That’s what I was trying to say…could have worded it better eh?
I could have been clearer too. I think we are saying the same thing.
Its a complicated, awful situation that I don’t think will get resolved in our lifetime. Plenty of blame to go round on this one.
3 Likes
In the current world that we live in, that’s a pretty poor reflection on the UN.
I cannot think that any sane person considers that Israel is (by far according to that chart) the worst human rights offender in the world.
1 Like
Probably more that the bulk of UN members steer clear of engaging in condemning a country on human rights ( realpolitik) and perhaps there is a high level of abstentions in votes.
Safety in numbers.
1 Like
So they are basically a waste of space…I thought the UN was supposed to be the body that ensured bad things were called out and stopped…but they’re too worried about politics?
I agree with you there.
I’m a little shocked, but not shocked, to see the U.S so low. Also shocked to see Syria so high considering they’ve barely had a functioning state in that time.
You’re shocked that the US is so low but have no comment about 0 condemnations for the likes of China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia?
The anomaly in the UN condemnation rates isn’t that certain states have such low rates of condemnation it’s that Israel has clearly been unfairly and unreasonably targeted by the UN.
Not to diminish any valid criticism.
The only question is why?
2 Likes
I would have thought those were self explanatory
And yet you felt the need to mention the US but not the others.
Two of those nations you mentioned hold veto power, I don’t know about SA but they weild significant influence in the Middle East.
I’m shocked by the U.S as
- they also hold veto power
- if other nations managed to get one through, why not more?
The Veto Power only applies to UN Security Council Resolutions so anything happening outside the UNSC is not affected.
Therefore any country can have one of these resolutions brought against them.
But then the politics comes into play.
As I said earlier, the UN is basically a waste of space when it comes to these type of issues.
Not the UN, but the member nations which have taken that position in regard to debates in the UNCHR system.
Members are less restrained in UNGA debates and resolutions which include human rights.
Australia is one of over thirty UN members to establish a Representative Office in Ramallah. Some others have established offices elsewhere ( of less than diplomatic or consular status because of their non-recognition of Palestine as a State) .
But the big names like the UK and USA are missing,
Forgive my lesser grasp of these things…but that just sounds like dissembling to me.
The member nations are the UN.
Australia has not held back at national level in official voicing of concerns at documented human rights abuses, including by China.
At the UN level, there are a number of procedural manoeuvres to avoid an issue appearing on the agenda or being debated in the UN , or to impeded progress.
Not a veto as such, but a numbers game.
There is a UN Charter, UN treaties and a UN institutional structure.
The UN exists in its own right as an international legal institution.
Member States play the numbers and politics within that system
A bit odd to quote someone saying their issue is with Israeli’s, not Jews as evidence that they won’t accept Jews living there. Almost like you assume they’re one and the same…
On the Apartheid bit, what you say is true that there is not forced separation now. However, it is also true that there was in the past, and that its legacy and continuing behaviours do mean that although it is not forced segregation, there is legacy segregation and continued discrimination. As shown by the stats you put up where (for example) the Israeli Supreme Court’s arab share is nowhere near the percentage they represent of the population.
Most Israeli cities have either primarily Jewish or primarily Arab populations. Towns in Galilee, the so-called Little Triangle along the 1949 Armistice Line that delineated Israel’s borders, and the Negev region have mostly Arab populations. This continuing separation is due to factors including the legacy of restrictions imposed at the time of Israel’s founding, which outline where non–Jewish Israelis can live; separated schools; and labor laws that discriminated against Arabs, as well as prevailing prejudices against Arab citizens residing in Jewish neighborhoods.
“Technically you don’t have redlining, technically you don’t have formal, Jim Crow–type segregation. In practice you do,” says Palestinian American historian Rashid Khalidi. Still, this informal separation doesn’t prevail everywhere, Khalidi says. About one-tenth of the Arab citizens of Israel live in what are officially called “mixed” cities, where the populations are intermingled, such as Haifa and Lod (the Hebrew name for the city Arabs call al-Lyd).
It is also true the laws governing Israeli settlers in the West Bank are very different from Palestinians there. Some who use the word apartheid are referring to conditions there.
2 Likes
I find this a bit odd. Many in those countries now see our behaviour towards the indigenous peoples by the UK as terrible. It was occupation, a dose of genocide and systemic abuse, discrimination and destruction of culture in all (? maybe less so NZ) those countries from the time European settlers arrived in them. If you want to compare Israel to those behaviours, that would be seeming to say that Israel is evil (which the Settlers undoubtedly were when considered as a whole rather than individuals). Or at least their acts were when considered with a modern lense.
What separates Israel from those countries is that we believe we’re more enlightened now, so similar acts should not occur, and that Israel is explicitly continuing the occupation. You’re not including those areas in Israel, but you’re not letting them self-govern either. You’re still an invading force controlling the area by force. Obviously, Israel believes it is justified in those positions, but that is very different from Australia, USA, Canada, NZ where those indigenous populations are now part of the countries (albeit, often still facing discrimination but not military occupation and separate laws).
Agree with this. Religion is tied in, but at it’s heart this is about control and defence.
Although religion really rears its head when anyone starts discussing Jerusalem.
3 Likes
I agree with your post but would argue the establishment of the state of Israel was for a homeland for the Jews. That’s a religious underpinning. Now its about control and defence.
And yes Jerusalem is the most difficult of all and at its heart is religion - it cannot be divided.
The 35th special session of the UN Human Rights Council has adopted a resolution to investigate human rights abuses in Iran.
The Council is comprised of 47 members, elected for a fixed term.
Reportedly, the vote was 25 to 6 , with 15 abstentions.
The proposal was put forward by Germany and Iceland.
Australia’s statement condemning abuses in Iran is available on the DFAT site ( the date is wrong - for 2021, read 2022)
1 Like