Moral Failure at the United Nations

By Lawrence Davidson

March 24, 2017 “Information Clearing House” –  On 15 March 2017 the United Nations’ Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) published a report on Israeli practices and policies toward the Palestinians. Using international law as its comparative criterion, the report came to a “definitive conclusion” that “Israel is guilty of Apartheid practices.” The term Apartheid was not used in the report merely in a “pejorative” way. It was used as a descriptor of fact based on the evidence and the accepted legal meaning of the term.

Such was the immediate uproar from the United States and Israel that U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres, in a moment of moral failure, ordered the report’s withdrawal. The head of ESCWA, the Jordanian diplomat Rima Khalaf, decided that she could not, in good conscience, do so and so tendered her resigation.

Reportage

The initial New York Times coverage of the incident paid little attention to the accuracy of the report, an approach which, if pursued, would have at least educated the Times’ readers as to the real conditions of Palestinians under Israeli domination. Instead it called the report, and those involved in producing it, into question. For instance, the NYT told us that “the report provoked outrage from Israel and the United States.” The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki R. Haley, was quoted as declaring that, “when someone issues a false and defamatory report in the name of the U.N. it is appropriate that the person resign.” At no point in the NYT story was it noted that Ms Haley’s charge that the report was false, was itself false. Other coverage by the NYT improved only slightly.

The NYT did pay attention to the fact that, among the authors of the report, was former U.N. human rights investigator Richard Falk. Falk served six years as U.N. Spacial Rapporteur for the Occupied Territories. According to the NYT, his presence had to “gall[ed] many Israeli supporters who regard him as an anti-Semite.” There is something troubling about a newspaper that claims to represent the epitome of professional journalism reporting such slurs without properly evaluating them. Richard Falk, who is Jewish, has an impeccable record of both academic achievement and public service. His reputation for honesty and dedication to the cause of human rights exemplifies the best practice of Jewish values. Thus, he has every right to say that “I have been smeared in this effort to discredit the report” – a study which “tries its best to look at the evidence and analyze the applicable law in a professional manner.”

Israel’s Behavior

An objective consideration of Israel’s behavior makes it hard to escape the brutal reality of its officially condoned practices.

On 17 March 2017, at the same time as the forced withdrawal of the ESCWA report, the U.S. State Department released a report on “grave violations against Palestinian children living under Israeli military occupation.” This was part of the department’s annual “country reports on human rights practices.” Among the problems cited were Israel’s practice of unlawful detention, coerced confessions and excessive use of force, including torture and killings.

Usually these annual human rights reports are made public by the Secretary of State. This year Rex Tillerson, who presently holds the office, was nowhere in sight. And, of course, President Trump failed to issue any of his characteristic tweets in reference to the Israel’s barbaric behavior.

Earlier, on 8 February 2017, it was reported that “Israel has banned anesthesia gas from entering the Gaza Strip.” There is a current backlog of some 200 patients in Gaza requiring surgical care, and some will die due to Israel’s ban.

A week later, on 14 February 2017, it was reported that Israeli officials were blackmailing Palestinian patients seeking permission to enter Israel for necessary medical treatment. A 17-year-old Gazan boy who suffered from congenital heart disease and needed a heart valve replacement “was explicitly told that in order to [leave the Gaza Strip and] have his operation, he would have to cooperate with the security forces and spy for Israel.” He refused and subsequently died. This is not a new or unusual tactic for the Israelis.

Blackmail All Around

The moral failure at the U.N., represented by the withdrawal of the ESCWA report, is the result of Secretary General Guterres’s decision to acquiesce in a denial of reality – the reality of Israel’s practice of Apartheid.

On the other hand, it probably also stems from Guterres’s acceptance of the reality of U.S. financial leverage along with the apparent threat to bankrupt the United Nations. This is, of course, a form of blackmail. Significantly, U.S. use of its financial clout at the U.N. mimics the same practice by the Zionist lobby in the halls of Congress.

Obviously the United Nations, to say nothing of U.S. politicians, needs alternate sources of income. My wife Janet once suggested that the UN be awarded the right to exploit and profit from all undersea resources. Not a bad idea. Likewise, U.S. politicians should agree to, or be forced to rely upon, government-based campaign funding rather than be pressed into putting themselves up for sale.

However, such changes do not appear imminent. As it stands now, reality in Palestine is what the Americans and Israelis say it is because politicians and international leaders literally can’t afford to challenge their corrupted views.

Lawrence Davidson is a retired professor of history from West Chester University in West Chester PA. His academic research focused on the history of American foreign relations with the Middle East. He taught courses in Middle East history, the history of science and modern European intellectual history. http://www.tothepointanalyses.com

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

What’s your response? –  Scroll down to add / read comments 

The UN’s moral failure on israeli apartheid

The UN’s moral failure on Israeli apartheid

Apartheid - wrong for South Africans and wrong for Palestinians

By Lawrence Davidson

Moral failure

On 15 March 2017 the United Nations’ Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) published a report on Israeli practices and policies toward the Palestinians. Using international law as its comparative criterion, the report came to a “definitive conclusion” that “Israel is guilty of apartheid practices.” The term apartheid was not used in the report merely in a “pejorative” way. It was used as a descriptor of fact based on the evidence and the accepted legal meaning of the term.

Such was the immediate uproar from the United States and Israel that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in a moment of moral failure, ordered the report’s withdrawal. The head of ESCWA, the Jordanian diplomat Rima Khalaf, decided that she could not, in good conscience, do so and so tendered her resigation.

Reportage

The initial New York Times (NYT) coverage of the incident paid little attention to the accuracy of the report, an approach which, if pursued, would have at least educated the newspaper’s readers as to the real conditions of Palestinians under Israeli domination. Instead, it called the report, and those involved in producing it, into question. For instance, the NYT told us that “the report provoked outrage from Israel and the United States”. The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki R. Haley, was quoted as declaring that, “when someone issues a false and defamatory report in the name of the UN it is appropriate that the person resign”. At no point in the NYT story was it noted that Ms Haley’s charge that the report was false, was itself false. Other coverage by the NYT improved only slightly.

The NYT did pay attention to the fact that, among the authors of the report, was former UN human rights investigator Richard Falk. Falk served six years as UN spacial rapporteur for the occupied territories. According to the NYT, his presence had to “gall[ed] many Israeli supporters who regard him as an anti-Semite”. There is something troubling about a newspaper that claims to represent the epitome of professional journalism reporting such slurs without properly evaluating them. Richard Falk, who is Jewish, has an impeccable record of both academic achievement and public service. His reputation for honesty and dedication to the cause of human rights exemplifies the best practice of Jewish values. Thus, he has every right to say that “I have been smeared in this effort to discredit the report” – a study which “tries its best to look at the evidence and analyse the applicable law in a professional manner”.

Israel’s behaviour

An objective consideration of Israel’s behaviour makes it hard to escape the brutal reality of its officially condoned practices.

On 17 March 2017, at the same time as the forced withdrawal of the ESCWA report, the US State Department released a report on “grave violations against Palestinian children living under Israeli military occupation”. This was part of the department’s annual “country reports on human rights practices”. Among the problems cited were Israel’s practice of unlawful detention, coerced confessions and excessive use of force, including torture and killings.

Usually these annual human rights reports are made public by the secretary of state. This year Rex Tillerson, who presently holds the office, was nowhere in sight. And, of course, President Trump failed to issue any of his characteristic tweets in reference to the Israel’s barbaric behaviour.

Earlier, on 8 February 2017, it was reported that “Israel has banned anesthesia gas from entering the Gaza Strip.” There is a current backlog of some 200 patients in Gaza requiring surgical care, and some will die due to Israel’s ban.

A week later, on 14 February 2017, it was reported that Israeli officials were blackmailing Palestinian patients seeking permission to enter Israel for necessary medical treatment. A 17-year-old Gazan boy who suffered from congenital heart disease and needed a heart valve replacement “was explicitly told that in order to [leave the Gaza Strip and] have his operation, he would have to cooperate with the security forces and spy for Israel”. He refused and subsequently died. This is not a new or unusual tactic for the Israelis.

Blackmail all around

The moral failure at the UN, represented by the withdrawal of the ESCWA report, is the result of Secretary-General Guterres’s decision to acquiesce in a denial of reality – the reality of Israel’s practice of apartheid.

On the other hand, it probably also stems from Guterres’s acceptance of the reality of US financial leverage along with the apparent threat to bankrupt the UN. This is, of course, a form of blackmail. Significantly, US use of its financial clout at the UN mimics the same practice by the Zionist lobby in the halls of Congress.

Obviously, the UN, to say nothing of US politicians, needs alternate sources of income. My wife Janet once suggested that the UN be awarded the right to exploit and profit from all undersea resources. Not a bad idea. Likewise, US politicians should agree to, or be forced to rely upon, government-based campaign funding rather than be pressed into putting themselves up for sale.

However, such changes do not appear imminent. As it stands now, reality in Palestine is what the Americans and Israelis say it is because politicians and international leaders literally can’t afford to challenge their corrupted views.

De Mistura between Lavrov, Al-Jubeir, and Guterres دي ميستورا بين لافروف والجبير وغوتيريس

De Mistura between Lavrov, Al-Jubeir, and Guterres

Written by Nasser Kandil,

فبراير 7, 2017

Since his assuming the mission of the UN Envoy in Syria Steffan De Mistura was a mediator in promoting the sectarian formula to reorganize the state in Syria by the force of the war waged by the alliance extends from Washington to Al-Qaeda organization including Turkey, France, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, but he determined to make Syria surrounded by a region that feels hostility toward it starting from Al-Qaeda organization represented by Al Nusra front towards which he was keen on creating formulas to improve its position as money laundering returning from the sale of drugs, and the Saudi Israeli bilateral with which he has relations starting from the money and ending with the intelligence work with Israel, since he was an envoy in Lebanon sponsoring the hostility toward the resistance. De Mistura is the owner of the theory of the inspiring Lebanese example for the political solution in Syria in a call for a settlement that ensures the presidency of the President Bashar Al-Assad but by making the presidential position for his sect without powers and making the position of the Prime Minister belong to a sect that is controlled by Saudi Arabia with powers that drive Syria to a path similar to the path of Lebanon after Taif Agreement but without an  auspices as provided by Syria to Lebanon.

The balances of the ruling powers of the first stages of De Mistura’s mission were providing his project the prosperity, so it was an opportunity to reveal his cards which were no longer hidden for each one who dealt with the issue entitled the political solution in Syria, and because Moscow before its military involvement in Syria was dealing with the political endeavors and preventing the employment of  the decision of the war in the philosophy of politics, it was witnessing De Mistura’s plots and clashing with them, towards the stages when the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov who was concerned in following up the political issue of Syria was forced to talk about De Mistura in a language that beholds him the responsibilities of supporting the terrorism and the postponement in doing what is needed, being away from accomplishing his duties and mobilizing his position as a UN envoy unfairly. Many times De Mistura has disabled Russian initiatives as the attempt of expanding the delegation of the opposition, or neglecting the talk about a ruling transitional body in order to go to a political ceiling for a solution that stems from the Syrian constitution and includes its modification and holding the elections on its basis. Lavrov does not forget the interferences of De Mistura in the Security Council in which he did not hesitate to accuse Russia of committing war crimes. Syria as well cannot forget all the collisions with De Mistura and his malignant behavior, as well as his conspiracies in the essence and in the details.

The coincidence between the victory of the Syrian army supported by its allies in Aleppo and the election of Antonio Guterres as a new Secretary-General of the United Nations has formed a change in the destination of the surrounding circumstances with the work of De Mistura whose his task will end in Spring unless renewed by Guterres. The information says that the understanding which enabled Guterres to occupy the position includes an agreement with Russia to exempt De Mistura from his tasks and nominating an alternative that is agreed upon with Moscow. In the beginning of the year, De Mistura has been notified by the Secretary- General the ending of his tasks in spring, so he assumed to coordinate with Russia and through the withdrawal of the veto on the continuation of his tasks. It seems that this has happened with the positions which expressed by De Mistura recently, that includes the formation of a delegation that gathers the formations of the opposition by consensus or by force, and a political ceiling that includes the government, constitution and elections. The campaign organized by the opposition that lives in Riyadh against him was just the echo of the Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir to restore the changeable UN envoy, while the interference of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to support him was just the echo of the understanding between Gutterres and Lavrov.

Once again after the victory of Aleppo and Astana Path the role of the UN envoy in the United Nations has moved to be under the test, to see his concordance with the variables, will De Mistura succeed or fail?

Translated By Lina Shehadeh,

دي ميستورا بين لافروف والجبير وغوتيريس

فبراير 3, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– منذ توليه مهمته كمبعوث أممي في سورية كان ستيفان دي ميستورا وسيط تسويق الصيغة الطائفية لإعادة تنظيم الدولة في سورية، بقوة الحرب التي يشنها الحلف الممتد من واشنطن إلى تنظيم القاعدة وبينهما تركيا وفرنسا والسعودية و«إسرائيل»، لكنه عقد العزم ليكون لسان حال منطقة وسط هي الأشد عداء لسورية، بين تنظيم القاعدة ممثلاً بجبهة النصرة التي كان يحرص على ابتكار صيغ تبييضها، كما يتم تبييض الأموال العائدة من بيع المخدرات، ومن جهة مقابلة الثنائي السعودي «الإسرائيلي» الذي تربطه به علاقات تبدأ من المال وتنتهي بالعمل الاستخباري مع «إسرائيل» منذ كان مبعوثاً في لبنان يرعى العداء للمقاومة. ودي ميستورا هو صاحب نظرية انموذج اللبناني الملهم للحل السياسي في سورية، بدعوة لتسوية تثبت رئاسة الرئيس بشار الأسد، ولكن وفقاً لجعل المنصب الرئاسي لطائفته ونزع صلاحياتها، وجعل رئاسة الحكومة من موقع طائفي تتحكّم به السعودية وبصلاحيات تأخذ سورية لمسار شبيه بمسار لبنان بعد الطائف، ولكن من دون رعاية كالتي وفرتها سورية للبنان.

– كانت موازين القوى الحاكمة للمراحل الأولى من مهمة دي ميستورا تتيح لمشروعه فرص الحياة، ولذلك كانت فرصة ليكشف أوراقه التي لم تعد خافية على كل من تعاطى عن كثب بالملف المسمّى الحل السياسي في سورية، ولأن موسكو منذ ما قبل انخراطها العسكري في سورية تقف على بعض المساعي السياسية وتوظيف منع قرار الحرب في فلسفة السياسة، كانت تشهد مؤامرات دي ميستورا وتشتبك معها، وصولاً لمراحل كان وزير الخارجية الروسية سيرغي لافروف المعني بمتابعة الملف السياسي لسورية، يضطر للحديث عن دي ميتسورا بلغة تحميله مسؤوليات الدعم للإرهاب والمماطلة بالقيام بالواجب والانحراف عن المهمة، وتوظيف صفته كمبعوث أممي بصورة غير نزيهة، وكثيراً ما عطّل دي ميستورا مبادرات روسية من نوع توسيع وفد المعارضة أو تخطّي الحديث عن هيئة حكم انتقالي للذهاب إلى سقف سياسي واقعي للحل ينطلق من الدستور السوري ويتضمّن تعديله وإجراء انتخابات على اساسه. ولم ينسَ لافروف مداخلات دي ميستورا في مجلس الأمن التي لم يتورّع خلالها عن اتهام روسيا بارتكاب جرائم حرب، أما سورية فلا يمكن أن تنسى كل محطات التصادم مع دي ميستورا وسلوكه الخبيث ولا مؤامراته في الجوهر وفي التفاصيل.

– شكّل التزامن بين انتصار الجيش السوري مدعوماً من حلفائه في حلب، مع انتخاب أنطونيو غوتيريس كأمين عام جديد للأمم المتحدة، متغيّراً في وجهة الظروف المحيطة بعمل دي ميستورا، الذي تنتهي مهمته في الربيع ما لم يجدّدها غوتيريس. والمعلومات تقول إن التفاهم الذي سمح لغوتيريس بالفوز بالمنصب تضمّن اتفاقاً مع روسيا بإعفاء دي ميستورا من مهامه، وتسمية بديل عنه يتفق عليه مع موسكو. وفي مطلع العام تبلّغ دي ميستورا من الأمين العام إنهاء مهامه في الربيع، فتعهد بالتنسيق مع روسيا وسحب الفيتو عن مواصلة مهامه، ويبدو أن شيئاً من هذا قد حصل مع المواقف التي عبّر عنها دي ميستورا مؤخراً، وما تتضمّنه من تشكيل وفد جامع للمعارضة بالتراضي أو بالإكراه، ومن سقف سياسي يتضمّن حكومة ودستوراً وانتخابات. وما الحملة التي نظّمتها المعارضة المقيمة في الرياض عليه إلا صدى لصوت وزير الخارجية السعودية عادل الجبير لاستعادة المبعوث الأممي المتبدّل، بينما تدخل الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة لدعمه ليس إلا صدى التفاهم بين غوتيريس ولافروف.

– انتقل مجدداً مع انتصار حلب ومسار أستانة، دور المبعوث الأممي والأمم المتحدة ليكون تحت الاختبار لدرجة ملاءمته للمتغيرات، ينجح دي ميستورا أو يفشل!

(Visited 661 times, 661 visits today)
Related Articles

UN idiot: Al-Aqsa Mosque is Jewish

Posted on

alt

Antonio Guterres, the newly installed United Nations secretary general and a Friend of Israel told Israel Radio on Friday that “it was completely clear that the Temple that the Romans destroyed in Jerusalem was a Jewish temple.”

This is no news to people who have studied the history of Temple Mount and Jewishness from some objective sources. The Zionist narrative of Temple Mount, just like Holy Holocaust is all based on fakes, frauds, and forgeries (watch video below).

The so-called Temple Mount (Solomon Palace or Haikale Sulemani) and part of Old City of Jerusalem were destroyed by Romans in 70 AD to crush the anti-Rome armed rebellion by the people of Judea, who were not Jewish. Majority of them belonged to Hebrew tribes also known as Bani Israel who were descendants of 12 sons of prophet Israel (Jacob). These people who lived in Arabian peninsula converted to Christianity and Islam with the passage of time. Over 90% of current world Jewry is not Israelites but Khazarian Turks.

Israeli historian Dr. Shlomo Sand, author of books The Invention of Jewish People’, ‘The Invention of the Land of Israel’, and ‘How I ceased to be a Jew’ has claimed that the word JEW was invented in late 18th century – most probably by Christian Zionists.

The photo above clearly shows that the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of Rock are not built on top of the Temple Mount. And the so-called Wailing Wall under the Al-Aqsa Mosque is not the foundation wall of the Temple Mount – but of a Roman fortress.

In October 2016, UNESCO declared that Old City of Jerusalem (occupied East Jerusalem) had nothing to do with Judaism.

But don’t expect Netanyahu stop speaking through Antonio Guterres’ mouth in the future.

Related Videos

%d bloggers like this: