The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

How G4S helps Israel break the Geneva convention

Lisa Nandy calls for the government to take action over G4S' participation in illegal imprisonment.

By Lisa Nandy Published 30 September 2012 9:48

The Israel/Egypt border. Photograph: Getty Images

Since 1967, more than 730,000 Palestinian men, women and children are estimated to have been imprisoned by Israeli military courts. The majority of such prisoners are held in detention facilities inside Israel, in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the transfer of these prisoners into Israel.

The practical consequence of this violation is that many prisoners, including children, receive either limited or no family visits, due to freedom of movement restrictions. In the case of children, this lack of adequate family contact also violates their rights under article 37 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

According to Israeli Prison Service figures released in June of this year, 85 per cent of Palestinian prisoners, including children, were detained inside Israel. Of 4,706 prisoners, 285 were held in administrative detention, without charge or trial.

The UK government has confirmed that Israel's policy of detaining Palestinians is contrary to Article 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, that they have raised this with the Israeli government and will continue to do so. In a recent letter to me, Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt MP stated that the FCO is lobbying Israeli authorities for a number of improvements, including a reduction in the number of arrests that occur at night, an end to shackling and the introduction of audio-visual recording of interrogations.

Such diplomatic pressure is important - but what of the British companies that keep Israel's prisons running? According to corporate accountability campaigners, the security giant G4S, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange, signed a contract with the Israeli Prison Authority in 2007 to provide services to a number of prisons and detention facilities. Some of these are known to house prisoners transferred from the West Bank.

What's more, the company has installed a central command room in Ofer Prison in the occupied West Bank, which houses a centre where prisoners are tried under military law. Ofer Prison is located in what the Israeli military refers to as the "Seam Zone", which means access for visiting families is highly restricted.

G4S have said that it will exit from all the contracts it holds in the West Bank at the earliest opportunity the contract terms allow. They also say that they have not violated any international laws, which on this specific issue may be correct, given that the Geneva Conventions apply only to Governments that have ratified their terms. Despite these limitations, the UK government can still act - yet it refuses to.

Alastair Burt told me that, despite being aware of G4S's involvement in Israeli prisons, the Foreign Office has not discussed the issue with the company and believes that the "provision of services in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories is a matter for G4S."

Last June the UK Government co-sponsored a UN resolution that places duties on states to protect against corporate abuse of human rights. The commitment is meaningless if the government refuses to take action in a clear-cut case such as this.

Companies that have been involved in grievous human rights abuse continue to be listed on the London Stock Exchange, seriously damaging the reputation of British business abroad and making it more difficult to compete for those businesses which are trying to uphold high ethical business and trade standards. Such abuse by any corporation is not merely a matter for the company, but for everyone who supports and believes in the basic concept of human rights.

Lisa Nandy is Labour MP for Wigan and Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on International Corporate Responsibility

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

More from Lisa Nandy

View the discussion thread.

42 comments

Tue, 2012-10-23 09:15 — Hilary Bent (not verified)

Israel needs to be given more Arab land to provide an adequate buffer zone to ensure the safety of its citizens.
A Greater Kurdistan a huge Kurdish state in the middle-east if formed after the Iranian attack would ensure both states.

Wed, 2012-10-24 14:45 — Armin ius (not verified)

Clearly you are deranged but just for interest I would ask how you Israel obtains this Lebensraum without massive bloodshed? It is clear that Israel does not mind shedding Goyim blood in pursuit of its aims but what you propose would certainly involve casualties for the Israeli Herrenvolk.

Tue, 2012-10-23 09:15 — Hilary Bent (not verified)

Tue, 2012-10-09 11:00 — jankaas (not verified)

@Jehudah, posting back at the top for legibility.

"In this sense, Israel is akin to other nation-states"
no they most certainly are not, except for the most cursory superficial appearances. none of those countries you list subject their minority citizens to the scrutiny (roadblocks, work permits etc) as the current Israeli administration does. Israel is virtually unique, and draws year on year criticism from other democracies as a result, and of course from the UN.

and then your last paragraph is quite disturbing, as you do appear to me one of the most reasonable posters on this subject. i do not mean this as a backhanded compliment, i am sincere. so to what troubles me. you write; "It is high time the Arabs cease fighting the law and live in peace with their Jewish neighbors."

this is far removed from the complete picture of this conflict, it entirely ignores the relentless nature of the Israeli intransigence and extreme acts of violence and retaliation (condemned by various official bodies, Western Democracies, charities etc). there is no doubt that Palestinians have broken International Law with their attacks on Israelis, and i condemn this. but for reasons of intellectual consistency i must also condemn Israeli acts of violence. as an outsider (i am Dutch btw) i have to deal with the reality that the Palestinians pose an almost negligible threat against the military might of Israel.
to someone like me it seems utterly absurd to have to believe that somehow Palestinians, or anyone else for that matter, is capable of inflicting harm on Israel that warrants the current behaviour of the Israeli administration.
here in Europe we lived through several decades of mutually assured destruction with more dignity than shown by your government. that threat was genuine, your threat is almost entirely existential.

your administration is crying wolf when it should be actively seeking an end of this conflict; to realise the 1967 state borders for 2 nation states.

as ever though successive Israeli administrations find ways to delay and fart about, ironically ensuring more loss of life and an escalation of their problems.

Sun, 2012-10-21 19:23 — Frederick. (not verified)

Jackass/Arminius: Living proof as to how Islamism and mental retardation complement each other.

Wed, 2012-10-24 14:32 — Armin ius (not verified)

Repeating the lie to spread your hate died out with Goebbels in 1945. A pity you don't follow the example of his final act.

Mon, 2012-10-08 09:21 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

The author, as many others often do, makes one fundamental error: The territories presently under Israeli control are legally not "occupied" territories in that they are part of what the League of Nations in 1922 determine to be "the national home for the Jewish people", i.e. the Jewish people's nation-state. This act by the League of Nations was then adopted by the United Nations upon its inception and etched into its Charter, Article 80, 1945, as an irrevocable act.

Indeed, upon the end of the British mandate, when these territories were, legally, to be handed over to the representatives of the Jewish people, i.e. the Zionist movement, the British failed to do so, and indeed sided with the Arab Legion that conquered them and held them for 19 years illegally.

But, once Israel captured the territories during the defensive June 1967 Six-Day War, the territories came under Israeli rule rightfully as captured territories, but not occupied; in dispute , since some dispute this status, but not territories that legally belong to anyone else.

And, therefore, the various Geneva conventions don't apply to these territories. By now, one would hope, intelligent people of good will would understand this reality and internalize it.

Mon, 2012-10-08 14:14 — jankaas (not verified)

i just adore the way some UN resolutions are valid and others are clearly not. well done you for deciding which is which!
not seen having one's cake and then eating it done so transparently since the last time Mark Regev was allowed to open his mealy mouth in public.

unfortunately for you intelligent people of good will are able to see through these flawed arguments. go internalize that if you are able.

Mon, 2012-10-08 14:56 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

Two points:

1) Not all UN resolution are of the same weight of course. And, some resolutions, very few, indeed, are part and parcel of the body of elements called international law. My interest is to point to those fundamental elements of UN and other instruments which are part of international law.

2) I do the above for the simple reason: As a Jew, the Arab Israeli conflict has affected adversely my people, the Jewish people, and its nation-state of Israel, and I am interested in resolving it. The only way the conflict can be resolved, in my view, is if the international community familiarized itself with those elements of international law that have been designed to resolve the conflict, and then insist on its application. Those elements are not many. But, unless we know them and demand of the parties to respect them, no accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world, local and regional alike, and the sovereign nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel, is going to come about.

Mon, 2012-10-08 16:16 — jankaas (not verified)

all you've done with your 1st point is to repeat that you decide which UN resolutions are valid, and which are not. so i remain unimpressed. since there are many resolutions ignored by Israel you can't demand that only a select few should have all of our attention.

and then your 2nd point merely confirms you only care for the interests of the Jewish Israelis, whereas i care about all people in the region. i consider all of them to have equal rights, not some having more equality than others.

intelligent people of goodwill remain convinced that the only way to resolve the conflict in the region is the 2 state solution, and there is absolutely nothing stopping Israel from making it so. your argument is merely a vehicle for preventing progress, it's content is entirely without relevance except perhaps to lawyers and other professional hair-splitters.

Mon, 2012-10-08 19:26 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

There is a fundamental difference between the UN charter, to which I make reference, and ALL other UN resolutions. One is akin to a constitution while the others to statements, views and laws. I hope you know he difference in the quality of these type of elements.

Of course I care about all, but my interest first and foremost is my people, the Jewish people, within and without the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel.

And, my interest, as noted, is to be realistic about achieving an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel. I am not here to score points in a debate. And, realistically, the only way to achieve such an accommodation, in my humble opinion, is to apply the relevant fundamental elements of international law.

Mon, 2012-10-08 23:08 — jankaas (not verified)

"I hope you know he difference in the quality of these type of elements."
yes, and i also realise that neither is set in stone. both resolutions and constitutions age, and evolve or fall by the way side.

"Of course I care about all, but my interest first and foremost is my people, the Jewish people, within and without the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel."
but Israel is not exclusively Jewish, though you would think it was reading your passionate views about your country.

and this is where the UN comes in. and it needs to.
rather than view the situation through your limited perspective, the rest of the world has a far better viewpoint. it shows that Israel needs to move asap to a genuine 2 state solution. no more dithering.

Tue, 2012-10-09 05:40 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

Israel's population is not exclusively Jewish, despite the fact that it is the nation-state of the Jewish people. In this sense, Israel is akin to other nation-states such as Finland, Greece, Lithuania, Poland, Denmark, Portugal, in all of which there are other minorities but in all, as in Israel, all citizens are equal before the law.

Indeed, the League of Nations and the UN expected this to be the case when the acts to which I have referred above dictated that the non-Jewish population in "the national home for the Jewish people" will benefit from all civil and religious rights, something that Israel has adhered to almost religiously.

It is time to accept the fact that former "Palestine" was partitioned, and each of its large communities should lead a separate national life: The Arabs on the 77% of "Palestine" that was alloted to it, east of the Jordan River that flows in the middle of the country of "Palestine"; and, the Jews on the 23% of the territory of "Palestine" that is located between the Jordan River and the Med. Sea. International law has provided for this accommodation. It is high time the Arabs cease fighting the law and live in peace with their Jewish neighbors.

Mon, 2012-10-08 18:44 — Armin ius (not verified)

But it makes a change from being called an "Islamist fanatic" even if it is merely a more refined way of saying I want peace but only on my terms. There is not the slightest prospect of a two state solution until fanatics on both sides (but especially the Israeli side since they hold most of the cards) are marginalised (i.e. not in government) and those who delude themselves that they are interested in peace change their mindset to make the sacrifices and compromises to make it happen.

Tue, 2012-10-02 01:20 — Frederick. (not verified)

730,000 prisoners! And where exactly do you get your figures from Ms. Nandy? Hamas or perhaps the Moslem Public Affairs Committee? I suggest that if you we're genuinely concerned about Moslem human rights you might just once have opened your gob to protest at the butchery of small Moslem children by Assad's Syria, the suicide-bombing of mosques and funeral processions by one sect of nutter Islamists against another in Iraq, Afghanistan or apartheid Pakistan? You won't of course because Wigan has a sizeable Taliban settler community and its just ever so more convenient to go for the Jews! Just makes you wanna vomit.

Mon, 2012-10-08 09:36 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

"730,000 prisoners! And where exactly do you get your figures from Ms. Nandy?"

This is a perfect example how seemingly intelligent people relate to the Arab Israeli conflict when their motive is an emotional obsession to demonize the liberal democratic and sovereign nation-state of the Jewish people, to de-legitimize it, to seek its very demise: by relating to "narratives", i.e. fictional short stories designed for political expediency.

No, of course there aren't 730,000 prisoners that are being held by Israel, but, who said that the belief needs to be supported by facts and rational observation of reality....??

Mon, 2012-10-08 10:05 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

------------

Mon, 2012-10-08 10:07 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

---------

Tue, 2012-10-02 17:34 — Armin ius (not verified)

Anything that makes an apologist for Zionist crimes vomit is aces in my book. I see very few if any individuals defending Assad, the Taliban, Al Queda and other Muslim fanatics but any criticism of Israel and its vicious fascistic government has the same slack handfull of loonies leaping to defend all manner of Zionist crimes and excesses. Peuk another bucket load.

Mon, 2012-10-08 09:48 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

One is not sure the poster is even aware of the meaning of the concept "Zionism". Let us talk about it.

Zionism is the age-old strong affinity Jews maintain toward Zion, also known as Jerusalem, and the country at the center of which it is located. This strong orientation and affinity commenced upon the setting of Zion/Jerusalem by the Jewish king, King David, as the administrative and spiritual center of the kingdom, more than 3,000 years ago. Practically, this has been manifested for all of these centuries by ascending to Zion on specified Jewish holidays and by trying to do so during this period even after many Jews were exiled from their national homeland.

It was in the 19th century that Zionism gained extra meaning:

1) The drive to in-gather those Jews not residing in the Jewish people's homeland and join, in doing so, the Jews who have never left it.

2) The re-institution of Jewish sovereignty over the country, within the context of exercising the universally accepted right of national self-determination and independence.

3) The re-vitalizing of Jewish civilization, i.e. Judaism.

The above three goals were to be achieved through the use of the powers that be and the laws that are in place, and with as much cooperation as possible with the local non-Jewish population.

Zionism, in short, became the first non-violent (not pacifist, mind you!!) movement of national liberation, and, happily, it has remained as such to this day.

Tue, 2012-10-02 18:21 — Frederick. (not verified)

I'd love to know how it's a 'Zionist crime' to lock Islamist fanatics who kill Jews in accordance with Article 7 of the islamofascist Hamas Charter and the racist anti-Semitic Koran? To an Islamist fanatic like Arminius - suicide-bombing and killing small Jewish children is totally acceptable behaviour. To the civilised world it isn't. Armi go stone some of your women!!

Tue, 2012-10-02 22:21 — Armin ius (not verified)

Difficult for me to be an *Islamic fanatic" when I am not even a muslim (I do not have a docked dick like most of those pesky, irritating Levantine types). Your kak fools nobody, Zionist puppet. Israel under Netanyahu is not part of the civilized World; civilised countries to not have religious fanatics in government such as the party Shas. The spiritual leader of this party is a nutjob by the name of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, an fruitloop to rival any Iranian Ayatollah. Here is a quote from the good Rabbi "Gentiles were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel."
Unfortunately this is not a joke from his latest stand up routine but it is an indication of the type of individual wielding political power in Israel today.

Wed, 2012-10-03 20:59 — Frederick. (not verified)

Arminius you Islamist loon didn't you know that disavowing to be Moslem is actually a capital offence under Islam? I sincerely suggest that you seek salvation by stoning yourself to death. You seem to spend your entire lifetime defending islamofascism be it in Iran, Sudan, gaza or apartheid Pakistan - your revered homeland. You spend your entire time mocking the Holocaust and inventing quotations to make Jews look bad. Any 4 year old can be 90% certain you are an Islamist fanatic or 10% certain a euro neo-nazi. Any sane individual can distinguish the modern liberal-democracy that is Israel with the primitive, intolerant, murderous, savage, pedophile-worshipping, fascist, women-stoning, Gay-hanging barbarism of the Islamist world.

Wed, 2012-10-03 23:21 — Armin ius (not verified)

Surely you do not seriously equate yourself with a sane individual? Since 4 years old is the mental age of the average EDL bonehead you reveal yourself yet again to be a kosher fascist. I have no doubt that you despise all muslims but your hatred is misdirected; I am simply a Goy that does not exist to serve the Israeli Herrenvolk as Rabbi Ovadia Yosef would like.
Here are a few good Jewish sources where you can read about the pronouncements of the deranged Rabbi, the founder of Shas, one of Netanyahu's main partners in his government of fascists cut-throats and religious nutters:
haaretz.com/jewish-world/adl-slams-shas-spiritual-leader-for-saying-non-jews-were-born-to-serve-jews-1.320235
ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3138779,00.html
bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11127409
Isn't he great? Unfortunately thes quotations were not invented by me but rather by the diseased mind of the crazed Rabbi. As a rabid bigot he must be someone for you to admire.

Fri, 2012-10-05 21:46 — Sebastian. (not verified)

Who on earth is Rabbi Yosef? Is the Islamist fanatic Arminius claiming that this individual is as notorious as Bashir the butcher of 400,000 non-Moslems in Darfur? Does he compare to Sadaam the man who slaughtered 300,000 of his own citizenry? is he comparable to the islamofascists in Iraq, Afghanistan and apartheid Pakistan that slaughter thousands of their own Moslem co-religionists in suicide-bombings on mosques and funeral processions?
It's very odd how Moslem fanatics like Arminius will ignore fellow Moslem mass killers of Moslems, yet try and deflect attention away to some obscure rabbi no one has ever hear of.

Sat, 2012-10-06 07:45 — Armin ius (not verified)

That a boneheaded EDL Paki-basher has not heard of of the former Chief Rabbi of Israel does not surprise me any more than the rest of your moronic post. He is anything but obscure since he is the founder and spiritual leader of the Shas Party, the 4th largest party in the Knesset and one which holds party four cabinet posts in Netanyahu's government.
Someone who tries to label a Protestant Christian (or non-compliant Goy if you wish) as an "Islamist fanatic", dredges up Muslim atrocity stories (this is an article about Israel after all) and who states that one of the most powerful figures in Israeli politics is "some obscure rabbi no one has ever hear of", is hardly in a position to accuse anyone of trying to deflect attention.

Sat, 2012-10-06 20:27 — Frederick. (not verified)

of course! when one thinks of murderous fanatics we don't immediately think of bashir of Syria, Bashir of Sudan, Bin Laden, Gaddafi, Sadaam Hussein, Nasser, Nasrallah, the leaders of apartheid Pakistan ..... we immediately think of 'Rabbi Yosef'! Arminius you deranged Islamist you have benefitted well from your education in your Pakistani madrassa!

Sun, 2012-10-07 09:05 — Armin ius (not verified)

You may have been thinking of "murderous fanatics" but I do not think I referred to the Rabbi as such. Racist, deranged, dangerous but I seriously doubt that he has directly murdered anyone. It is only the most boneheaded of EDL/BNP boneheads that think Muslim leaders (even the long dead ones) have a monopoly on murder or fanaticism.
My education was entirely in Edinburgh (there are no Madrassas there). You scarcely seem to have an education at all beyond the hate pamphlets of the EDL and the back of beermats.

Sat, 2012-10-06 20:42 — Frederick. (not verified)

I think upon reflection that the poor unhinged Islamist Arminius is just a tad distraught that his icon Abu hamza has just been dispatched to the states in chains from belmarsh where no doubt in his new abode he'll be pleasuring lots of men each night.

Sat, 2012-10-06 20:42 — Frederick. (not verified)

Sun, 2012-10-07 09:28 — Armin ius (not verified)

Reflection? Have you been admiring yourself in the mirror again? Remember the good Rabbi said that tame Goyim will have a long life, to work well for the Jews. I'm not sure that you are working too well so you may have to up your game to better serve the Herrenvolk.

Mon, 2012-10-08 13:01 — Frederick. (not verified)

Arminius your comment is both incomprehensible and imbecilic. May I suggest that you stay off the weed - you know that in many of your Islamist states even taking mind-bending drugs can result in you being flogged or hanged! Now there's a good chap just bugger off to the MPAC or Moslem Council Of Britains website where your Jew-hatred will be we'll received.

Mon, 2012-10-08 18:13 — Armin ius (not verified)

Incomprehensible to you perhaps but then I do not expect much of knuckle-dragging EDL Paki-bashers.
The NS site is open to all even Zionist scum so you can bugger off if you want to. I really can't think of a website that would welcome your feeble-minded drivel so I can only suggest that you put your heid in a poly bag.

Tue, 2012-10-09 06:22 — Tristan A. (not verified)

May I ask is anybody who criticises the fascist, illegal and truly apartheid state if Pakistan an 'EDL bonehead?' Is Pakistan immune from criticism?

Tue, 2012-10-09 06:35 — Armin ius (not verified)

If you want to ask stupid questions that is up to you but the article is about Israel, an apartheid state in the Middle East with a government containing fascists and religious fanatics.

Mon, 2012-10-01 22:07 — jmgreen (not verified)

"Last June the UK Government co-sponsored a UN resolution that places duties on states to protect against corporate abuse of human rights."

It follows that UK should not only apply some kind of sanctions to G4S but also to Veolia which operates in the Occupied Palestinian Territories servicing the illegal Israeli settlements. In addition isn't it time for the UK to ban the sale of all settlement goods or to follow the lead of the Co-op and stop dealing with all companies which produce goods in the settlements? Condemnation is all very nice but actions speak louder than words.

Mon, 2012-10-08 10:03 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

"Occupied Palestinian Territories"

I must ask: Where are those "Palestinian territories" that are occupied?

I ask the question because I find no such place on any respectable map. Also, when examining international law, I find no such location as "Palestine", either in a form of a nationality/state or people.

Indeed, the only "Palestine" that I am able to recognize in sifting through legal material is a territory on the eastern shores of the Med. Sea that was legally partitioned back in 1921/22. At the time, 1921, some 77% of "Palestine" as it was defined by the British Crown was handed over to the Arabs. Located east of the Jordan River, the Arabs, subsequently changed the name of their part of "Palestine" to Jordan, since "Palestine" is not an Arab term.

The rest of "Palestine" was then, in accordance with the San Remo conference decisions of 1920, was assigned to be "the national home for the Jewish people", i.e. the Jewish people's nation-state. This act by the League of Nations took place in 1922, which assigned 23% of "Palestine", located between the Jordan River and the Med. Sea.

This act by the League of Nations was subsequently adopted by the United Nations and etched into its Charter, Article 80, of 1945, as an irrevocable act.

This de jure partition of "Palestine" followed by the de facto of doing so, first in 1948 upon the end of the Mandate over Palestine, 14 May 1948 at midnight. The rest was fully implemented in June 1967.

Thus, back to my question: Where are those Occupied Palestiian territories" if legally and practically they don't exist...??

Mon, 2012-10-01 07:52 — Bukharin (not verified)

Red Herring Alert!

This article's based around a red herring. Israel, like the UK or US likes to consider itself moral and, to this end, ought to attempt to be whiter than white. Like the UK and US (internment in Northern Ireland; Guantanamo Bay; who knows what in Iraq and Afghanistan) Israel too often falls far short.

But this is not the case with regard to G4S involvement with and the location of Palestinian prisoners. The letter of the law (Article 76) was written with a view to situations such as WW2 (Germany and the USSR) or of colonialism. But Israel's occupation of the West Bank is not in far off Iraq or Afghanistan, or even over the sea in Ireland. It takes about 40 minutes (barring traffic jams) to drive from the heart of Tel Aviv to the Nablus area deep inside the northern West Bank. No journey for prisoners' families ought to take more than an hour. Whould Lisa Nandy prefer that Israel build more prisons inside the West Bank?

The problems are road blocks and permission for the families to visit, which is used by the Shabak (AKA Shin Bet, like MI5) to pressure prisoners for information. These are the real questions, along with detention without trial which is a serious and substantive issue.

Perhaps it's too much to expect Lisa Nandy to fathom these facts before she submits her articles.

Mon, 2012-10-01 17:06 — JG (not verified)

Let me guess: you work for G4S, or hold shares in the company?

The real red herring is yours: saying that G4S has no moral culpability because it's not the company's fault that Israel restricts access across its border for the families of Palestinian detainees.

But I agree with you on one of your points: that detention without trial is a serious issue. The question then remains: why is a British company complicit in, and profiting from, detention without trial?

Mon, 2012-10-01 07:47 — willoyen

good article, but Israel doesn't need G4S to break the Geneva conventions or any other international agreement, law, or resolution. It will do just as it likes without regard for anyone else. Except the US, of course who will always give the nod.

Mon, 2012-10-08 10:12 — Jehudah Ben-Israel

Actually, legally, Israel govern its affairs based on three important elements: Israel's law; international law; and, bilateral and multilateral agreements in place.

This is the way the vast majority of liberal democracies govern their affairs. And, since Israel is one such a democracy, it adheres to this norm.

Sadly for some, this reality doesn't correspond with the "narratives:, i.e. short fictional stories designed for political expediency, that Israel's detractors with to peddle to the uninformed.

Mon, 2012-10-01 17:10 — JG (not verified)

And the current Conservative government of Canada, led by born-again Christian Zionist Stephen Harper.