For Immediate Release
GENEVA, Dec. 2, 2016 – The Geneva-based UN Watch saluted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for his government’s principled stand at the United Nations on Wednesday in voting against each of six Arab-sponsored resolutions singling out Israel, part of a total of 20 unbalanced and inflammatory texts adopted each year in the ritual scapegoating of the Jewish state. See chart below listing all 6 resolutions.
“Prime Minister Trudeau is showing moral leadership by continuing Canada’s exemplary UN tradition over the past decade in joining a small handful of principled nations who are unafraid to defy the intimidation of dictatorships who use the demonization of Israel to distract attention from their horrific human rights record and failed governance,” said Hillel Neuer, the Canadian-born executive director of UN Watch, an independent non-governmental organization.
“Canada’s voting record is entirely unchanged from last year, and once again upholds the UN Charter’s principle of equal treatment of all nations,” added Neuer.
One resolution effectively calls on Israel to transfer control of the Golan Heights to Syria, oblivious to the mass killings now being perpetrated by the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.
Another resolution condemns Israel for actions in Jerusalem, and uses only the Islamic term for the Temple Mount, ignoring the site’s biblical role in Judaism and Christianity.
“The UN’s assault on Israel this week with a torrent of one-sided resolutions is surreal,” said Neuer.
“When forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad are attacking Syrian civilians in Aleppo, causing thousands to flee, it is obscene for the UN to adopt a resolution mentioning Syrian territory and invoking the Geneva Convention and the ‘protection of civilians’ — yet only to condemn Israel,” said Neuer.
“It’s astonishing: as the Syrian regime is killing its own people by the hundreds of thousands, how can the UN call for more human beings to be placed under Assad’s rule? The timing of this resolution is morally galling, and logically absurd.”
“And while there will be a total of 20 inflammatory, unbalanced or redundant resolutions against Israel this session, it is telling that not a single UN General Assembly resolution is planned for victims of gross human rights abusers such as Saudi Arabia, Burundi, Turkey, Venezuela, China, or Cuba.”
“At a time when Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his state-controlled media continue to incite their people to stab and shoot Israeli Jews, the UN’s inexplicable response today is to reflexively condemn Israel in six separate resolutions, each of them one-sided and mute on Palestinian abuses.”
“This week’s resolutions claim to care about Palestinians, yet the UN refuses to say a word for the dozens of Palestinians who in the past months have been slaughtered, maimed and expelled by Assad’s forces, with more than 3,000 killed since 2011.”
“The latest farce at the General Assembly underscores a simple fact: the UN’s automatic majority has no interest in truly helping Palestinians, nor in protecting anyone’s human rights; the goal of these ritual, one-sided condemnations remains the scapegoating of Israel,” said Neuer.
“The UN’s disproportionate assault against the Jewish state undermines the institutional credibility of what is supposed to be an impartial international body. Politicization and selectivity harm its founding mission, eroding the U.N. Charter promise of equal treatment to all nations large and small,” Neuer added.
CANADA OPPOSED 6 UNBALANCED UNGA RESOLUTIONS TARGETING ISRAEL
|“Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People” – A/71/L.18
Plenary Vote: 100 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Guatemala, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 55 abstentions,
|22 OIC countries including Saudi Arabia & Sudan, and others||“Noting with deep regret the onset of the fiftieth year of the Israeli occupation, and stressing the urgent need for efforts to reverse the negative trends on the ground…
“[R]equests the Committee to continue [its work] to mobilize international solidarity and support for the Palestinian people…”
|Biased committee is one of the veteran pillars of the UN’s anti-Israel infrastructure. It is the only GA human rights committee devoted to a single cause. Its reports systematically turn a blind eye to Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians. Committee’s mandate concerns Israeli actions only and is inherently prejudiced and one-sided.|
|“Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat” – A/71/L.19
Plenary Vote: 98 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Guatemala, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 57 abstentions.
|22 OIC countries including Saudi Arabia & Sudan, and others||“Requests the Division to continue to monitor developments relevant to the question of Palestine, to organize international meetings and activities in support of the Committee’s mandate … to liaise and cooperate with civil society and parliamentarians, including through the Working Group of the Committee and its associated ‘UN Platform for Palestine’, to develop and expand the ‘Question of Palestine’ website and the documents collection of the United Nations Information System on the Question of Palestine…”
||The DPR serves the biased special committee and is dedicated to spreading anti-Israel propaganda the world over. Its 16-member staff is grossly disproportionate to the UN’s other four divisions which cover enormous geographical regions. The DPR’s work is counter-productive to the peace process and seeks to coordinate international boycotts against Israel instead of seeking bridges for peace. Excludes from its events any NGO that declines to swear fealty to its hardline politics.|
|“Special information program on the question of Palestine of the Department of Public Information of the Secretariat” – A/71/L.20
153 votes in favour to 7 against (Australia, Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States), with 7 abstentions (Cameroon, Honduras, Nauru, Paraguay, Togo, Tonga, Vanuatu).
|22 OIC countries including Saudi Arabia & Sudan, and others||“Recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory…”
“Requests the Department to continue… its special information programme for 2017-2018, in particular, to organize and promote fact-finding news missions for journalists to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel…”
|The program is one more example of how the neutral UN secretariat is forcibly co-opted by the anti-Israeli forces at the UN. The program eschews a balanced approach by overtly choosing the Palestinian over Israeli narrative, ignoring terrorism against Israeli men, women and children, and other daily realities of Israeli life. Resources devoted to anti-Israel propaganda are taken away from other worthy causes.|
|“Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine” -A/71/L.21
Plenary Vote: 153 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 7 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Honduras, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Tonga, Vanuatu).
|22 OIC countries including Saudi Arabia & Sudan, and others||“Expressing its grave concern about tensions, provocations and incitement regarding the holy places of Jerusalem, including the Haram al-Sharif, and urging restraint and respect for the sanctity of the holy sites by all sides…”
||Blames Israel only for lack of peace. Expresses “concern” that 69 years have passed since the 1947 partition plan, suggesting Israel is at fault when it was the Arab states and Palestinian Arab leaders who uniformly rejected that resolution and initiated hostilities the day after its adoption. Text is redundant to several other resolutions and serves no effect other than demonization. References to terror fail to name its perpetrators, whereas Israel is named and blamed throughout. Uses only the Islamic term “Haram al-Sharif” when referring to Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, ignoring Jewish and Christian religion and history.|
|“Jerusalem” – A/71/L.22
Plenary Vote: 149 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, United States), with 8 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Vanuatu).
|23 OIC countries including Saudi Arabia & Sudan, and others||“Expressing its grave concern, in particular, about tensions, provocations and incitement regarding the holy places of Jerusalem, including the Haram al Sharif, and urging restraint and respect for the sanctity of the holy sites by all sides…”||Implies that Israeli administration of Jerusalem hinders freedom of religion when in fact the opposite is true—before 1967, Jordan destroyed Jewish holy sites and denied access to Jews, while under Israel all faiths have access to the city and enjoy full freedoms. Uses of uniformly harsh language against Israel that is not used even against regimes like Iran. Repeated passage of annual resolution to address acts from 1980, or matters already covered in other similar resolutions, serve no purpose other than demonization. Uses only the Islamic term “Haram al-Sharif” to describe Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, ignoring Jewish and Christian religion and history.|
|“The Syrian Golan” – A/71/L.8
Plenary Vote: 103 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau, United States), with 56 abstentions.
|27 OIC countries including Saudi Arabia & Sudan, and others||“Deeply concerned that Israel has not withdrawn from the Syrian Golan, which has been under occupation since 1967, contrary to the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions…”||Redundant to A/C.4/71/L.15 on “the Occupied Syrian Golan.” Oblivious to genocidal massacres taking place now in Syria and its security implications for Israel and the civilians of the Golan Heights. Ignores Syria’s history of shelling Israeli communities, its leader’s calls for a “war of annihilation” against Israel, and Syria’s 1967 aggression that led to its loss of the territory.|