Minchin and ANSTO churned out reams of justification of its
choice to the press. "What can you expect from losing tenders?" But
nothing solid to refute the claims.
As with the submission to the EIS the most remarkable was that from Tony Wood,
former Chief Engineer at ANSTO and still a strong supporter of the new reactor
project. After describing the total lack of absolute liability in the case of an
accident -"the people living in the vicinity are blissfully unaware that
they are disadvantaged with respect to their financial security compared with
their equivalents living in Europe, North America and Japan" .. he turned
again to the matter of the worst accident.
It is Wood's view that a major risk (perhaps the dominating one) has been
omitted from the calculation and this omission is in fact admitted in the EIS,
Page 11.37. He continued "I must emphasise that this in no way claims that
a level of risk is unacceptable. It merely states that the EIS makes claims for
risk which cannot be substantiated". Just what we locals have been saying
for the past three years. But Tony Wood had not yet finished. He jumped on the
choice of INVAP as the preferred tenderer.
He describes the three unsuccessful bidders as having over 100 years of
operating experience with research reactors they had built with power levels
equivalent or higher than the one proposed for Lucas Heights. INVAP "has
only one reactor (Egypt) that has 2 or 3 years of operation. Unlike the
Minister, I do not count the little reactors built by Argentina which are almost
irrelevant: His conclusion, "the concern is that ANSTO is not a
particularly experienced buyer, dealing with a not particularly experienced
supplier".
We await the report of the Senate Committee with great interest but with no
great expectations. At least it will flush out some of the more outrageous
aspects of the way the contract has been handled. Inefficiently and secretly.
The Specification for the reactor is being drawn up at present. It will reach
Australia next year and will be assessed for its capability and safety by
ARPANSA. But ARPANSA's corporate plant includes regulating the siting,
construction, commissioning and operation of the proposed replacement research
reactor and that this will be a priority. Doesn't sound like a regulator to us.
More like a branch of government working to meet a government time-table.
For further information contract Michael Priceman, Email: panr@acay.com.au
Every State in Australia had a celebration on October 7 and a number of the
States had further activities through the month of October. All rallies have
been outstanding successes. Congratulations to the members of the National
Coordinating Committee for World March of Women 2000 in Australia who did a
magnificent job conveying information and greetings to each of the venues
throughout Australia.
Source: UAW News Letter.
The Promise of Broad-Based Support for Vanunu and Nuclear Abolition (back
to top)
By Felice Cohen-Joppa
A record 170 demonstrators gathered at the fence of Israel's off-limits Dimona
nuclear weapons reactor to press for its immediate closure. The event, organized
by women for a variety of peace and justice, environmental, and feminist groups
in observance of International Women's Day of Peace and Disarmament, drew a few
foreign guests and a good number of uniformed police and undercover security
agents.
Present in spirit was Mordechai Vanunu, the 45-year-old former Dimona nuclear
technician, now serving an 18-year prison term for leaking the story of Israel's
secret nuclear arsenal, who told the crowd through the voice of his adoptive
mother, "Nuclear weapons will lead to a second holocaust. The Dimona
reactor is a second Auschwitz."
The wind-blown, sunburned crowd, the most diverse as well as the largest ever to
assemble at the remote desert reactor, rallied under the banner, "After the
use of nuclear weapons, no side will have won."
Palestinians from inside Israel and the Occupied Territories were there. Many
youths joined with more seasoned activists. Members of the Black Hebrew
community, based in Dimona City, sang a song dedicated to Vanunu.
Protests were shaded by a peace tent within sight of Dimona's distant dome,
shimmering in the hot sun, and flanked by a bouquet of sunflowers symbolizing
world aspirations for nuclear abolition, speakers addressed a variety of
concerns.
Issam Makhoul, a member of the Israeli Knesset, received applause for having
initiated last February's first Knesset public debate on Israel's nuclear
policy.
Mary Eoloff of St. Paul, Minnesota, who, with her husband Nick, adopted Vanunu
three years ago, moved the audience with her report for Ashkelon Prison, where
the couple had visited their son the day before. She said that Mordechai
appreciates all the efforts that are made for his release and all protests
against nuclear weapons, and that he urged Israelis to continue and expand their
anti-nuclear struggle.
Two days earlier the Eoloffs appeared as guests of honor before an audience of
100 at a Knesset panel discussion hosted by Knesset member Tamar Gozansky. The
panelists discussed a variety of nuclear issues.
The gatherings and the Knesset and in the sun-baked Negev Desert underline the
significant momentum in Israel with regard to Mordechai Vanunu and the secret
nuclear arsenal he warned his fellow citizens about.
The grim reality is that after being caged in isolation for almost 12 years,
Vanunu is still barred from mixing with Palestinian prisoners, still denied
visits with all except his lawyer and a few close relatives, still subjected to
censorship and long delays of his mail. But the good news is that in Israel there is growing public awareness of Vanunu
and his role as conscientious whistle-blower rather than spy or traitor:
the
false labels pinned on him by a lock-step judiciary and national media. There is
also a growing awareness of the nuclear weapons program which Vanunu first
brought to public light and which the government still calls secret.
No longer can Israel and its leaders credibly ignore the existence of these
weapons and the dangers they pose to the environment, to the economy, to
democracy, to peace and security. The shroud of secrecy and apathy has been rent
by revelations from the long-secret trial of Mordechai Vanunu, which shows him
in true light, by increasingly fair and favorable media coverage of his case,
and by the Knesset's historic decision to visit the once taboo subject of
nuclear weapons.
When I travelled to Israel for the first time in 1991 as part of a Women's Peace
delegation, I met few activists who were interested in discussing nuclear
weapons or the case of Mordechai Vanunu. Since then, undeniable steps forward have led to this year's broad-based
demonstration.
There is no doubt about it: A dynamic and growing anti-nuclear movement, one
which recognizes Vanunu's sacrifice and calls for his freedom, is taking hold in
Israel. And that must give Mordechai some hope.
Felice Cohen-Joppa is an associate coordinator of the UŁ Campaign to Free
Mordechai Vanunu and coe4itor of the Nuclear Resister; published in Tucson,
Arizona. Accompanying her at the Israeli events was Marie Stone of London,
representing the British Campaign to Free Vanunu and For a Nuclear-Free Middle
East.
Messages
He likes to receive cards.
You can write to him at:
Mordechai Vanunu,
Ashkelon Prison, Ashkelon,
Israel.
If you want to express your anger at Vanunu's return to solitary and 15 years
incarceration write to:
Prime Minister Ehud Barak, 3 Kaplan Street, Hakiyra, Jerusalem 91007. FAX 001
5-972-2-5664~8 and/or Jossi Beilin, Minister for Justice, 29 Salah al-Din
Street, Jerusalem 91010 FAX 0015-972-2-628-5438
Coming to Terms With History
(back to top)
In a country full of war memorials, the Aboriginal victims of the Myall Creek
Massacre now have their own monument
In rural New South Wales last century, those who murdered Aboriginal people
wouldn't have thought they were breaking the law.
On 10 June 1838 on the pastoral frontier on the Gwydir River in the northwest of
New South Wales, 12 stockmen, marched 28 Wirrayaraay people into the bush and
shot and hacked them to death, later trying to burn the bodies. Only two young
children escaped.
On hearing of what became known as the Myall Creek Massacre, Governor Gipps
decided to impose the rule of law on an unruly colony and sent a magistrate to
investigate. Despite many obstructions, overwhelming evidence was amassed
against the stockmen who were charged with murder
The first jury let them off Then a retrial was ordered, causing general protest.
Seven of the stockmen were
convicted and hanged. This was the first time white men had been convicted for
killing Aboriginal people.
The trial made Myall Creek famous, though there were other killings that year As
many as 300 may have died at Waterloo Creek
On 10 June this year a memorial to the men, women and children killed at Myall
Creek was unveiled at the massacre site.
The monument is constructed along the route the people were forced to
march-seven plaques set in granite boulders each tell a part of the story The
main site is at the end of the walkway. Here a granite boulder several meters
high bears a plaque reading:
"In memory of the Wirrayaraay people who were murdered on the slopes of the
ridge in an unprovoked but premeditated act in the late afternoon of 10 June
1938. Erected on the JO June 2000 by a group of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal
Australians in an act of reconciliation, and in acknowledgment of the truth of
our shared
history.
We remember them. Nigiyani winangay ganunga."
The Myall Creek
Memorial Committee
oversaw this project and, on the day brought together descendants of both the
victims and perpetrators.
Lyall Munro Snr chair of the ATSIC Kamilaroi Regional Council and co-chair of
the committee saw the memorial as helping come to terms with the real history of
this country.
"Myall Creek is not the only massacre site around here and of course there
are thousands around the country but bringing awareness and owning our history
is what Australia needs to reconcile," Munro said.
"Not until we tell the truth and acknowledge it, will we move on."
The 500 or so people who attended the ceremony were invited to bring a stone to
place around the perimeter of the monument acknowledging common history and
unity in the commitment to Reconciliation.
From 'ATSIC News'
APC's letter to Phillip Ruddock
(back to top) Our joy at seeing Cathy Freeman light
the Olympic Flame of the 27th Olympiad; then winning gold for black and white
Australians was quickly extinguished by your ill-considered statement about
chariots and the wheel. You said that Aboriginal people are relatively
disadvantaged because they didn't have chariots or invent the wheel.
The disadvantaged state of Aboriginal people today began with the invasion of
their country over 200 years ago. The invaders brought with them not only their
chariot wheels but their diseases, guns, racism, politicians and a desire to
claim this country for themselves to the exclusion of the original owners.
They have continued over the years to denigrate and patronize the totally
self-sufficient and multi-talented original inhabitants of this land.
Why do you and the Federal Government continue to portray Aboriginal people as
being inferior to white people? Can you imagine how your remarks offend, insult
and affect them?
Aboriginal people absorb this constant negativity against them and this is what
is disadvantaging them. This constant downgrading is unnecessary and hurtful.
What sort of lucky country has this turned out to be for those who were here
first.
No doubt the sight of the white man's wheel fascinated early aborigines.
However, what did they think of the values of our white culture as they watched
the building of one of our first structures in Feb. 1788, a set of gallows?
What would they have felt seeing a 17-year-old convict hanged by the neck on it?
Hunger had driven him to stealing food for which he was tried, convicted and
hanged all in the space of 60 minutes.
His Reply
Thank you for your letter in relation to comments of mine included in some
recent international newspaper articles. Reconciliation is a challenge that
Australia is facing and will face into the future. I am proud and honoured to be
directly involved in the process.
I have always stated that the disadvantage experienced by Indigenous Australians
is something that must be addressed in such a way to achieve practical outcomes.
Work to address this disadvantage has been undertaken by successive Commonwealth Governments for the
last three decades and positive outcomes are being witnessed. Hopefully the
added efforts that we have made over the last four years will lead to ever
increasing positive change in the lives of Indigenous Australians.
In no way were my comments meant to be divisive or in any way derogatory. As I
have stated I was not advocating the superiority of one culture over another
Unfortunately offence was taken where it was never intended This was in part due
to the fact that comments included in the article were part of a much longer
interview and those comments when reported on, were taken out of context.
I think that it should suffice to say that we have been able to build upon the
richness and strength of many cultures to create a nation of which we can all be
justifiably proud We must now ensure that the legacy we leave allows future
generations to build upon our achievements - achievements that date back tens of
thousands of years.
Dealing with Unfinished Business (back to top)
By Patrick Dodson
Inaugural chair of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, Mr. Patrick
Dodson, outlined his proposals for the handling of the outstanding business of
the reconciliation process in Canberra on 12 May.
Delivering the biennial Wentworth lecture, he told a packed auditorium that the
Government had to commit to a process with the Aboriginal peoples for finding
practical, legal and political ways of advancing the recommendations of the
Council for the Aboriginal Reconciliation's national reconciliation documents.
He suggested the establishment of an independent commission of eminent
Australians to draft a Treaty between the Australian Government and Aboriginal
peoples based on the matters conveyed to it during the course of its life.
The Wentworth lecture, presented by the Australian institute of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Studies, honours the founding father of the institute,
former parliamentarian and Minister for Social Services 1968-72 and in charge of
Aboriginal Affairs 1969-71, the Hon William Charles (Bill) Went-worth AO. Mr.
Wentworth, now 92, attended the lecture and, at its conclusion, spoke of his
disappointment that achieving justice for Aboriginal people had been so slow and
difficult.
Mr. Dodson said it was one thing for the Council to make the strongest possible
statements and recommendations in its national documents, but quite another
matter as to what the Government and the Parliament
is committed to doing about them. "This is the aspect of the current reconciliation process that I am most concerned
with ," he said.
"This is the relevant period of the process of reconciliation when outcomes
have to be focused upon and made real. We should not be distracted by political
posturing, but argue for an effective Government response."
"The fact that there is a people's movement associated with the formal
process of reconciliation at the present time may add to the optimism, but is no
guarantee that their goodwill and resolve will be any more rewarded than that of
the Council itself."
"Reconciliation involves
beneficial resolution of our status as the first peoples of this country and
restitution for the way our inheritance as owners and custodians of the land has
been taken away from us. It also requires us meeting our obligations and
responsibilities in the changed world of contemporary Australian Society."
Mr. Dodson listed the key principles to be addressed in any legislation
framework or Treaty between the Indigenous peoples and other Australians. He said these came under the core
headings:
- Political representation
- Reparations and compen sation
- Regional agreements
-
Indigenous regional self-government
-
Cultural and intellectual
property rights
-
Recognition of customary
law
-
An economic base
He said that in common with all other Australians, Indigenous peoples must
have the right to maintain their unique cultural identity. This must happen
without having their entitlements as Australian citizens held hostage to the
social imperatives of governments unable to comprehend the value of the
contribution that they brought to this country as first Australians.
"Justice requires that the efforts of all involved in the reconciliation
process, and over the past 200 years or so, have some reward," Mr. Dodson
said.
"The reconciliation dynamic involves truth in both fields of practical and
spiritual domains in order for the ongoing cause of discord and division between
us to be resolved."
"The Council cannot deliver the results on the issues that it highlights.
It does a service to all of us to bring them to the forefront of the nation's
consciousness. It is for Government to commit to finding the path of lasting
reconciliation. Its hour has come."
Mr. Dodson's entire lecture may be viewed at www.aiastis.gov.au
From 'walking together'
West Papuan Leader Releases Three Point Peace Plan (back to top)
Mr Koknak who is the Supreme Commander of the West Papuan National Liberation
Army (armed wing of the OPM) has been with the OPM for 15 years. The OPM is the
umbrella organisation representing the West Papuan liberation struggle for
self-determination and independence from Indonesia.
Mr Koknak has emerged after 10 years in the jungles of West Papua to call for a
peaceful path to solving the issue of self-determination for the people of West
Papua.
He was in Canberra to meet MPs and Senators to seek support for
self-determination for West Papua.
He says Australia or the United Nations should back a three point strategy to
resolve the issue:
1. Hosting an open dialogue between Indonesia and West Papuan leaders which
would lead to;
2. A genuine vote of self-determination by the 1.8 million people of West Papua
and, depending on that;
3. Transition to independence.
West Papuans, Mr Koknak insists, demand that their
nation be treated as an international rather than domestic issue to be left to
Jakarta. According to him the United Nations was responsible for the problem
from the beginning, therefore it must take a lead in solving
it.
"Being a neighbour and friend to both Indonesia and West Papua, Australia
is best placed to also help. It is urgent that Australia assist in mediating
this issue. The National Congress of the West Papuan people has
given December 1st, 2000 as a deadline for significant progress to be
achieved", Mr Koknak said.
"We do not want this to be left to violence and bloodshed but the
determination of my people should not be underestimated," he said.
Apart from Australia, Mr Koknak has also visited Fiji and Vanuatu.
John Koknak is committed to a peaceful, diplomatic resolution of the West Papua
desire for self-determination. He founded the West Papua Student Association at
the University of PNG in the early 1980's when studying for a political science
degree. His work at the moment is to improve international understanding of the
West Papuan situation by advocacy and diplomatic means.
MPs Set Up West
Papua Group
A widely represented group of 10 MPs met in Parliament House on 2 November to set
up 'Parliamentarians for West Papua'
The meeting was addressed by two West Papuan leaders. Mr John Koknak and Mr John Ondawame.
The group's aim is to promote information and dialogue on West Papua to the
Australian Parliament and people.
Greens Senator Bob Brown, interim convenor, said the meeting also resolved to
write to the Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer asking the Governments attitude
to the establishment of a West Papuan information office in Australia.
Back to Top
| 
