EU stater röstade för UNHRC-resolution som fördömer Israel

 Palestinierna skriver en resolution med hjälp av de islamska staterna som fördömer Israel, och flera EU stater väljer att rösta för resolutionen i UNHCR. 

 Resolutionstexten är så verklighetsfrämmande att det är helt oförklarligt att EU stater som påstår sig stå för demokrati och mänskliga rättigheter röstade för den.

De som röstade mot var Österrike, Brasilien, Bulgarien, Kamerun, Malawi och Togo.

För röstade Danmark, Frankrike, Tyskland, Italien, Nederländerna och Polen. 

France, Germany, Netherlands, Italy Back PLO-Sponsored Condemnation of Israel at UNHRC (UN WATCH)

"...The resolution was adopted by a vote of 22 to 6, with 8 abstentions. Bahrain was absent, which may have been deliberate. Those voting in opposition were Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Malawi and Togo. Brazil was the one to ask for a vote, preventing the text from being adopted by consensus.

“The fact that this resolution was literally written by the Palestinians, with co-sponsors that include Pakistan on behalf of the Islamic states as well as Venezuela’s Maduro regime, is clear from the text’s pervasive condemnation of Israeli actions, with no mention whatsoever of Hamas, Islamic Jihad or the Palestinian Authority,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights organization.

“If the resolution were truly about Palestinian human rights, it would not have completely ignored Palestinian Authority abuses, including arbitrary killings, torture, and arbitrary detention,” said Neuer.

“Astonishingly, the resolution backed by numerous EU states included no reference whatsoever to abuses by the PA, which holds political prisoners and detainees, restricts freedom of the press and the internet, and uses violence, threats, arrests, interrogations and prosecutions to target journalists and dissidents.”

“In all of its six pages, the text further turned a blind eye to PA censorship and site blocking, interference with the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including harassment of human rights activists, as well as its restrictions on political participation. Nor was there any mention of PA corruption, violence and threats of violence motivated by antisemitism, or  violence and threats of violence targeting LGBT persons, and forced child labor,” said Neuer.

“Likewise, the text omitted any mention of Hamas’ systematic use of torture, oppression of women and LGBT persons, unlawful recruitment and use of child soldiers, and its arbitrary detention this year of Gaza peace activist Rami Aman.”

“In reality, the resolution is not really about Palestinian human rights, but about demonizing Israel. Any self-respecting democracy that supports human rights should have voted to oppose this outrageous text from the PLO.”

UNHRC arms embargo call against Israel passes with EU OK, Bahrain absence ()Jerusalem Post)

"The United Nations Human Rights Council approved a resolution calling for an arms embargo against Israel that had the support of many of the European countries but received a nod of disapproval from Bahrain, which was absent for Tuesday’s vote..."

Resolutionstexten här 

Vad hände vid fredsförhandlingarna år 2000?

 Om man är intresserad av vad som hände vid fredsförhandlingarna i slutet av år 2000 kan man läsa följande analys. 

In Depth: Arafat Rejected Peace in 2000

"Introduction

Recent peace agreements between Israel and UAE, Bahrain and Sudan have changed the face of the Arab-Israeli conflict and revealed a pent-up frustration among Arab nations with the long-standing Palestinian veto on their ability to normalize relations with Israel.

Arab nations have not suddenly become “pro-Israel” or abandoned their support for a Palestinian state, but they are more willing to call out Palestinian mistakes and lack of gratitude for longstanding Arab support. This dynamic was starkly on display in a recent interview of Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia on Al Arabiya, a Saudi-owned television channel. Bandar spoke for over an hour, focusing on Palestinian leadership mistakes over the decades, capped off in the final part recounting the colossal error committed by Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat in rejecting a peace agreement with Israel in 2000-2001. Even though these events are twenty years old, Bandar puts it front and center, demonstrating its enduring importance in discourse about the conflict. This article will review the old and new evidence showing the tragedy of Arafat’s “no” response to an attractive peace deal, despite continued attempts by many to absolve Arafat and the Palestinians of fault..."

ICC och Israel - politik, inte juridik

 Såsom omvärlden behandlar Israel är det inte förvånande att också ICC anslutit sig till hopen och nu beslutat utreda Israels eventuella krigsbrott när de försvarat sig mot terror. 

Det är sorgligt också därför att ICC därmed gör sig till en bricka i det politiska spelet där udden alltid riktas mot Israel.

Honest Reporting lyfter fram fakta som knappast kommer att beaktas av våra inhemska nyhetsredaktioner.

Två viktiga fakta:

- Israel är inte medlem av ICC (har inte undertecknat Romfördraget)

- Palestina är inte en självständig stat

Judge Péter Kovács’ Partly Dissenting Opinion

ICC Gives Itself Authority to Adjudicate Israeli “War Crimes:” What It Means (Honest Reporting)

"What is “international law”? As discussed many times by HonestReporting, international “law” is not a compilation of legislation in the classical sense but, rather, a collection of treaties according to which sovereign states have agreed to abide. In this case, the relevant treaty is the Rome Statute. However, Israel has never agreed to abide by this statute. Nor has the United States, for that matter. This means that in Friday’s ruling, the ICC has “given” itself the power to exercise authority over any sovereign nation, a notion that violates the very nature of international law itself. To put it differently, when nations agree to a treaty, that agreement can and should be enforced by bodies that the various nations have nominated for that purpose. However in this case, the ICC has determined that it is acceptable to impose a treaty even on countries that have never agreed to it....

...prosecutor Bensouda brought the question to a tribunal of three ICC judges to determine whether the ICC can exercise jurisdiction. The panel ruled 2-1 in favor of jurisdiction, with a strong dissenting opinion written by judge Judge Péter Kovács’...

...on Friday, the U.S. State Department under the Biden administration echoed the same underlying US position as the Trump administration, saying (emphasis added): As we made clear when the Palestinians purported to join the Rome Statute in 2015, we do not believe the Palestinians qualify as a sovereign state, and therefore are not qualified to obtain membership as a state, or participate as a state in international organizations, entities, or conferences, including the ICC. We have serious concerns about the ICC’s attempts to exercise its jurisdiction over Israeli personnel. The United States has always taken the position that the court’s jurisdiction should be reserved for countries that consent to it, or that are referred by the UN Security Council.”...

Blinken: US stands with Israel, ICC lacks jurisdiction to hold investigation (Jerusalem Post)

"...The United States firmly opposes and is deeply disappointed by this decision. The ICC has no jurisdiction over this matter," Blinken said in a statement issued early Thursday morning. "Israel is not a party to the ICC and has not consented to the Court’s jurisdiction, and we have serious concerns about the ICC’s attempts to exercise its jurisdiction over Israeli personnel."

Blinken also stressed that the Palestinians don't qualify as a sovereign state and therefore cannot participate in the ICC..."