2004 Australian Labor Party Platform on the Middle East

[Violet_Crumble]

Labor strongly supports the negotiation of a just, enduring and comprehensive peace settlement in the Middle East, based on United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, the Middle East Road Map to Peace and the Oslo Declaration of Principles agreed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation, representing the Palestinian people, in 1993.
Labor considers it to be a matter of great regret that Israel and the Palestinian Authority were unable to reach agreement on permanent status issues at the Summit held under the auspices of US President Clinton at Camp David between 11 and 24 July 2000.

Labor urges the commitment from both sides to continue their efforts to conclude an agreement on all permanent status issues as soon as possible, thereby seeking to put an end to decades of conflict and achieve a just and lasting peace. Labor further urges both sides of avoiding unilateral action that prejudge the outcome of negotiations.

Labor urges both Israel and the Palestinian Authority to resume substantive negotiations to achieve a permanent status agreement as quickly as possible.

Labor continues to support the right of Israel to exist in peace and security within secure and recognized borders. At the same time Labor supports the right of self determination for the Palestinian people, including their right to their own independent state.

<not sure if I have to worry about copyright with party platforms, but here goes....SNIP!>

Labor does not believe the current dividing barrier being constructed by the Israeli government will assist in bringing about a lasting peace settlement with the Palestinian people.

http://www.alp.org.au/policy/platform2004/chapter_15.html#national_security_and_foreign_policy%20objectives

Now, THAT'S a platform from a mainstream left-wing party that makes me proud to be a Labor voter (at least I am in the House of Reps!)

[Jack Rabbit]

1. Among the differences between the American model and a parliamentary one

Among the differences between the American model, with separation of powers and a strong executive, and a parliamentary model is that the Parliamentary model features strong political parties that lay out their program beforehand and let the voters know what the issues are and where each party stands. If one compares this document to the platforms of the two major US parties, one sees more detail here as compared to the broad brush strokes of the American documents. Whether or not one agrees with the Australian Labour Party's stand on the Middle East, one knows exactly what to expect from a Labour government should there be one.

One consequence is that party discipline is more important in a parliamentary, so more junior legislators have less initiative than they do in the US Congress or a US state legislature. There is necessarily more pressure on a junior legislator to tow the party line in the parliamentary system.

Another consequence is that an American politician has more leeway to change course when his program isn't working. This is necessary in the American system, since terms are for a fixed length of time and no-confidence votes are not part of the structure. Of course, in a parliamentary system, especially one with multiple parties and dependent on building transient governing coalitions, if things aren't working then a party withdraws its support from the government, joins the opposition against the government in a confidence vote and the government falls. This precipitates new elections.

Although I am an American, I find the parliamentary system more attractive. That may have something to do with having lived through the two most abusive and nearly dictatorial Presidential administrations in US history, those of Nixon and Bush the Frat Boy, have left me with a distaste for strong executives.

[Djinn]

2. It's not really any different to the Liberal Platform though is it

while the ALP "supoprts" the rights of Palestinians to self determination they're pretty quiet on any Israeli abuses.

[Matilda]

3. Meanwhile, Australia under Howard's direction,

meekly supports the U.S.in voting against condemnation of the
building of the wall on Palestinian territory.

Just when you think he's gone as low as he can, he drags us down
even further.

[Djinn]

4. That one really got me depressed

Opposing the resolution were the United States, Israel, Australia, Ethiopia and the Pacific islands of Nauru, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.

Just take a look at that list - we're now up there with powerful idependant states like Palau, the Marshall Islands and our very own indebted lapdog Nauru!?!?!?!

51st state here we come :puke:

[Violet_Crumble]

5. A motley collection of shitty little countries...

Apart from the US and Israel, the other four who opposed the Resolution were Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, Palau, and Australia. Nauru abstained, and I suspect Ethiopia supported the Resolution. Did you hear Alexander Downer trying to justify the way Australia voted? Claimed it was solely because they believe the ICJ had no jurisdiction to make the ruling, and the Australian govt doesn't believe the route of the barrier is legal. What mealy-mouthed twaddle that is. The ICJ did have jurisdiction to rule on it, though it's no surprise that the Howard govt would try to claim otherwise, considering it also claimed prior to the invasion of Iraq that it had advice from its solicitors at AG's that an invasion would be legal *snicker*...

Violet...

[Djinn]

7. what I love

is Downer waffling on about how the wall needs to avoid cutting into Palestinian territory but when it's pointed out that it DOES cut in it's like he's suddenly gone deaf as he starts waffling about Israel needing to protect itself??

smug irritating git that he is!

[Matilda]

8. At the peace rally to mark the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq,

John Pilger quoted a Deputy Secretary of the U.N. as saying that
Downer is "the most wilfully stupid politician" in the international
arena.

He got it in one.

Edit: sp.

[dudeness]

6. common sense approach

a recognition of both Israel and Palestine and defined borders..as a Labor party member my small input at local branch level is for a fairer more just world..bush blair and howard must all go..