By: Mehdi Hamidi
The Western Asian region is inflamed, the attention of Islamic and Arab countries is fully focused on occupied Palestine, Israeli leaders have made a shameful decision, and they are opposed to all international resolutions; Palestinian resistance and nationalist groups, including negotiators and armed men, are shouting that the West Bank belongs to them, and there is no denying this unless the existence of Palestinians in Palestine is completely hidden from the beginning.
With the exception of the Israelis, who have no mercy and who, according to my religion, make the Talmudic decision and bring to life scenes from Saturday's Hunter movie by proposing projects such as the annexation of Palestinian lands, the Americans and In short, Trump has not played a small role in this, a country that once set up the United Nations and the Security Council with the claim that it would prevent the rights of nations from being violated after two tough world wars. He is once again known for his abuse of veto power and his first-degree violation of human rights in the world.
From Vietnam to Iraq and Afghanistan, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, Mexico to various African countries and finally countries in the guise of European gentlemen who claim to be free, but God knows what they mean by gentlemanliness and democracy with the American name of the community. are.
But in the meantime, what was the position of the same Europeans who claim independence from Washington's positions, and with that tumultuous alliance they have caught the eye of the media, in the face of the West Bank annexation plan? Were their convictions and rhetoric in action?
The Zionists were expected to launch the annexation (or occupation) plan in the West Bank and Jordan Valley on Wednesday, July 1, while the Americans, especially their Jewish ambassador David Friedman, were strongly in favor of its implementation. The plan was, but in the end, Washington and Donald Trump's team, consisting of the groom and his other special advisers, did not show the red curtain to Netanyahu and his comrades, so that the situation and the wave of international condemnation against the plan would not negatively affect their election process. Do not tarnish Trump's freedom-seeking face!
But beyond that, what was the European position on accession?
Europe condemned Tel Aviv's decision months before the accession deadline expired on Wednesday, sending warnings to the plan by sending letters to the regime's top leaders, including Netanyahu's war minister and rival Netanyahu. It has become more serious, but as the issue has become more serious over the past month, the German government, as the European Union's branch, has rejected sanctions against the occupying regime! The EU envoy, along with some other European representatives, explicitly stated that "the imposition of sanctions against Israel will not have any positive effect on the establishment of friendly talks between the Palestinian and Israeli sides!"
It is noteworthy that the union rejected the proposal to boycott the Zionist regime, while in the past years, Brussels easily decided to annex Russia due to the annexation of Crimea to Russia, citing international resolutions. To boycott.
EU member states, the United States, Canada and the rest of the world imposed various sanctions on Russia in 2014 following the annexation of the disputed island of Crimea and the holding of elections by Moscow, claiming that the referendum was carried out by force of arms by Russia. Held and the result is not legitimate for them.
However, after the annexation of the island of Crimea, in the same year (2014) a poll was conducted in this region, and another poll was conducted in 2019 by Moscow throughout Russia and again in the Crimea, where more than 80% of the inhabitants of this The region has said it will vote to secede from Ukraine and join Russia if another referendum is held in Crimea.
Sanctions were limited to access to global markets, including the banking and energy systems, as well as to the export, import and import sectors of oil extraction technology, as well as Russia's military and defense sectors.
These actions of the Europeans were based on an international law; "Prohibition of land acquisition of a country through war or the use of force or coercion."
This resolution automatically leads the mind to the Zionists and their illegal actions in order to dominate the Palestinian territories, especially Resolution 242, which is directly aimed at Israel and directly warns the regime against escalating tensions. He refrained from returning to the affected lands in the 1967 war.
The forced occupation of Palestinian lands by the Zionists contradicts even the most basic principles enshrined in the UN Charter, including the "right to self-determination," but the Europeans are boycotting Russia!
It was expected that Europe, like what it did against Russia and banned its industrial and tourism companies from investing in Crimea, would do so against Israel and the occupied Israeli towns, and at the rightful cries of the Palestinian people on the shores. Bakhtari listened, but no significant action was taken in this regard.
The Europeans say they are not imposing sanctions on Israel to prevent damage to the West Asian peace process, which is a lie.
In 1962, Resolution 1761 was adopted at the UN General Assembly; The resolution stated that apartheid is a violation of human rights in South Africa under UN standards and a threat to world peace and security.
Several members of the organization called for voluntary sanctions and severance of political ties. The resolution led to the initial sanctions of most countries and the formation of special assemblies against apartheid at the United Nations, the attention of public opinion and the formation of integrated movements around the world. Beginning in 1965, a nationwide university embargo was imposed, and colleges around the world refused to lecture, implement projects, or programs in South Africa and boycotted programs there.
Athletes were also important choices in South African society. Therefore, sports bans were introduced in 1961 by FIFA (International Football Organization). South African athletes were not called up to many international cricket and rugby competitions and were ignored at the 1964 Olympics.
Fifty countries have threatened to boycott the 1970 Olympic Games in protest of South Africa, which eventually led to their expulsion from the Games. Eventually, the same countries that today claim that nothing can be changed by force overthrew the apartheid regime in South Africa by imposing severe sanctions in the 1980s.
Doesn't all these pressures, destroy the opportunity for negotiation? Isn't Israel known as an apartheid regime?