Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Israel/Palestine
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]shira
(30,109 posts)11. Samantha Powers 2 days ago...
But in reality this vote for us was not straightforward, because of where it is taking place at the United Nations. For the simple truth is that for as long as Israel has been a member of this institution, Israel has been treated differently from other nations at the United Nations. And not only in decades past such as in the infamous resolution that the General Assembly adopted in 1975, with the support of the majority of Member States, officially determining that, Zionism is a form of racism but also in 2016, this year. One need only look at the 18 resolutions against Israel adopted during the UN General Assembly in September; or the 12 Israel-specific resolutions adopted this year in the Human Rights Council more than those focused on Syria, North Korea, Iran, and South Sudan put together to see that in 2016 Israel continues to be treated differently from other Member States.
Like U.S. administrations before it, the Obama Administration has worked tirelessly to fight for Israels right simply to be treated just like any other country from advocating for Israel to finally be granted membership to a UN regional body, something no other UN Member State had been denied; to fighting to ensure that Israeli NGOs are not denied UN accreditation, simply because they are Israeli, to getting Yom Kippur finally recognized as a UN holiday; to pressing this Council to break its indefensible silence in response to terrorist attacks on Israelis. As the United States has said repeatedly, such unequal treatment not only hurts Israel, it undermines the legitimacy of the United Nations itself.
The practice of treating Israel differently at the UN matters for votes like this one. For even if one believes that the resolution proposed today is justified or, even more, necessitated by events on the ground, one cannot completely separate the vote from the venue.
And Member States that say they are for the two-state solution must ask themselves some difficult questions. For those states that are quick to promote resolutions condemning Israel, but refuse to recognize when innocent Israelis are the victims of terrorism what steps will you take to stop treating Israel differently? For those states that passionately denounce the closures of crossings in Gaza as exacerbating the humanitarian situation, but saying nothing of the resources diverted from helping Gazas residents to dig tunnels into Israeli territory so that terrorists can attack Israelis in their homes what will you do to end the double-standard that undermines the legitimacy of this institution?
Member States should also ask themselves about the double standards when it comes to this Council taking action. Just this morning we came together, as a Council, and we were unable to muster the will to act to stop the flow of weapons going to killers in South Sudan, who are perpetrating mass atrocities that the UN has said could lead to genocide. We couldnt come together just to stem the flow of arms. Earlier this month, this Council could not muster the will to adopt the simplest of resolutions calling for a seven-day pause in the savage bombardment of innocent civilians, hospitals, and schools in Aleppo. Yet when a resolution on Israel comes before this Council, members suddenly summon the will to act.
Like U.S. administrations before it, the Obama Administration has worked tirelessly to fight for Israels right simply to be treated just like any other country from advocating for Israel to finally be granted membership to a UN regional body, something no other UN Member State had been denied; to fighting to ensure that Israeli NGOs are not denied UN accreditation, simply because they are Israeli, to getting Yom Kippur finally recognized as a UN holiday; to pressing this Council to break its indefensible silence in response to terrorist attacks on Israelis. As the United States has said repeatedly, such unequal treatment not only hurts Israel, it undermines the legitimacy of the United Nations itself.
The practice of treating Israel differently at the UN matters for votes like this one. For even if one believes that the resolution proposed today is justified or, even more, necessitated by events on the ground, one cannot completely separate the vote from the venue.
And Member States that say they are for the two-state solution must ask themselves some difficult questions. For those states that are quick to promote resolutions condemning Israel, but refuse to recognize when innocent Israelis are the victims of terrorism what steps will you take to stop treating Israel differently? For those states that passionately denounce the closures of crossings in Gaza as exacerbating the humanitarian situation, but saying nothing of the resources diverted from helping Gazas residents to dig tunnels into Israeli territory so that terrorists can attack Israelis in their homes what will you do to end the double-standard that undermines the legitimacy of this institution?
Member States should also ask themselves about the double standards when it comes to this Council taking action. Just this morning we came together, as a Council, and we were unable to muster the will to act to stop the flow of weapons going to killers in South Sudan, who are perpetrating mass atrocities that the UN has said could lead to genocide. We couldnt come together just to stem the flow of arms. Earlier this month, this Council could not muster the will to adopt the simplest of resolutions calling for a seven-day pause in the savage bombardment of innocent civilians, hospitals, and schools in Aleppo. Yet when a resolution on Israel comes before this Council, members suddenly summon the will to act.
read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.761017
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
19 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Just to clarify, this means that America just took a largely symbolic stand against Israel?
HoneyBadger
Dec 2016
#1
There are many Israelis who oppose the settlements and support a two-state solution
oberliner
Dec 2016
#3