Why the UN now declares Israel an 'Apartheid regime'

Tuvia Brodie,

לבן ריק
לבן ריק
צילום: ערוץ 7
Tuvia Brodie
Tuvia Brodie has a PhD from the University of Pittsburgh under the name Philip Brodie. He has worked for the University of Pittsburgh, Chatham College and American Express. He and his wife made aliyah in 2010. All of his children have followed. He believes in Israel's right to exist. He believes that the words of Tanach (the Jewish Bible) are meant for us. His blog address is http://tuviainil.blogspot.com He usually publishes 3-4 times a week on his blog and 1-3 times at Arutz Sheva. Please check the blog regularly for new posts.

On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 the United Nations issued a new report on Israel. This report accused Israel of imposing an "Apartheid regime" of racial discrimination that "oppresses and dominates the Palestinian people" (aljazeera, below).

The report used the word, 'Apartheid' to describe Israel's be‎havior. This was a first: no other UN body has made such an accusation ("Israel imposes 'apartheid regime' on Palestinians: U.N. report", reuters, March 16, 2017). 

Headlines around the world captured the propaganda significance of this report:

-"UN report says Israel a racist state and apartheid regime", irishtimes, March 15, 2017;

-Ben White, "UN report: Israel has established an Apartheid regime", aljazeera, March 15, 2017;

-Rick Gladstone, "Tempest at UN over report saying Israel practices Apartheid", nytimes, March 15, 2017; 

-"Israel has established apartheid regime, says report", tribuneindia, March 16, 2017;

-Tareq Haddad, "United Nations report condemns Israel as apartheid state for first time", internationalbusinesstimes, March 16, 2017; 

-"UN agency report brands Israel an apartheid regime", dailystar (Lebanon), March 16, 2017.

This report could change everything for the Palestinian Authority (PA). The UN's 1973 Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid declares Apartheid to be a crime against humanity (Steven Ratner, "Apartheid", crimesofwar, 2011). If this report makes Israel officially 'Apartheid', Israel could become an easy target for the International Criminal Court. 

For the PA, this opportunity could be the breakthrough it needs to conquer Israel. For Israel, becoming 'Apartheid' could mean the end of its legitimacy. 

Anti-Israel forces at the UN would like to see that happen. But it might not happen. 

This report has too many flaws. These flaws are so significant that, the day the report was released, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres immediately distanced himself from it. 

He had good reason to do that.

First of all, the report was published without any prior consultation with the secretariat (reuters, ibid). A spokesman for the Secretary-General also suggested that the report doesn't reflect the po‎sition of the UN itself--but reflects only the views of its authors (ibid). This statement could delegitimize the report.

Indeed, a spokesman for the group that wrote the report has already demeaned it. He suggested that this report was written only because the members of the group--the UN's Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA)--requested it.

This last statement suggests two questions: who were the members of this group--and why would they request such a report? The answers to these question tell you all you need to know to understand why this report is trash. 

There are 18 members in the ESCWA. They are: Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. 

This group is a monolithic bloc. It entertains only two points of view: to do what's best for Islamic nations--and to help the Palestinian Cause (see below). 

Each member state is Islamic. Each member belongs to the OIC--the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The OIC is an organization dedicated to—and exclusively for—the world’s 57 Muslim states (it counts ‘Palestine’ as a state). Its homepage says, “It endeavors to safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world…[Its fundamental purpose is] to strengthen the solidarity and cooperation among the Member States” (OIC Homepage, About).

The OIC is about Islamic interests. It isn't interested in balance or fairness or world freedom. It's interested in Islam.

One of those Islamic interests is the Palestinian Cause. That interest is so important, it's built into the OIC Charter.

That Charter states that the OIC exists partly “to support the struggle of the Palestinian people, who are presently under foreign occupation, and to empower them to attain their inalienable rights, including the right to self-determination, and to establish their sovereign state with Al-Quds Al-Sharif [the Jewish Jerusalem] as its capital” (OIC Homepage, documents, charter)”. 

The UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, containing only an Islamic-centric and Palestinian-centered point of view, recently met in Beirut. There, with no input from the UN secretariat, its members created a one-sided, OIC-correct, pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel document. 

These Islamic states concocted a political 'blood libel' against the Jewish state. Like the original blood libel, this political analog accuses Jews (Israel) of causing grievous harm to non-Jews (Muslim Palestinians) who live beside them. 

The purpose of a blood libel never changes. It's to destroy what's Jewish--in this case, Israel.

The Muslim-packed ESCWA served as judge and jury against the Jewish Israel. Its conclusion (Israel-is-Apartheid) was no different from those seen in whites-only kangaroo courts of the Deep South of the 1920's. There, Blacks couldn't win. The court was stacked against them. Here, Jews couldn't win, either--because the ESCWA was stacked against them. 

That's not moral be‎havior. It's bigotry. 

The US Ambassador to the UN was correct to demand it be withdrawn.