By Elliott Abrams
Monday, March 14, 2016
It may seem hard to believe that the United Nations can
hold any new surprises when it comes to unprincipled attacks on Israel, but
never despair: There is always farther to fall.
For more than 20 years, the U.N. Human Rights Council has
had a dedicated “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the
Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.” (Needless to say, there’s no U.N.
Special Rapporteur for the condition of Tibetans or Cubans; only Palestinians.)
Now, the incumbent Israel-Hater-in-Chief is leaving and his replacement must be
chosen.
This being the U.N., what kind of candidate will they
choose? Be careful, now: The position’s entire purpose is to condemn Israel, so
it’s important to disqualify anyone who might examine the evidence in an
unbiased search for truth. Heaven forfend. Much better to choose someone whose
anti-Israel bias is absolute.
And this being the U.N., that’s what they’re doing.
There are two top candidates, both worthy successors to
Richard Falk, who served in the post from 2008 to 2014. Falk was the nut-case
Princeton professor who wanted U.S. officials prosecuted as war criminals for
deposing Saddam Hussein, and once said, “Is it an irresponsible overstatement
to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record
of collective atrocity? I think not.” You can see why the U.N. chose him.
Anyway, back to the current candidates. Ranked second for
the Special Rapporteur job is a Canadian named Michael Lynk. Who is Lynk? The
invaluable U.N. Watch notes: “Lynk . . . promotes an extreme anti-Western
political agenda. Three days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Lynk
instinctively blamed the West, pointing the finger at ‘global inequalities’ and
‘disregard by Western nations for the international rule of law.’” Needless to
say, this political stance means he hates Israel. As UN Watch reports:
Lynk plays a leadership role in
numerous Arab lobby groups, including CEPAL, which promotes “Annual Israeli
Apartheid Week” events; signs anti-Israel petitions; calls to prosecute Israel
for alleged war crimes; addresses “One State” conferences that seek to
eliminate Israel; and argues that “the solution” to “the problem” must go back
to Israel’s very creation in 1948, which he calls “the start of ethnic cleansing.”
You might think, “Wow, he’s perfect for the U.N.!” But
no, he’s only ranked second, under the top candidate, Penny Green. Who is
Green? She’s a British criminologist whose hatred of Israel is even more
blatant. She has urged that the U.K. de-list Hamas as a terrorist group. U.N.
Watch reports that she “advocates the total boycott of Israel, posting
statements on Twitter such as: ‘Support BDS against Israel – best way to resist
this criminal government’; ‘Academics should now systematically refuse any
invitations to visit Israeli universities or attend conferences there’; ‘the
West must impose sanctions against, boycott and divest from Israel.’”
The Human Rights Council’s Vetting Committee deemed both
Lynk and Green to be impartial and put them forward as the two best candidates
for the job.
In doing so, the committee bypassed eight other
applicants, some of whom have never expressed any view about
Israeli–Palestinian affairs, and some whom even appear to be actually
impartial as that term is commonly understood. The ultimate decision now rests
with South Korean ambassador Choi Kyong-lim, the Human Right’s Council’s
chairman, who could reject Lynk and Green in favor of one of the other
applicants if he so chooses.
Will he? We’ll find out on March 24, at the end of the
council’s current session. Not to worry, though: Even if the U.N. chooses Lynk
or Green, Israel will never let either of them set foot in “the Palestinian
territories occupied since 1967.” Israel never let Falk or his successor set
foot there, either. But the game goes on in Geneva. President Bush would not
permit the United States to join the Council; Obama reversed him and leapt for
a seat at the table. Today, the U.N. has entrusted the defense of global human
rights to representatives from China, Cuba, Vietnam, Russia, and Saudi Arabia,
among other liberal bastions.
Here’s hoping a Republican president keeps us as far away
from this wretched sham as possible starting in 2017.
No comments:
Post a Comment