Less than a fortnight after its creation, the ‘new’ and ‘reformed’ United Nations Human Rights Council called its first special session. This was not to discuss the humanitarian catastrophe taking place in Darfur where 2.5 million Sudanese have been displaced by the violence. Nor was it called to prevent Iranian’s genocidal regime from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. And no…it wasn’t called to discuss the recent violence in Somalia following the seizing of Magadishu by radical Islamists. Last week the ruling Islamists killed two people for the reprehensible act of watching the Football world cup!
No, the only issues that concerns United Nations ‘Human Rights’ bodies are Israel’s defensive military actions against Palestinian terrorists.
Even before this shameful session, Anne Bayefsky (the renowned international law expert) and her UNWatch.org team had comprehensively debunked the myth that this new Human Rights Council was an improvement on the old and discredited Human Rights Commission. Serial human rights abusers such as Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Cuba and China have all been elected as members of this new Human Right’s body. America has refused to take part in this sham. It voted against the Council’s creation and refused to stand for nomination.
The new Council did not waste any time picking up from where the old had left off. After a day of discussion (actually condemnation) of the Jewish state, the model anti-Israel resolution was passed. Entitled ‘Human Rights situation in the occupied Palestinian Territories’, the resolution expressed
grave concern at the violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people caused by the Israeli occupation, including the current extensive Israeli military operations against Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; demands that Israel, the occupying Power, end its military operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, abide scrupulously by the provisions of international humanitarian law and human rights law, and refrain from imposing collective punishment on Palestinian civilians; expresses grave concern at the detrimental impact of the current Israeli military operation on the already deteriorating humanitarian conditions of the Palestinian people; urges Israel, the occupying Power, to immediately release the arrested Palestinian ministers, members of the Palestinian Legislative Council and other officials, as well as other arrested Palestinian civilians’ etc etc etc… |
The glaring exclusions from this long list of crimes is the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit by Palestinian terrorists and the continued bombing of Israeli towns by Palestinian rocket fire. These are actually the reasons for Israel’s military incursion. The UN human rights council’s refusal to condemn any Palestinian actions and its deliberate attempt to frame Israel’s actions out of their proper context demonstrates its prejudice against the Jewish State.
In addition, the council also urgently dispatched the Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories John Dugard (a renowned South African anti-Israel advocate even by UN standards) to undertake a fact-finding mission. This is perhaps the height of the perverted UN notion of justice. A fact-finding mission after the Council has already condemned Israel for a litany of crimes. What could possibly be its purpose? Only to find (or more aptly invent) new crimes to attribute to the Jewish State so that they can call more emergency sessions and pass more biased resolutions. These officials do have to earn their pay somehow.
So which countries took part in this modern day Dreyfus affair? It was the usual Jew haters. The non-democratic Arab and Muslim states like Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mali, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Tunisia; then the totalitarian anti-Western China and Cuba; and a few other 3rd world fellow travelers. Included in this prestigious collection of failed states and oppressive regimes was none other than our very own South Africa. In contrast all Western democracies voted against or in the case of Switzerland abstained.
Once again the South African government has demonstrated where it stands on foreign policy. It is not a bridge between the developed and developing world or a potential honest broker between Israelis and Palestinians as they would have us believe. South Africa’s voting record from Iran to the Red Cross makes it clear that we are an active participant in the anti-Western Islamic and totalitarian block. This position flies in the face of our hard won freedom and commitment to end discrimination. I am today ashamed to be South African.
All we want is balance.
Comments