Alan Sabrosky analyzed the UN HRC vote on the Goldstone Report for the Palestinian Think Tank and surmised that the US has lost considerable leverage and influence at the UN after decades of defending Israel’s ‘rogue’ attitude toward UN resolutions and international law. The Gaza slaughter of 1,400 mostly civilian Palestinians including over 300 children now appears to be acting as the last straw.
Voting patterns on the HRC are important, as they provide insights into what might happen later on the Security Council (UNSC) and in the General Assembly:
1.Of the permanent members of the Security Council, Russia and China supported the resolution, Britain and France did not vote (the equivalent of hiding under the table!), only the US opposed it;
2.France and Norway did not vote for or against the resolution, but they did support the conclusions of the Goldstone Report;
3.Both major Sub-Saharan African states (Nigeria and South Africa) voted for it;
4.Two of the Asian “Big Three” (India and China) voted for it, the third (Japan) just abstained;
5.Two of the usual US supporters in SW and SE Asia (Pakistan and the Philippines) voted for it; and
6.Three of the four largest Latin American states (Argentina, Brazil, Chile) voted for it, the fourth (Mexico) abstained.
What makes this significant — since the US lobbied hard first to keep the Goldstone Report from even reaching the HRC, and then for others to vote against the HRC resolution — is that many states who voted for it, or abstained, would normally have been in the US corner.
Full article HERE.
Sabrosky also adroitly addressed US criticisms of the HRC resolution, which go beyond the Obama administration’s “parroting of Israel’s wishes.”
The resolution did not mention Hamas, an oversight, but there are at least five reasons including that the HRC focus in this case was on the actions of the oppressor (Israel) and not on those of the oppressed (the Palestinians). Then there is Israel’s right to self-defense, which is a specious claim because Israel, like all occupiers and oppressors, has no inherent right to defend itself against its victims. And third is the idea that holding Israel accountable for its actions will somehow endanger the Middle East peace process. Simply put, there is no peace process. Israel’s occupation and efforts to colonize the West Bank and East Jerusalem continue unabated as they have since the beginning of the Oslo period, and even before with the Peres government of the late 60s.
interesting to see on DKos, anyway, … Iran & Israel talking.
Not the kind of thing one would predict happening under a Likud government, let alone Netanyahu. It is possible that the US let it be known that neither the US nor Israel itself will be permitted to attack Iran and throw the Middle East and the world into turmoil.
It is interesting that Iran rarely if ever brings up Israel’s nuclear arsenal or bargains on a tit for tat basis.
Whatever the consequences this is good news as long as we are not being put through another deception. We all remember the Oslo hoax.
.
In a resolution (A/HRC/S-12/L.1) on the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, adopted by a vote of 25 in favour, six against, and 11 abstentions, the Council strongly condemns all policies and measures taken by Israel, the occupying Power, including those limiting access of Palestinians to their properties and holy sites, particularly in Occupied East Jerusalem, on the basis of national origin, religion, sex, age or any other discriminatory ground, which are in grave violation of the Palestinian People’s civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights; condemns further the recent Israeli violations of human rights in Occupied East Jerusalem, particularly the confiscation of lands and properties, the demolishing of houses and private properties, the construction and expansion of settlements, the continuous construction of the separation Wall, changing the demographic and geographic character of East Jerusalem, the restrictions on the freedom of movement of the Palestinian citizens of East Jerusalem, as well as the continuous digging and excavation works in and around Al-Aqsa mosque and its vicinity; demands that Israel respect the religious and cultural rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and allow Palestinian citizens and worshippers unhindered access to their properties and religious sites therein; demands also that Israel immediately cease all digging and excavation works and activities beneath and around Al Aqsa Mosque and its vicinity, and refrain from any acts or operations that may endanger the structure or foundations or change the nature of holy sites both Christian and Islamic in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; requests the High Commissioner for Human Rights, pursuant to resolution S-9/L.1 and in the context of her periodic reports, to monitor, document and report on the state of implementation by Israel of its human rights obligations in and around East Jerusalem; condemns the non-cooperation by Israel with the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission (established by resolution A/HRC/S-9/L.1); welcomes the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission (A/HRC/12/48), endorses the recommendations contained therein, and calls upon all concerned parties to ensure their implementation; recommends the General Assembly to consider the report of the Fact-Finding Mission during the main part of its sixty-fourth session; requests the Secretary General to submit a report on implementation of the Fact-Finding Mission’s recommendations to the Council’s thirteenth session; also endorses the recommendations contained in the first periodic report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in this regard (A/HRC/12/37), and calls upon all concerned parties including United Nations bodies to ensure their implementation; and requests the High Commissioner to submit to the Council’s thirteenth session, a report on the status of implementation of this resolution.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (25): Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, and Zambia.
Against (6): Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Ukraine, and United States of America.
Abstentions (11): Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, and Uruguay.
DOUGLAS M. GRIFFITHS (United States), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that they were disappointed at the outcome of this session. … The United States had voiced their serious concerns over several of the recommendations in the report. They had continued to stress the need of holding all parties to the conflict accountable before law. They had been prepared to support a resolution that would have done so. The United States was still working with the Palestinian Authority and Israel in the peace process. The proposed resolution could only exacerbate polarization. The United States would vote against the resolution, but this would in no way diminish their efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
AHARON LESHNO-YAAR (Israel), speaking as a concerned country, said that Israel had worried from the start of the discussions months ago that the actions of the mission would be one-sided, that the resolution, mandate, make-up and actions of the mission would be imbalanced. But most of all, Israel had been concerned that the result could not but be unbalanced and misused. Justice Goldstone it seemed now understood these concerns. He had told Swiss radio yesterday that he was worried when reading the draft resolution. It had 36 paragraphs but not a word on the rockets launched on Israel by Palestinian groups. In this morning’s “Le Temps” newspaper, Justice Goldstone said that this draft resolution saddened him, because it only made allegations against Israel. There was no single sentence condemning Hamas. This time, Justice Goldstone was correct …
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Thanks Oui for this indepth write-up. I like that language of the resolution in that it brings back the reality, that we are talking here about a military occupier and a people being occupied and exploited in the process.
I hope that Americans will read it for what it is because reality has become quite twisted around since 9/11, and even before that.