Sounds like hypocrisy to me. But don't worry: Instead of panicking, the PSC decided to put TULIP on the defensive with this savvy gambit:
Responding to the accusation, PSC's trade union officer, Bernard Regan, said: "If TULIP can send me a map of Israel then I will comment."
Oh noes! How will TULIP get out of this bind?
A map that clearly showed the 1949 armistice line, which also labeled the West Bank and Gaza as Palestine, was sent to Regan, but he declined to comment further. However, Betty Hunter, PSC's general secretary, said that the PSC will continue to use a map of historic Palestine.
Curse those sneaky TULIPers with their ability to run a simple Google image search!
2 comments:
The problem with all this "gotchya" stuff that goes on between NGOs on opposite sides of this, or any debate for that matter, is that one side will never corner the other into a concession on any point of their policy or position. They're too entrenched in their views. So, TULIP may have scored a hit on the PSC but what are the real consequences of this?
To my mind, it's really just that the PSC has been checked in their PR campaign, which of course, has value, but will fundamental positions change? Will the PSC change its map? I doubt it.
Well sure, but external observers can use these things to note which groups do and don't have valid grounds to critique an entity for not buying into a two-state solution. The PSC's credibility in complaining about Israel "erasing Palestine from the map" is severely diminished when it does the exact same thing.
TULIP isn't planning on changing the PSC's mind, it's trying to destroy the PSC's credibility amongst groups which are pro-two-state.
Post a Comment