Britain and France continue dance of deception as Goldstone Report goes to UN General Assembly
If you want a comparison that illustrates the difference between the United States and Europe on attitudes to Israel in particular and basic standards of moral clarity in general, consider the following. Yesterday, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution deriding the Goldstone Report on Gaza as “biased and unworthy of further consideration” by 344 to 36, not much short of a 10-1 margin. That’s moral clarity.
Representing the European Union, Britain and France by contrast will be dancing through hoops at the United Nations General Assembly today with assorted dictatorships and tyrannies in a desperate attempt to massage and amend a motion based on the odious UN Human Rights Council’s (HRC) October 16 resolution endorsing the Goldstone Report and effectively throwing Israel’s right to self-defence out of the window. The French and the Brits could not even be bothered to turn up to vote at the HRC session in October, but under pressure from Israel and the United States now say they might possibly vote against the resolution in the General Assembly. Then again, they might vote in favour if they can get a couple of changes to the text. And then again (again) they might just abstain if they can’t make up their minds. That’s not moral clarity. It’s a moral dunghill.
But how quaint can I get? Moral clarity, Europe, and Israel all in the same sentence?
Consider the way the Jerusalem Post is reporting the European approach today:
“EU countries were hammering out details of an initiative that would amend the existing resolution and send the matter back to Geneva,” the paper reported. “In an attempt to scuttle efforts by Arab states to bring the matter to the Security Council, and from there to the International Criminal Court, EU states were backing new language emphasizing accountability for crimes against humanity and calling on Israelis and Palestinians to launch investigations into war crimes.”
“Send the matter back to Geneva”? “backing new language emphasizing accountability for crimes against humanity”? “Calling on Israelis and Palestinians to launch investigations into war crimes”?
Again, compare all of this muddle and waffle with the above quoted words from yesterday’s motion in the House of Representatives: “biased and unworthy of further consideration”! That’s right. Not sending it here and sending it there. Not new language. Not a basis for launching investigations. Just plain old “biased and unworthy of further consideration”.
Of course, I can’t let the United States and President Obama entirely off the hook. They erred egregiously in rejoining the UN Human Rights Council in the first place. Legitimising a human rights grouping run by dictatorships was naive at best. At worst it smacked of the kind of illiberal multi-lateralism that is starting to dog this administration’s reputation from the disappointed dissidents of Iran to the oppressed of Tibet.
But if America’s shortcomings over Israel in particular and human rights in general were all the world had to contend with we’d be in a happy place indeed. Just imagine if it was all down to Europe…
To read about and purchase my recently published book on the subject of European hostility to Israel, click here:
Tags: Israel
November 4th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
G-d bless America
November 4th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Questions to Judge Goldstone: Pray do tell us, in the case of the Palestinians,who did you and your colleagues actually have in mind among the Palestinian leadership or the Palestinian judiciary who would be suitable (capable?) of carrying out an objective investigation leading to a prosecution for Palestinian war crimes before you made your recommendations?
The wretched resolution that was passed afterwards seems to have done away with this requirement. Are you Judge Goldstone so surprised?
What were the chances that the International Criminal Court would be trying Hamas members?
November 4th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
“Just imagine if it was all down to Europe”
We’ve been down that road before:
http://tinyurl.com/yjvw72o
November 4th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
Way to go America!
Hopefully Obama and Clinton can catch up with congres’ and the american people’s view on UNHRC kangaroo courts.
Robin, purchased and read your fine book.
Regards,
Darryl Dempsey
November 5th, 2009 at 6:28 am
“Send the matter back to Geneva”? “backing new language emphasizing accountability for crimes against humanity”? “Calling on Israelis and Palestinians to launch investigations into war crimes”?
Which Palestinians?
The one’s on the WB, who weren’t involved except as kibitizers?
Although they wouldn’t mind sticking it to their “friends” in Gaza for a change.
Or the terrorists in Gaza, so that they can be flown first class to NY, put up in a luxury hotel, and no doubt beat their breasts in front of the GA to confess their crimes against humanity? Thye must be joking.
Just say “NO! and veto discussion in the UNSC
The report will then fade away like all the other UN reports - its only the fuss over it that is keeping it alive.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
I have received notice of the following from a colleague which I’m posting :
Debate of the Year: Gold vs. Goldstone – Amb. Dore Gold vs. Judge Richard Goldstone. War Crimes in Gaza or UN Crimes Against Israel? Brandeis University, Thursday 5th November @ 10pm UK time time). Watch the Debate live at http://www.brandeis.edu/israelcenter/. In what is sure to be a heated debate, South African Judge Richard Goldstone will discuss his report for the first time with a senior Israeli figure. Dore Gold, former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations and President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, will respond to Goldstone in the forum and then both will take questions from the audience.
http://www.brandeis.edu/israelcenter/