It seems totally reasonable (if one can considerable any
international action against Israel as reasonable) that the Schabas committee
is not a commission of inquiry but rather a committee of foregone conclusions
pretending to conduct an investigation before publishing its conclusions. Thus
Israel has stated that it will not
cooperate with the committee established by the UN Human Rights Council to
investigate the conflict between Hamas and Israel (summer 2014). This decision
was made taking into account the council's obsessive hostility towards Israel,
the committee's one-sided mandate and the publicly expressed anti-Israel
positions of the committee's chair.
While Hamas launched thousands of rockets at Israel, the
Human Rights Council decided in advance that Israel was guilty and established
a committee to act as a rubber stamp for its predetermined positions. This is
evident in the fact that the committee was instructed to investigate only the
events occurring after the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers by
Hamas terrorists. Further evidence of bias can be seen in the appointment of
Prof. William Schabas - who is known for his anti-Israel views - to head the
committee.
Many examples of Schabas' anti-Israel statements are
recorded:
a) 7 January 2013: "My favorite would be Netanyahu within
the dock of the International Criminal Court" (in connection with
Operation Cast Lead in 2009, when Netanyahu was head of the opposition).
b) On 26 December 2010 he wrote: Netanyahu is "the single
individual most likely to threaten the survival of Israel."
c) Again in connection with Operation Cast Lead, Schabas said,
"Why are we prosecuting the president of Sudan for Darfur at the
International Criminal Court, and not President Peres for Gaza?"
d) Schabas has also defended past president of Iran,
Ahmadinejad, and claimed that his repeated calls "to wipe Israel off the
map" were not calls to genocide, but merely "political
opinions".
e) In media interviews, Schabas refuses to call Hamas a terror
organization, although it is defined as such in the United States, the European
Union, Britain, Canada, and numerous other countries.
f) The Council's obsessive treatment of Israel since its
establishment, revealed in its disproportionate focus on Israel and its unjust
accusations against it.
The unreasonable mandate of the committee and appointment of
its chairman prove once again that the Human Rights Council has betrayed its
original purpose - instead of investigating war crimes perpetrated by terror
organizations such as Hamas, the Council has again chosen to focus blame on
Israel while granting legitimacy to terrorism.
Israel has stated that it is committed to international law
and in all of its actions during Operation Protective Edge adhered to the
standards and rules incumbent upon states fighting terrorism and thus has been
confirmed by several independent military
sources. In contrast, Hamas deliberately committed heinous war crimes.
Israel has already set in motion investigations into the
events of Operation Protective Edge in accordance with the highest
international standards.
No comments:
Post a Comment