UN report on Israel disregards UN Watch submission, exemplifies biased approach that hinders peace

GENEVA, Jan. 31, 2013 – UN Watch issued the following comment on the UN Human Rights Council’s latest report on alleged Israeli violations:

UN Watch is astonished by the commission’s failure to make even a single reference to our lengthy submission, a 54-page document with 257 footnotes. The UN Watch submission provided essential context that the commissioners inexplicably chose to ignore.

The council report is categorically one-sided, casting Palestinians as the sole victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict, while denying the slighest consideration to any basic human rights for Israelis.

The report disregards the thousands of suicide bombings, knifings, and other terrorist attacks committed by Palestinian Arab groups, failing to acknowledge how this violence brought about Israeli security measures in the territories that did not previously exist.

The report abandons any nuance regarding Israeli communities beyond the Green Line, lopping remote settlement outposts into the same category as Jerusalem neighborhoods, thereby ignoring previous peace plans such as the Geneva Accord and the Clinton Plan.

By calling for the forced eviction of Jews from Jerusalem’s Old City—in what the report euphemistically terms a process of “withdrawal,” as if 500,00 people were like deployed soldiers—the UN commissioners endorse a policy inconsistent with UN conventions on the elimination of racism.

The reality is that the HRC’s fact-finding enterprise is dedicated chiefly to attacking but one country: Israel. In the entire history of the HRC, there have been seven one-sided inquiry missions on Israel, and only five on the rest of the world combined. Mass atrocities committed by Iran, China, or Sri Lanka, for example, have never been subjected to a single HRC inquiry.

Today’s report exemplifies and only further entrenches the council’s biased and disproportionate focus on Israel.

Whatever one’s position on settlements, the report does nothing to promote a just and lasting peace.

Instead, as the U.S. acknowledged when the inquiry was created last year, it has the perverse outcome of pushing the parties further apart, while also inappropriately pre-judging final status issues that can only be resolved through direct negotiations. The UN and its human rights bodies should all be working to advance the cause of peace — not to hinder it.

In a week when the UN legitimized genocidal Sudan, by electing the regime as vice-president of a top human rights body, it is now focusing its scarce time, resources and moral outrage on yet another biased, politicized, and one-sided report against Israel.

Its pre-determined findings are reminiscent of previous missions authorized by the HRC, which failed to acknowledge that there are two sides to this conflict. By choosing polarization, and pushing the parties further away from peace talks, the council’s inquiry breaches its responsibility to promote and protect human rights.

Sadly, the HRC will never have credibility on the Middle East so long as:

– The HRC continues to maintain a special agenda item and special day against Israel at every session. Israel is the only country targeted in this fashion.

– Half of all HRC condemnatory resolutions have been against Israel.

– Israel is the only country excluded from any of the council’s five regional groups.

– Israel is the only country subjected to a permanent mandate of investigation where only one side’s actions are examined. Contrary to the title of the “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Palestine,” the actual mandate, unchanged since February 1993, is to investigate “Israel’s violations.” Actions by the PA, Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad are excluded. Mandate-holder Richard Falk endorses Hamas and has been condemned by Ban Ki-moon for endorsing the 9/11 conspiracy theory.

7 Responses to “UN report on Israel disregards UN Watch submission, exemplifies biased approach that hinders peace”

  • UNHRC continues down path of darkness and promotes cynicism.

  • No surprise here. This is the habitual outrageous biased one sided report. One additional degree in the UN shameless behaviour.
    I am disgusted by these so called “united nations”.

  • The United States as one of the founders of the UN and it’s principal supporter should condem the bias against Israel. The only democratic country in the middle east. And should use every means possible to see that they discontinue it’s policy of attacking Israel or they will lose our financial support. Let’s get out of the UN it serves no purpose to continue allowing rouge nations to make important decisions while they are against human rights in their own countries.

  • Issa Hamad Alhewetat

    In humanitarian rules , never won Peace and occupied Land in the same time. The rule said ” Give and Take” , give back occupied land and take peace.

  • “Give back occupied land and take peace” [Issa Hamad Alhewetat’s words] is something Israel would be delighted to do if it were possible without committing national suicide and exposing millions of Jews to more murder. The Israeli people AND the Israeli government have both endorsed a two-state solution (as was originally proposed in 1947). Israel DID give back land in Gaza, and got nothing but rockets and murder in return. Until the Palestinian people and leadership are committed to a solution in which Israelis and Jewish communities are protected from physical attack, Israel can’t afford to give away the West Bank. If the Palestinians wanted a state more than they wanted to destroy Israel, they could have their state almost overnight. Instead, their leadership (both Hamas and the PA) are committed to an ideology that denies Israel’s very existence as a Jewish State, and actively seeks to destroy that State.

    The settlements aren’t the problem. They’re the result of Arab rejectionism and attacks. Furthermore, settlements are only a problem if the Palestinians insist (as they do) that NO Jews can live in a future “Palestine”. Why should that be, when a million Arabs live as citizen in Israel? Jews can live in Canada and the US, why not in Palestine?

  • Issa Hamad Alhewetat states “give back occupied land and take peace.” – which might have some semblance if sense if he were specific. However, he, like most others who make the same or similar arguments, conveniently ignores a simple historical fact: If Israel gave Gaza back, it would not give it to Palestine, but to Egypt – and the disputed West Bank territories would be given back to Jordan.
    Considering the lengths that Egypt has gone to to keep Palestinians in Gaza, it almost seems that Egypt doesn’t want that land back – and Jordan’s treatment of Palestinian Arabs has been less than exemplary – with many thousands still kept in internment camps much worse off than Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank.

    Just food for thought …

  • Since when does the U.N or when was the last time the U.N. appraised anything fairly? It has been a very long time.

    The U.N. has become dominated by leftists who are out to screw the successful countries like Israel. These same leftists come from countries filled with corruption.

    The U.N. has strayed far away from it’s original intent and has become a platform for bigotry and hate. So long as the U.N. allows history to be re-written then their will always be trouble. It is time for the members of the U.N. to grow up otherwise the U.N. will come crashing down.

Leave a Reply