UN-Truth

A  U.S. diplomat representing her country at a debate of the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee last week said, after hearing the presentation of Richard Falk, the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967, that “her delegation had serious reservations about the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation, including that anybody request an opinion from the International Court of Justice on Israel’s refusal to cooperate” …

This diplomat, who is not indentified in the UN press release summary of the Third Committee meeting, “noted that Israel had received at least 100 complaints of abuse in Gaza and had already investigated several of them.  On other hand, Hamas was a terrorist group that had seized control of Gaza and had no institutions to deal with these violations.  She requested that the Palestinian Authority carry out its own investigation into the violations of international law by Hamas”.

The Palestinian Authority would probably just love to do so …

The UN press release noted that, in a response, Falk said that all three of the Special Rapporteurs who spoke that day to the Third Committee “had faced the same problems of non-cooperation from the country they were tasked with assessing.  He believed that it was the responsibility of the international community, as well as the General Assembly, to take this non-cooperation seriously and to address it in a non-political manner.  Israel should receive the same focus that Myanmar and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea did”.

According to the UN press release, Falk also said, in response to “the comment of his own Government, the United States … it was all very well to speak abstractly about a commitment to peace.  But, there was an ongoing commitment that had been obtained for the years of the occupation.  He saw no interest on the part of the United States, in its very important role in relation to this conflict, to seek compliance and accountability, the failure of which had produced an ordeal of suffering for the Palestinian people.  He believed that calling on the International Court of Justice to mandate and require cooperation on the part of a Member State was a constructive step, particularly in the absence of repeated failures to achieve this cooperation by voluntary means and by efforts of persuasion … The most immediate practical step possible was to take seriously the recommendations of the Goldstone report, which was an objective report by highly respected authorities and provided a clear basis on which to challenge impunity.  If it was ignored, it would send a very unfortunate message to the Palestinian people and Israel, suggesting that international law was only important when it coincided with the geopolitical concerns of world’s most powerful countries.   He also believed that the situation of prolonged occupation called for distinct attention.  When does an occupation that goes on for so long without heeding the framework of humanitarian law, become a threat itself to international peace and security? … In closing, he emphasized that his report, as well as the Goldstone report, required specific actions to be taken.  If they were, it would reinforce the credibility of the United Nations.  If they were not, it would confirm that the United Nations could not work effectively when there were significant political obstacles to action”.    This exchange, and more, is all contained in the UN press release, posted here.

The UN press release also reported that “Sweden’s delegate, speaking on behalf of the European Union, expressed deep concern on the deteriorating human rights and humanitarian situation in the Occupied Territories. Her delegation believed all parties were obliged to respond to all violations of such rights“.

European diplomats are always so quick to say how closely aligned their policies are with the those of the United States — so how do they explain this divergence? The Europeans are deeply concerned, while the U.S. has serious reservations?

In his report, which was originally presented to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in late August, Falk wrote: “Richard Falk as Special Rapporteur holder of the mandate was expelled from Israel on 14 December 2008, and despite repeated formal efforts to discuss future visits to the occupied Palestinian Territory (oPt), Israel has ignored all such approaches without providing any explanation. His report takes particular note of the continuing unlawful non-cooperation of Israel with the work of the mandate holder. Along similar lines it has denied entry and cooperation with the Human Rights Council fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict headed by Judge Richard Goldstone. As suggested in earlier reports this non-cooperative behaviour is setting an unfortunate precedent for Human Rights Council/United Nations relations with Member States, as well as interfering with the work of the mandate. As earlier, it is recommended that the General Assembly or the Human Rights Council request clarification of the legal consequences of this non-cooperative behaviour by referring the issue to the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion”.

Falk’s report (A/64/328) makes the following recommendations “as matters of urgency”:
(a) The General Assembly should request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the obligations and duties of Members States of the United Nations to cooperate with the Organization and its representatives;
(b) Members States should be encouraged to use national means, including courts, to fulfil their obligations under the Fourth Geneva
Convention, articles 146 to 149, with respect to implementing international criminal law as pertains to the occupied Palestinian Territory;
(c) Israeli respect for international law and Palestinian rights should henceforth be an integral element in future peace negotiations;
(d) Consideration should be given to imposing limits on the supply of arms to the parties to the Israel/Palestine conflict;
(e) The unlawfulness of Israeli settlements should be confirmed, and steps taken to move beyond the freeze, and in the direction of dismantling, with due respect for the human rights of all affected;
(f) Consideration should be given to requesting the International Committee of the Red Cross or some other designated body to study and make recommendations as to the special problems arising from prolonged occupation.

In an extraordinary passage in the report — which touches on some extremely important but often-overlooked matters –  Falk writes that “the prolonged occupation of Palestinian territories, as well as recent military operations by Israel, have revealed three gaps in the law that deserve to be noticed and closed as soon as possible: (a) the denial of a right by civilians to depart from a combat zone.  This right was denied to all civilian inhabitants of Gaza during Operation Cast Lead with the exception of a few hundred Gazan residents with foreign passports and members of a small Christian community in Gaza … (b) the denial of internationally donated reconstruction aid to repair war damage in Gaza due to maintenance of blockade in violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.  This blockage of reconstruction aid could be treated as an instance of prohibited collective punishment, but because it raises a distinct set of post-combat issues that are not explicitly addressed by international humanitarian law it might be best handled by the adoption of a further protocol to the Geneva Conventions; and (c) as a specific result of prolonged occupation of the occupied Palestinian Territory, now in its forty-second year, coupled with restrictions on mobility imposed by the occupying power, anguishing family fragmentations have added to Palestinian suffering and seem unacceptable from the perspective of international human rights.  The Nobel Peace laureate, Mairead Maguire, a frequent visitor to Gaza and the West Bank, has recently written that there is rightly much talk about people and aid getting into Gaza but for her the greatest crime the Israeli Government commits is to cut the people of Gaza off from family and friends in the West Bank, and also from other Palestinians around the world. She noted that denying people the right to meet with their families and friends is surely one of the greatest forms of torture and collective punishment of civilians” …[n.b., does anybody remember the rare pictures of the reuniting of North and South Korean families who were separated for decades...]