Window on Israel: Political aggression and its consequences

Excerpts from an official United Nations summary of the Human Rights Council resolution on the Goldstone Report:

. . . while the Israeli Government sought to portray its operations as a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defence, the Israeli plan had been directed, at least in part, at the people of Gaza as a whole ... the treatment of many civilians detained or killed while trying to surrender [is] one manifestation of the way in which the effective rules of engagement, standard operating procedures and instructions to the troops on the ground appeared to have been framed to create an environment in which due regard for civilian lives and basic human dignity was replaced with a disregard for basic international humanitarian law.... The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses had been the result of a deliberate and systematic policy by the Israeli armed forces and not because those objects had presented a military threat ... other Israeli activities, particularly in Jerusalem, including ... limits to Palestinian access to properties and holy sites based on national origin, religion, sex, age or other grounds ... a grave violation of the Palestinian people's civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights ... Israeli violations of human rights in occupied East Jerusalem, particularly the confiscation of lands and properties, the demolishing of houses, the construction and expansion of settlements, the continuing construction of the separation wall built in part on land Israel occupied in the 1967 war, and the continuous digging and excavation works in and around Al-Aqsa mosque and its vicinity.... The Council demanded that Israel allow Palestinian citizens and worshippers unhindered access to their properties and religious sites in the occupied Palestinian territory, cease immediately all digging and excavations beneath and around the mosque, and refrain from any acts may endanger the structure or change the nature of Christian and Islamic holy sites."

What to do?

An obvious option is to persuade friendly and neutral governments that the resolution is one-sided, distorted or false, and a threat against Israel's elementary right to defend itself. Israel will work with its friends to assure that other United Nations forums, the courts and governments of individual countries do not respond to the Human Rights Council resolution with any concrete actions against Israel, its citizens, officials, or soldiers.

The most obvious falsehood is the claim that Israel is digging and excavating in, around, or beneath the Al-Aqsa mosque. The closest Israeli excavations are outside the large elevated area on which the mosque sits. The one-sided nature of the resolution is evident in that 10 out of 11 paragraphs deal with Israel's alleged violations, while only a "by the way" paragraph deals with allegations about Hamas:

(The Report) also found that Palestinian armed groups caused terror within Israel's civilian population through the launch of thousands of rockets and mortars into Israel since April 2001, determining that both sides may thus have committed serious war crimes and possible crimes against humanity."

Some Israeli politicians are blaming the resolution on the lack of sufficient efforts by Israel to explain its actions. More and better explanation is their solution.

In reality, there are countless explanations, from numerous perspectives, disseminated on a daily basis, about Gaza and everything else Israel does or does not do, by official government organs, organizations and individuals (Israelis and others) who identify with Israel's concerns.

The amount and range of explanations is part of Israel's strength and weakness. It reflects the diversity of the society and the sensitivity of issues that Israel encounters. It also tires those who feel that they have heard enough about Israel. Like other commentary about controversial issues, it is likely to strengthen those already convinced of a perspective being conveyed, fail to convince those opposed, and will be ignored by those who are not interested.

The countries supporting the Human Rights Council Resolution promoted by the Palestinians reflect the automatic bloc that Muslim countries and their allies routinely mount against Israel, and employ to prevent resolutions against even more heinous actions of the same countries. No amount of Israeli explanation is likely to penetrate this bloc of opponents.

Yet another approach would make Palestinian initiators of this and other political attacks against Israel pay a price for their actions. The prime minister has already indicated that Palestinian promotion of the resolution will affect Israel's readiness to risk its security by taking chances for the sake of a peace agreement.

Palestinians, like others, must feel that there is a cost to pay for political as well as other kinds of aggression. Such recognition is inherent in political maturity.

It does not take a great deal of imagination to speculate what might happen if Palestinian officials continue their campaigns in international forums. Israel may slow, stop, or even reverse the process of removing roadblocks and lessening inspections in order to facilitate the movement of Palestinians in and out of the West Bank, and between areas of the West Bank. Expressions by government officials, and public musings by ranking military officers can make the climate in the West Bank less attractive for overseas investors. The campaign against Israeli settlements, joined by the White House, European authorities and international organizations, has provoked settler activists to increase their demands within Israel, and may make it less likely that government bodies will oppose them.

One can hope for justice, peace and quiet, without expecting wide agreement on what they entail.