The
United Nations continues to be our
best hope for creating a fairer
and more
just world.
God bless the Republic of Nauru,
and God bless the United Nations.
Marcus
Stephen, President of the Republic of Nauru
General
Assembly UN 64th Session
25
September 2009 (UN Doc. A/64/PV.7)
The
Republic of Nauru, the smallest Republic in the world, is a small island of
about 21 square kilometres, inhabited by 9500 people in the middle of the South
Pacific. A long way from everywhere (especially Nablus) the centre of the
island was a once deep repository of millennia of bird-shit which provided the
phosphate mother-load subsequently plundered by Germany, Japan, Australia, New
Zealand and the United Kingdom. Gaining independence in 1968 it had one of the
highest per-capita incomes in the world until the phosphate ran out (estimated
at one point to last about 300 years the commercial exploitation by Australia
in particular reduced that to about 30) and Nauru was reduced to earing its
crust by allowing Australia build a detention centre for migrant boat-people
and allowing illegal money laundering.
Nauruans
suffered severely in the Second World war (1500 were transported to the island
of Truk for slave labour) and fully understand the exploitative potential of a
more powerful neighbour backed by “Superpower” consensus (see Judgement on
Preliminary Objections. Nauru v.
Australia. International Court of Justice. No 92/18 26 June 1992) and yet
in the General Assembly vote taken in the 67th Session on the 29th
November 2012 to accord the Palestinian Authority non-Member Observer State
status (UN Doc. A/Res/67/19) at the UN, Nauru voted against the adoption of the
resolution (along with the USA & Israel of course, but also Canada, the
Czech Republic, Marshal Islands, Micronesia, Palau and Panama).
I am
not entirely certain what the people of Nablus ever did to Nauru. It is not
clear from the debate as to why they voted against the resolution as I can find
no record of a verbal or written submission. Being generous I might conclude
that Nauru’s stance might have because of similar concerns to those expressed
by Canada and the Czech Republic about the ‘watering-down’ of the impetus to
achieve a true Two State solution but I suspect it was more likely part of a
South Pacific game plan to force a greater ‘climate change’ dialogue by flexing
their voting rights.
It
is true that the non-Member Observer State status might allow a ‘back-door’
access to other organs such as the International Criminal Court but in the
realpolitik of complete Israeli and American intransigence to progressing the
Two State solution it perhaps is the only way at present.
I
have a problem with Nauru and its political posturing, who without explanation,
and who only two months previously on the 26th September 2012 had
ratified the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment, would then ignore the inhuman and degrading
treatment perpetuated by Israel on the people of Nablus and would decide to
deny them and all other Palestinians some avenue of hope in trying to rightly
achieve the independent statehood that Nauru has already gained for the sake of
some ‘great game’.
There
is nothing as sad as a collective amnesia of hope.
