Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Israel is fighting for its very survival, but you wouldn’t know it from the treatment it receives at the United Nations.
On October 7, Israel was attacked in an unprecedented massacre by Hamas terrorists. Under international law, specifically Article 51 of the UN Charter, nations have an inherent right to defend themselves when subjected to armed attacks. Yet Israel continues to be disproportionately targeted at the UN.
In 2023 alone, the United Nations General Assembly passed 14 resolutions condemning Israel — double the total number of condemnations of all other countries combined, all while overlooking major global human rights violators, such as Iran, Venezuela, China and Saudi Arabia. Countries like North Korea and Syria faced just one resolution each.
This is part of a broader trend where Israel has been systematically singled out. Between 2015 and 2022, the General Assembly passed 140 resolutions against Israel — more than twice the number passed against all other countries combined. The irony here is glaring: a country defending itself against terrorism is repeatedly condemned, while states that commit egregious human rights violations remain unscathed by the UN’s criticism.
In one of the most outrageous resolutions, this week, 124 countries voted in favour, 14 against and 43 abstained in a call for Israel to withdraw its forces, cease settlement activity and dismantle parts of its West Bank security barrier. The resolution also demands the return of land and property seized since 1967 and the right of displaced Palestinians to return, with reparations for damages caused by the occupation. It stems from a nonbinding International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion declaring Israel’s continued presence in the territory to be “unlawful.”
However, none of these assertions are true. The “separation wall” is a security fence that has been highly successful in preventing Palestinian terrorist attacks and safeguarding Israeli civilians. The lands in question are “disputed,” not “occupied,” and are subject to final negotiations under the Oslo Accords. Furthermore, the ICJ’s opinion has been widely criticized, as the court has been weaponized against Israel, with its ruling reflecting its clear bias, not legal objectivity.
Unsurprisingly, the resolution does not call for the dismantlement of Hamas or Hezbollah, nor does it require these hostile terrorist organizations to lay down their arms before Israel halts its defensive war. The bias is apparent: while Israel faces demands to withdraw and make reparations, terrorist groups that openly call for its destruction are not held to the same standard.
Juxtapose this bad international behaviour against Israel with an event I attended this week in the Bedouin-Israeli village of Rahat in southern Israel, where a new museum was inaugurated with many faiths in attendance. It was a show of peace, co-existence and pride in the freedoms afforded to all faith groups in Israel. But you wouldn’t know that if you were to listen only to the United Nations.
I applaud the Czech Republic’s bold statement at the United Nations. Ambassador Jakub Kulhánek rightly noted that, “Given the current circumstances on the ground, we believe that this resolution is not a step in the right direction, as it risks potentially sowing further divisions.”
He pointed out that the resolution “fails to address the immense security challenges Israel faces, including Hamas’s use of the Gaza Strip as a launching pad for its rampage of killing of Israelis, while systematically using the Palestinian civilians as human shields.” The ambassador also called for the immediate release of all the hostages who were “brutally abducted on 7 October,” and correctly noted that this “assembly has once again failed to acknowledge this issue with today’s vote.”
I concur with Danny Danon, Israel’s ambassador to the UN, who tweeted, “In my speech at the General Assembly, I condemned the hypocrisy and bias in the UN, which since October 7 has passed two resolutions that failed to mention Hamas and its responsibility for the massacre last October. I reiterated that anyone who supports this circus is a collaborator. Every vote you cast in support of this circus fuels the violence. This empty show is not just an insult to the victims of October 7. It is an insult to the hostages.”
Especially disappointing is Canada’s decision to abstain from Wednesday’s vote, rather than take Israel’s side, which represents the moral high ground. Experience tells us that you know who your true friends are during tough times — not when the going is easy.
Canada’s abstention represents a concession to the Palestinian lobby in this country and a stab in the back of its longtime friend and ally. But should we be surprised? This week, Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani met with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Ottawa — despite the fact that Qatar is one of Hamas’s biggest benefactors.
In this upside down story, Canada seems to have more sympathy for Hamas these days than for its longtime friend and ally. How sad.
National Post
Avi Benlolo is the founding chairman of the Abraham Global Peace Initiative.
English