The United Nations has come up with yet another spectacularly
biased report, this time 575 pages long, accusing Israel of "war
crimes" in Gaza and "possibly crimes against humanity". The
document also (far less forcefully) criticizes Palestinian rocket
and mortar attacks against Israel, but the overwhelming emphasis is
on Israel's actions. In effect, the U.N. establishes a dubious
moral equivalence between the legitimate defensive measures of the
Israeli security forces and the terrorist activities of groups such
as Hamas who are deliberately targeting civilians.
This should come as no surprise considering the report is
produced by the discredited U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC), which
has adopted no less than 26 resolutions criticizing Israel since
the council was founded in 2006. The HRC includes in its membership
some of the world's biggest human rights violators, including
China, Cuba, Russia, and Saudi Arabia.
The Council, which has just been joined by the United States,
was responsible for organizing the anti-Semitic hate fest known as
the Durban II World Conference Against Racism, held in Geneva in
April. The U.N. circus was eventually boycotted by several European
countries after Iranian tyrant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched into a
sickening tirade against Jews and Israel. Even the
dictator-friendly Obama administration stayed away altogether, a
sign of just how bad it was.
The U.N,. report is the product of a fact-finding mission to
Gaza led by the eminent South African judge Richard J. Goldstone,
former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for
the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. It is disappointing that a figure
of Goldstone's stature has put his name on a report commissioned by
a body with a clear track record of persecuting Israel. It is even
more disturbing that his panel of experts was far from neutral
before it launched its inquiry.
The U.N.'s Gaza mission included Hina Jilani, Advocate of the
Supreme Court of Pakistan, a country which does not even have
formal relations with Israel. Jilani previously served as the U.N.
Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary
Executions, and was a member of a 2004 U.N. panel of experts that
controversially condemned Israel for its treatment of demonstrators
in the Rafah refugee camp. One of her two co-authors on that report
was Asma Jahangir, now the U.N.'s Special Rapporteur on Freedom of
Religion or Belief, who famously called in 2002 for an
investigation into the supposed Israeli Defense Force "summary
execution" of Palestinian refugees at the Jenin camp. The U.N.'s
own inquiry subsequently concluded that no such massacre had taken
place.
As the respected NGO U.N. Watch first reported, the Goldstone
panel also included London School of Economics Professor Christine
Chinkin, an academic with very strong opinions on Israeli actions
in Gaza. Chinkin signed on to a letter to The Sunday Times of
London by 27 academics in January accusing Israel of a "war crime"
in its offensive on Gaza. Here's an excerpt from the letter,
entitled "Israel's bombardment of Gaza is not self-defence -- it's
a war crime":
"ISRAEL has sought to justify its military attacks on Gaza by
stating that it amounts to an act of "self-defence" as recognized
by Article 51, United Nations Charter. We categorically reject this
contention.
The rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do
not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack
entitling Israel to rely on self-defence. Under international law
self-defence is an act of last resort and is subject to the
customary rules of proportionality and necessity."
One of Chinkin's co-signers on the Times letter was none other
than Richard Falk, Emeritus Milbank Professor of International Law
at Princeton and outspoken critic of Israel, who was appointed last
year as the UN's Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the
Palestinian Territories. Falk has compared Israel to Nazi Germany
and has accused the Israelis of genocide. In his now infamous 2007
polemic "Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust," Falk, the
U.N.'s chief Gaza expert, wrote of "a Palestinian holocaust in the
making":
"Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment
of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective
atrocity? I think not. The recent developments in Gaza are
especially disturbing because they express so vividly a deliberate
intention on the part of Israel and its allies to subject an entire
human community to life-endangering conditions of utmost cruelty.
The suggestion that this pattern of conduct is a
holocaust-in-the-making represents a rather desperate appeal to the
governments of the world and to international public opinion to act
urgently to prevent these current genocidal tendencies from
culminating in a collective tragedy. If ever the ethos of 'a
responsibility to protect,' recently adopted by the UN Security
Council as the basis of 'humanitarian intervention' is applicable,
it would be to act now to start protecting the people of Gaza from
further pain and suffering."
It beggars belief that the United Nations is claiming that its
Gaza report is an objective assessment of Israeli operations when
it appoints a professor -- Christine Chinkin -- who has already
publicly stated that Israel's actions amounted to "war crimes", and
when its chief Rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, Richard
Falk, is a figure with extreme anti-Israeli views. With good
reason, 50 British and Canadian lawyers challenged the presence of
Chinkin on the U.N. panel, arguing that she could not be considered
impartial.
This is yet another example of the U.N. publishing a supposedly
neutral report written by a panel of "experts" that includes key
members who have already reached their own conclusions well before
the investigation has even begun. The United Nations receives more
than $5 billion a year from U.S. taxpayers, whose money is all too
often squandered on highly politicized projects targeting close
American allies such as Israel.
In light of this latest hatchet job from the U.N., President
Obama should reconsider his foolish decision to join the Human
Rights Council and ensure that American interests are defended not
undermined. The White House and State Department should also heed
the advice of my colleagues Brett Schaefer and Steven Groves who
call for the establishment of an alternative body to the Human
Rights Council outside of the United Nations, in a new book Conundrum: the Limits of the United Nations and
the Search for Alternatives. As the book's authors point
out, when it comes to defending the cause of liberty and freedom on
the world stage, the UN simply doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Nile
Gardiner is Director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for
Freedom at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC.