|
||
The United Nations Kangaroo "Investigation" of Israeli "War Crimes"
Just as Spain's National Court decided to shelve a phony war crime investigation of a 2002 Israeli air strike in Gaza, a group of lawyers and military experts assigned by the United Nations Human Rights Council continued its phony investigation of "the grave violations of human rights in the occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly due to the recent Israeli military attacks against the occupied Gaza Strip."
The UN Human Rights Council is a scandal. It's a successor to the defunct UN Human Rights Commission. Both organizations have a long history of singling out Israel for condemnation and of ignoring real human rights abusers by the world's worst offenders, several of which dominate the Human Rights Council and it predecessor.
As Hudson Institute scholar Anne Bayefsky recently noted: "The Council has adopted more resolutions and decisions condemning Israel than all the other 191 U.N. member states combined.... The more time the Council spends demonizing Israel, the less likely it becomes that it will ever get around to condemning genocide in Sudan, female slavery in Saudi Arabia, or torture in Egypt."
The very mandate that authorized the Gaza investigation reveals its bias against Israel. The council has already concluded, without any pretense to an investigation, that Israel is guilty of "grave violations of human rights... due to its... military attacks."
It has also concluded that the Gaza Strip "remains occupied," despite Israel having ended its occupation and having removed every single soldier and settler in 2005. Moreover, the Council's current president has limited the scope of the investigation to "violations committed in the context of the conflict that took place between 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009." Those are the dates of the Israeli response to more than seven years of rocket attacks by terrorists operating behind human shields in Gaza. During the period prior to 27 December 2008, Hamas and its terrorist allies fired thousands of rockets and mortar shells into civilian areas of Israel, killing, maiming and traumatizing Israeli women, men and children. But these attacks that provoked Israel's self-defense military actions are excluded from the investigation, according to the mandate and its interpretation by the president of the council. It would be as if the UN convened an investigation of the United States and terrorism but limited the investigation only to actions taken after September 12, 2001.
The very idea of the UN Council conducting an "independent" or objective investigation of Israel is preposterous. It would be as if an all white Mississippi court were investigating a black man's self-defense in response to years of lynchings by whites and limiting its investigation to the event following the lynchings. There is simply no way of an investigation conducted under the auspices of the UN Human Rights Council and be fair. Its history of bias and bigotry should not be legitimated by men and women of decency who care about real human rights.
That is why it was so surprising and disturbing to see a good man like Richard Goldstone agree to head the investigation team appointed by the UN Human Rights Council. Goldstone is a South African who fought against Apartheid and led an important investigation into the causes of violence there, ultimately blaming the government itself for instigating violence through a "third force." Would he have succeeded if his commission had been limited to white members only, and if its mandate of his investigation was limited to the black violence and excluded the white violence that provoked it? Would he have been willing to lend his good name to legitimate the bad history of all white Apartheid courts? What if he were a black lawyer, deliberately selected by the all white court to be an "Uncle Tom" precisely because he was black?
Goldstone was selected to head this investigation precisely because he is Jewish. Let there be no mistake about that cynical reality. I don't blame the UN Council for selecting a Jew to legitimiate its kangaroo investigation of the Jewish state, but I wonder why a man like Goldstone would allow himself to be used in this manner. Does he not realize how he is being played? How his distinguished reputation is being exploited in the interest of bigotry? Oh yes, Goldstone will be "even-handed". That is precisely what the Council wants: equivalent condemnation of Israel and Hamas for unequivalent actions.
Hamas admits -- indeed boasts -- that it has committed multiple war crimes: first it boasts about firing rockets at Israeli school children; it fires its rockets primarily at times when Israeli children are on their way to and from school; it has hit several kindergartens, elementary schools and playgrounds (fortunately, the children had been sent home); it celebrates every civilian death and injury it causes. Targeting civilians is a war crime.
Second, Hamas boasts of hiding behind human shields, which is also a war crime. A prominent Hamas legislator has boasted of the fact that Hamas:
"...[has] formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahideen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine. It is as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: 'We desire death like you desire life.'"
Third, since Hamas is the elected government of Gaza, every rocket attack from Gaza is a violation of Article 51 of the UN Charter, which authorizes member nations to defend itself against "armed attack."
Fourth, these attacks are part of a long term strategy to destroy a member nation of the United Nations, as the Hamas charter clearly proclaims.
No "investigation" is needed to conclude that Hamas engaged in war crimes.
Israel, on the other hand, is engaged in legitimate self defense: as a leading British expert, Richard Kemp put it on the BBC during the Gaza War:
"I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when an army has made more efforts to reduce the civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF is doing today in Gaza."
To be even-handed in the face of such uneven conduct, or to find moral equivalence where there is none, would be the worst sort of immoral bigotry. Yet moral and legal equivalence is precisely what this investigatory commission will "find," following its "independent fact-finding mission," unless it finds that Israel's conduct was worse than Hamas's because more people died from Israeli fire than from Hamas rockets. The investigators will ignore the law that holds murderers who hide behind human shields responsible for the deaths of these human shields, even when the bullets that killed them came from the weapons of those who engaged in legitimate self-defense. Consider the analogous situation of the Navy SEALs who killed the Somali pirates that had kidnapped American merchant captain Richard Phillips. Similar rescue attempts have sometimes resulted in the tragic deaths of the hostages. Would it be fair to try the SEALs for murder, instead of the pirates? That is exactly what the Gaza commission aims to do to Israel. It will also ignore the fact that Hamas always exaggerates the number of civilians killed by including in that category armed police (who double as terrorists), "civilians" who willing serve as human shields or who willingly allow their homes to be used to manufacture, store or fire rockets, "children" and "women" who have become terrorists, and even "collaborators" killed by Hamas.
Goldstone will try his best to be even-handed. But he knows that unless his report condemns Israel, at least as forcefully as it condemns Hamas, it will never be accepted by the UN Human Rights Council and his work will come to naught. He is an experienced international diplomat. He knows who appointed him. He understands his mandate. He will try to expand it to include Hamas war crimes, so as to be "even-handed," even though Hamas already boasts of its crimes.
Israel too knows this. They know Goldstone. They know that his appointment was calculated to make it difficult for Israel to refuse to cooperate with a Jewish investigator who has had close ties with the Jewish state. Their refusal to cooperate with this distinguished group of investigators, they will be seen by some as afraid of the "truth." Had they cooperated, they know that "the truth" produced by this investigation will be a lie. They are in a no-win situation, precisely because Richard Goldstone accepted an appointment he should never have agreed to accept.
Israel should conduct its own thorough investigation and let the chips fall where they may.
Richard Goldstone should resign in protest if the Human Rights Council finds moral or legal equivalence between the multiple war crimes deliberately committed by a terrorist and the inadvertent deaths caused by the use of human shields to protect terrorists from legitimate self-defense actions taken by a democracy to protect its citizens.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I'm frankly surprised that such a poorly reasoned argument should come from Mr. Dershowitz of all people. As we are just learning now, the 15th of July, Hamas wasn't the only belligerent accused of using human shields.
I hope everyone here realizes that Allen Dershowitz is not taken seriously on the Israel-Palestine conflict by any serious scholars/experts of the issue. So take what he says with a grain of salt. Noam Chomsky made him look like an amateur in a debate at Harvard on this very issue a few years back.
Your attack on Dershowitz has nothing to add to the discussion. And your conclusions are wrong and wrong-minded.
Ironic.
Ahhhh the selective outrage on the HP. The fact that Hamas launches attacks on Israel from Hospitals, Schools and Mosques using civilians as human shields is not a problem for the Palestinian supporters. They had no problem with Hamas killing 35-50 Palestinians using extra judicial executions under the cover of the Gaza war (as reported by Human Rights Watch). That was OK with the Israeli haters but they are incensed that Israel would defend itself against the attacks from Gaza. What these people are really fighting for is not a two state solution, human rights, peace, or justice. They are pushing for the destruction of Israel and nothing else. One thing I always find interesting is that those who hate Israel usually hate the U.S. too. And those that blindly hate Israel are usually screaming the most hypocritical invective imaginable.
The difference is that there aren't huffpost bloggers that are writing columns defending war crimes by the Palestinians. Every pro-Palestinian article you will ever see starts with "I condemn the killing of innocent Israelis " or "There are atrocities on both sides"
If someone did write a column defending terrorism of the Palestinians, I assure you they would receive negative comments, likely many more than this one is getting
I notice you quote human rights watch in your post because of their condemnation of Palestinian war crimes. Case in Point
"One thing I always find interesting is that those who hate Israel usually hate the U.S. too"
wow...where do you really come up with these quotes, i can bet from megaphone or similar propaganda vending machines....
well in all of your 'IDF is god' post this was best line, and the trophy for propaganda goes to...
another forgettable article by Derhsowitz, I will be concise as there is too much to comment on this obviously flawed article: if you have problem with UN then why don't we just dissolve UN and all it's actions going back to the period when UN was started...is this a fair deal?
Mr Dershowitz's views on war crimes can not be taken seriously
He formally supports torture
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/01/22/ED5329.DTL
He formally supports terrorism
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/jpost/access/110385358.html?dids=110385358:110385358&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Mar+11%2C+2002&author=ALAN+M.+DERSHOWITZ&pub=Jerusalem+Post&edition=&startpage=06&desc=New+response+to+Palestinian+terrorism
So given that those are his views of military ethics, the fact that he opposes investigations into war crimes should not come as a surprise to anyone
Mr.Dershowitz does not support torture in general. Only in ticking bomb cases to save many lives and with a warrant to do so but still not with any lethal or dangerous effect to the perpetrators life!
He also does not support terrorism. But he has said he supports counter-terrorism which is lawful.
He also does not oppose investigations into war crimes, that's not what he said.
You've drawn your own faulty conclusions on all these misdirected accusations.
I'd always considered Dershowitz a pretty smart dude, but here he disappointingly selectively quotes, (intellectual dis honesty), conjures stereo - types, attempts to bully ... all in a graceless attempt to impugn the UNHRC.
His argument here is essentially;-
We aren't the only human rights abusers here - pick on the others too.
I'm done with him.
You have not done a very good job of sharing the message Dershowitz has shared.
It sounded like a good summery to me
Although he left out "Israel should investigate itself and those who think international human rights commissions should investigate war crimes are racists"
One has to wonder about the huge "what if" situation.
What if the world wasn't so eager to condemn this tiny nation?
I honestly believe that Israel doesn't properly investigate the IDF properly because the entire world would jump up and down and say "See...look how evil those Jews are...we told you so."
Mr. Dershowitz even states: "Israel should conduct its own thorough investigation and let the chips fall where they may."
Great post again, Mr. Dershowitz.
The comparisons you give have left the anti-Israel rads here so crazy they can only come up with personal attacks to counter the arguments. This testifies to the brilliance of the article.
Right on.
I'm sorry Alan that you wasted your time on this article.
If it appeared in a "real" news source it might open some eyes.
BUT putting it the Huff Post with it's talking points group of Hamas appologists will get you nothing but condemnation.
In the future if the article is for Huff Post and is on the middle-east please follow these simple rules in your writing.
EVERYTHING Israel does is wrong
EVERYTHING Hamas does is right.
If you do that the scathing criticism will end.
I still can't believe the liberas on this site.
Legitimate criticism of Israel is NOT antisemitism.
However, comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, calling for the end of Israel, equating zionism with racism (Israel has more ethnic groups than any other country in the Middle East), and saying how Israel is filled with Russians and Europeans who aren't real Jews, that is all blatant antisemitism.
Here endeth the lesson.
Of course you are right, but let's see if the anti-Israel crowd agrees. Some how I doubt it. Sad.
I thinkyou know how much trouble you're going to be in for using real facts and honesty in your posting.
RIGHT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!
1. Comparing everything with Nazi germany gets silly IMO as well, however Dershowitz makes frequent claims that Iran is like the Nazis, so not much to that point as far as I'm concerned.
2. zionism is clearly a form of racism, as I'm sure you would have no problem labeling islamists who want to restore the islamic caliphate instead of the kingdom of david with such a title. Although it should be pointed out that the majority of zionists in the world are not jews, they are christians. So much of the racism by zionists is actually directed towards the jewish people as well as the muslims. The reason most zionists want the kingdom of david restored is not because they like the jews.
3. The state of Israel was formed by a majority of Russian and European immigrants as opposed to native arab jews. Nobody said that they aren't real jews, I'm not sure what you are talking about there. People do say that they didn't have claim to the land, and certainly did not have more claim over it than Palestinians who were living there. That is not anti-semitic in any way. It is an opinion open to debate however. So for instance many muslims who would deny foreign jew's claim to the land but want broad right of return rights for muslims. And conversely many jews who believed in the right of return for their ethnic group don't feel the same way about others
None of the above is anti-semitism. It is anti-Israel and anti-zionist but not anti-semitism. Arabs are semites also. The anti-semitic card just doesn't work anymore. Move on.
The whole "Arabs are semites too..." argument is so tired. Can't you simps come up with anything that's grounded in reality as adults know it?
"Arabs are semites also."
This is true in a philological sense. However, the word 'anti-semetism' means hatred of jews exclusively. It has never, and does not, indicate antipathy for both arabs and jews.
"None of the above is anti-semitism."
The EU commission on racism and xenophobia specifically mentions comparing Israel with Nazi Germany as an instance of antisemitism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemetism
Why is everything regarding Israel in quotation marks? Isn't using military force on innocent civilians a war crime? One day of this aggression killed more women and children than all the "rockets" from the "Palestinians" oops I meant "terrorists". The Palestinians are innocent people who have been put through hell, on one side attacked by Israel and on the other governed through fear and desperation by thugs like hammas.
I don't think the argument that "The Council has adopted more resolutions and decisions condemning Israel than all the other 191 U.N. member states combined" is one in your favor...
The Palestinian people of not innocent and they have been used by all of the Arab governments to keep attention off of their mistreatment of their own people. Fuel hatred of the Jews and you'll keep it from being pointed at yourself. You are so dupped.
Tzippi
Kind of hard to look at pictures of dead babies and little kids and come to the conclusion they were not innocent. Just what were they guilty of?
That surely is Israel's tactic???
"Isn't using military force on innocent civilians a war crime?"
Not in every case. Under international law, military action resulting in the death of civilians is only vindicated if the shooting that killed civilians came as a direct response to being fired upon. Prof. Dershowitz's argument is that yes, those deaths that occurred are in the main the result of war crimes, but that those war crimes were committed by Hamas, and not Israel. In other words, if soldier A first shoots at soldier B, and soldier B responds directly and kills a civilian nearby soldier A, then soldier A has committed a war crime, and not soldier B, even though the actual bullets came from soldier B's gun. This leaves out the idea of proportionality, but it is basically what Prof. Dershowitz argues.
It should be noted that, in general, these arguments are cold comfort to the mourners.
This post reeks of fear. Fear that one of the fairest and most just men in the world, Justice Richard Goldstone, will give an honest judgment of war crimes by both sides, unbiased by the prejudice of tribal allegiances. It seems that Mr. Dershowitz is so fearful of the truth that he has to resort to nasty ad hominem name-calling(really? an "Uncle Tom"?).
Whenever asked whose side he is on, Richard Goldstone will reply, "I am on the side of justice."
Which side are you on Mr. Dershowitz? Justice or injustice? Good or evil?
Oh jeez. Good or evil? Do you know who you sound like? Our former president George Bush. No situation is black and white or good vs evil. Otherwise, how do you justify the thousands of innocent people throughout the middle east who have died at the hands of Palestinians (note, not just Israelis).
When will you realize that the constant misapplication of the antisemitism label as a weapon to defend your racist, colonialist agenda will actually create antisemitism?
As the king of all Pro-Israeli Jews, I beg of you: Stop throwing that label around before someone gets hurt. Please write an opinion piece on the responsible application of that term.
NYC-Ninja...on another article you actually called out your Jewish friends for being pro-Israel...so now you are a pro-Israel Jew? And the king of all of us? I think if you actually were, you wouldn't call your pro-Israel friends hypocrites...
Please point out where and how you think Prof. Dershowitz misused the term. Most of the public has only the vaguest notion of what antisemetism is, and they don't care to find out. Explanation can only help.
"Israel should conduct its own thorough investigation and let the chips fall where they may."
Dear Alan, would you have rapists and murderers conduct their own trials? then we could get rid of the police! think of the savings!
Bernie Madoff should just have investigated himself, why didnt I think of that - its GENIUS.
Every so called investigation by the IDF - even after the most egregious atrocities, with the whole world watching and SEEING what they've done - has miraculously always found the IDF innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever. Surprised? I didnt think so.
Have you ever served in your nation's military and did you see any combat?
"bubbaC33",
Is that what they called you in the "military" you served in?
Let's compare US investigations with IDF "investigations shall we?
Israel simply exonerates whatever action (war crime) it takes against a largely helpless and captive people.
When the US military mistakenly kills innocent civilians it conducts its own investigation, it conducts a joint investigation with the government it is operating with, and it even meets *face to face* with family members of the victims and takes their testimony and feelings into account.
Israel cannot even be bothered to do any of these things. It clears itself of wrongdoing and thumbs its nose at the world time and time again.
Time's up. We now have a US President concerned about peace and the rule of law equally applied, even to Israel.
Brilliant. Don't forget Mexican drug cartels-they should investigate the "lawfulness" of their activity.....
Your comparison is far from accurate and is hardly appropriate.
According to Dersh, every human rights group in the world AND the UN and all the countries and people in Europe are "anti semitic".
I think its an appalling view to take. Everyone in the whole world is racist eh? or maybe Israel is in the wrong? just maybe the occupation is immoral? No?
"According to Dersh, every human rights group in the world AND the UN and all the countries and people in Europe are "anti semitic"."
Half of all Jews of Dershowitz's mother and father's generation, worldwide, were murdered in a program of racial extermination. During the period, almost every nation on earth refused to help save their lives, when asked to do so, and many colluded. This is the place where his worldview comes from. It's not accurate to think the world is out to get you, but the tendency toward this kind of thinking is understandable if you are jewish.
"or maybe Israel is in the wrong? just maybe the occupation is immoral? No?"
If pressed, I'm sure Dershowitz would admit that the occupation is immoral. He certainly speaks of 'legitimately criticizing' israel in most of his posts.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
