Nikki Haley delivers BOLD And FEARLESS remarks at UN Security Council meeting

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley delivers

her final remarks at UN Security Council meeting.

PA to Lead World Group of Developing Nations

The "Group of 77” (G-77) developing nations is a powerful entity on the UN and the international stage. It is the largest Third World bloc, today numbering 134 member states with 80 percent of the world’s population. The "State of Palestine” – the Palestinian Authority – is set to chair the G-77 for a year beginning on January 1, 2019, and will likely use this clout to advance its own political agenda. The Palestinian Authority should not be allowed to chair the group due to incompatibilities between the principles of the G-77 and the laws, policies, and actions of the Palestinian Authority. These incompatibilities are evident when juxtaposing the Palestinian Authority’s laws, policies, and actions with some of the fundamental principles of the G-77, as delineated in their 2014 declaration, "For a New World Order for Living Well.” These principles include gender equality, improving the practice of democracy, eradication of poverty, coexistence with the environment, and fighting corruption. This study’s findings show that the Palestinians have violated over two dozen articles of the 2014 declaration. By appointing the Palestinians as chairman, the G-77 is sending a message that abusive, undemocratic, corrupt governance is entirely permissible and even rewarded. The G-77 should immediately annul the Palestinian appointment, and instead elect one of its numerous other members who would be much more suitable for the position. If the Palestinian Authority were to change its method of government to more closely align with the principles of the G-77, their nomination could be reconsidered.

The UN: Abbas’s Palestinian playground

For full article by Yisrael Medad  https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-un-abbas-playground/ 

(October 2, 2018 ) 

How important is the Temple Mount?  Ask Mahmoud Abbas. Elected leader in 2009, with no elections since then, of the Palestinian Authority that purports to be a state (but can’t even extend effectively its rule over Gaza).

Bottom of Form

According to the Haaretz version of his speech at the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday last week, he said:

“And you might note, ladies and gentlemen, that the Israeli settlers and even the Israeli army on every single day; they are committing acts of blasphemy against our holy sites, especially Al-Aqsa mosque.”

The media supporting the P.A. regularly employs purposeful terminology so as to distort and demonize Jews. One recent headline published during the Sukkot holiday reads: “Over 500 Israeli settlers storm Al-Aqsa.” Indeed, “storm” is their preferred word-of-choice, intimating that Jews as Jews should not be there at all, and that they are somehow breaking in illegally. Another referred to “religious rituals” as if they were witches from Macbeth.

Interestingly, that section was not in the official WAFA version.

By the way, Jews do not, indeed cannot, enter the Temple Mount compound daily, unlike prior to 2000. Almost 160 days in the year the Temple Mount are off-limits to Jewish visitors for various reasons.

But that was but one part of Abbas’s litany of lies.

He also touched on the Law of Israel as a nation-state and declared:

“This racist law talks about what is called the ‘land of Israel.’ Can you ask the Israeli government what exactly constitutes the ‘land of Israel’? What are the ‘borders’ of the State of Israel? I challenge anyone to tell us what they are.”

If one reads the Basic Law of the Palestinian Authority, no exact borders of a proposed Palestinian state exist. Worse, all we are informed geographically is that “Palestine is part of the large Arab world.”

In another version, we read of another land mass undefined: “On the land of the fathers and forefathers, the land of heavenly Messages … ,” but then deeper into the document, we read, “Its territory is an indivisible whole with its boundaries, as they existed on the eve of 4 June 1967.” And yet, Judea and Samaria were part of Jordan, illegally occupied and annexed, and Gaza was under Egyptian military rule. We also need not forget that the U.N.’s Resolution 242 does not mention Palestine as a state or other political entity.

So, what is Abbas claiming?

Quite simply, he is engaged in national-identity negation.

A bit later on in his address, Abbas notes that the Arabs of Palestine are “an indigenous people and our roots are deep across 5,000 years.” Arab collective identity within the general area of historic Palestine is 1,380 years old. Arabs may have been engaged in commerce or pilgrimage before 638 C.E. (and prior to them assuming an Islamic ethos), but to claim a 5,000-year history, even as Canaanites or Jebusites or even Natufians are false, ridiculous and outlandish suggestions.

What does Abbas mean when he said peace must include “an independent Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and not some place in East Jerusalem as its capital, and with all of its holy sites?” Do all holy sites refer to just Islamic sites? What about Christian or Jewish sites, and the claim that one cannot be Palestinian if one is Jewish? Of course, since Abbas and company promote a form of reconstructionism that suggests the Western Wall is actually the Al-Buraq tethering post, and outright denies of the 800-year existence of two Jewish Temples on the Temple Mount—despite their explicit mention in the Koran—perhaps Abbas really does disavow anything Jewish about Jerusalem.

One last excerpt of reveals Abbas’s strategy of self-denial, on the one hand, and his assumption that all will believe him no matter how pejorative he is on the other:

“We resist this colonial, settler Israeli occupation through the legitimate means created by this international organization. Foremost among these is peaceful, popular resistance as we witness today in the Great March of Return in Gaza.”

Incendiary kites, terror tunnels, sniper fire, tossing of grenades, IEDs, infiltration and more at the Gaza border occur almost daily, not to mention mortars, rockets and missiles.

But Abbas knows that the United Nations is his playground, his theater. He can be elected, as he was just now, to the Group of 77 with impunity despite his words and his actions. And his stage is becoming increasingly immoral, malevolent and extremely hazardous, revealed by the applause Abbas received from that seemingly august, peace-loving body.

It is that applause that assign to his appearances the tragicomic label.

What Will Netanyahu Reveal in the UN?

Mossad chief Yossi Cohen leaves for New York this week to brief senior UN officials and others about Iran's actions in the Middle East. The purpose of his trip is to reinforce the Prime Minister who flew to the United Nations General Assembly today.

The Prime Minister's Office hinted that Netanyahu would surprise the world in his speech as the he is preparing to deliver to the United Nations in 2 days time.

I hear that Iran is going to be the dominant subject and Prime Minister Netanyahu is going to reveal Iranian secrets that they do not want the world to know about.

Watch this space for ant earth shattering news 

Lies, Lies and More Lies

The following is from a friend of mine which reflects wide ranging support.

Abbas, the Palestinian leader, the guy with whom we are to make peace, addressed the Security Council about a month ago. As one reads the comments on his speech and the quotes from it, the extent of the lies spread by the Palestinians, with Abbas at the helm, once again boggle the mind.

Although Israel is of course, like any other country, has its faults, the entire picture and even every negative fact about Israel spread by Abbas and his mates, is just one huge lie . The extent of the lies is just beyond the comprehension of the western mind. Forget about the "inaccuracies" sprouted by well-known politicians  here - they're not in the same league as he is. They sometimes tell the truth! This is a unique phenomenon.

Just to touch on one example from his speech - the most impressive (by a hair's breadth) for me. He claimed that " Palestinians youths are raised in “an environment of tolerance, coexistence of civilizations and nondiscrimination". This is like stating adamantly that ISIS teaches its followers  - guess what? - "tolerance, coexistence of civilizations and nondiscrimination". We regularly see quotes from their schoolbooks in which maths is taught using sums about how many Israelis a Palestinian kills in various circumstances and how many martyrs go to heaven because of killing an Israeli and on and on, plus the young kids' holiday camps where they learn how to do it, and of course to hate Jews and Israelis so that their greatest feat will be to become a martyr as above.... and so on. Beyond comprehension? Well, it worked under the Nazis and it's working for the Palestinian youth. New heights in the art of lying....

While many pretend that these are the facts while knowing the opposite, there are also many who in good faith, and wanting to do good for the underdog, lap it up and set out to correct the horrors imposed by Israel on the Palestinians (although they don't seem to care much about all the wrongs being done elsewhere in the world against minorities all over, but we won't flog that dead horse here again).

When and if you look through the editorial from our local paper, you'll see lies, including the above-quoted, which are so preposterous any normal human being would be too embarrassed to come out with them, and any normal human being would chuck him out and say "come on, cut out the bullshit - who do you think we are, total idiots?"  But nobody says it. Maybe I'M on the wrong planet.

I confess to getting a bit frustrated sometimes....

UN to Blacklist IDF for Child Abuse

Is this a joke or not?  Yes, the earth is flat, right is wrong, left is right. Who is prepared around the world to say "the emperor has no clothes?" It seems only Trump for all his twisting and weaving is calling a spade a bl---dy shovel.

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) is spearheading a campaign to have Israel included on a UN blacklist of “grave” violators of children’s rights.

NGO Monitor, the watchdog that exposed this scandal, explained that this political agenda is a primary facet of UNICEF’s activities relating to Israel, completely inconsistent with its mandate of “child protection” and its guidelines for neutrality and impartiality.

NGO Monitor said that UNICEF’s partners for this campaign are radical “advocacy” non-governmental organizations (NGOs)., which play an integral role in carrying out UNICEF’s anti-Israel campaign and receive substantial funding from UNICEF to do so.

The UN blacklist consists almost entirely of terror groups and militias from failed states.

“In essence, by pushing for the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) inclusion on the list, UNICEF and its NGO partners are claiming that Israel’s army is equivalent to ISIS [Islamic State], Boko Haram, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda,” 

Several UNICEF partners recommended inclusion of the IDF on the UN blacklist, but absurdly claimed they lacked sufficient evidence to recommend inclusion of the PFLP or the Hamas terror group.

While seeking to besmirch the IDF, UNICEF is simultaneously ignoring real crime committed by the Palestinians.

A key component of the UN’s Children and Armed Conflict campaign is to end the exploitation and use of children as combatants and child soldiers. Although Palestinian armed groups routinely use children in this way, there is little evidence that UNICEF funding is devoted towards exposing or ending this practice.

For more on this nonsense see https://unitedwithisrael.org/un-body-launches-campaign-to-blacklist-idf-for-child-abuse/?

The UN Fraud

UN Watch is an  NGO fighting the battle for Israel in the United Nations. Here are just three examples of their wonderful work on Israel’s behalf in the most biased international arena.

1. When UNRWA launched a global campaign showing 11-year-old girl “Aya from Gaza” in a bombed-out building—portraying Israel as a cruel oppressor of Palestinian children—UN Watch exposed a fraud: the photo was actually from Syria! The story went viral online. UNRWA suffered massive embarrassment, and was forced to remove the photo worldwide.

2. When the U.N. held its 'Hate Israel Day,' we brought the Son of Hamas to deliver an epic speech exposing Palestinian crimes. He stunned the assembly into silence, and literally caused heads to turn. The video has been seen more than 8 million times on Facebook and YouTube. Israel’s prime minister called it “an extraordinary moment of truth at the United Nations.”

3. When Arab states accused Israel of Apartheid, I took the floor at the U.N. to remind the world that “Israel’s 1.5 million Arabs enjoy full rights to vote and to be elected in the Knesset; they work as doctors and lawyers; they serve on the Supreme Court.” Then I asked the accusers: “How many Jews live in your countries? Once upon a time, the Middle East was full of Jews. Algeria had 140,000 Jews. Algeria, where are your Jews? Egypt used to have 75,000 Jews. Where are your Jews?"  The speech went viral—viewed more than 5 million times—and continues to reverberate.

All Aboard the UN Titanic

Israeli laughs last at UNESCO antisemitism

What Goes for UNESCO Goes also for the UN

By Alan Baker  November 2, 2017

http://www.jpost.com/opinion/what-goes-for-unesco-goes-also-for-the-un-513215 

The entire UN human-rights assistance machinery has now been formally and officially recruited and financed to streamline the harassment and persecution of Israel.

Citing “the need for fundamental reform in the organization, and continuing anti-Israel bias at UNESCO,” the US State Department notified UNESCO director-general Irina Bokova on October 12 of the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the organization, effective December 31, 2018.

This decision stemmed from repeated Israel-bashing by UNESCO, notably since 2011, when the Palestinian Authority sought and won admission to UNESCO as a full member-state, despite the fact that there exists no sovereign Palestinian state. The State Department saw this as “regrettable, premature” and harmful to “our shared goal to a comprehensive, just and lasting peace.”

Indeed, Washington cut off US funding for UNESCO under a law that prohibits the US government from funding any UN agency that admits a non-state as a member. American funding, once accounting for more than one-fifth of UNESCO’s budget, hasn’t been restored since 2011.

As reported in The Washington Post on October 12, Haley said the United States will evaluate all UN agencies “through the same lens.” Logically then, the conclusion could only be that the UN organization itself – decayed, flawed, manipulated and abused even more so than UNESCO – should be the next in line for a mass withdrawal by responsible states.

More than 20 annual Israel- bashing resolutions specifically singling out and condemning Israel are adopted by an automatic majority of Muslim and Arab states, often with the support of other states, including Europeans.

While the UN may be the “only club in town,” no one can doubt that it has veered far from the noble intentions of its founding fathers. The manner in which Israel is treated in the UN and in its various specialized agencies and other UN bodies is the very antithesis of such purposes and principles. Isolating Israel and preventing its full involvement in the UN organs (including the Security Council and International Court of Justice, where Israel has never been elected to serve) is in clear violation of the first principle of the UN Charter declaring the “sovereign equality of all its Members.”

Perhaps the straw that is breaking the camel’s back is an amazing, recent joint UN-Palestinian project for the years 2018-2022, the title of which conceals its true intentions: “UN Development Assistant Framework – State of Palestine.”

The UN has committed to channel no less than $1.3 billion into various UN agency signatories to the framework, in order to assist the Palestinian leadership in advancing its diplomatic warfare against Israel.

The project aims to finance “training, capacity-building and technical advice” with a view to assisting “Palestinian victims” to exploit international accountability mechanisms and to prosecute “Israeli violations of international law.”

In other words, the entire UN human-rights assistance machinery has now been formally and officially recruited and financed to streamline the harassment and persecution of Israel.

Logic would assume that the US, Israel and the major European powers should now take decisive action to halt this deterioration.

First and foremost, they should each dock $1.3b. from their membership fees as a demonstration of their disgust at the UN’s official policy of Israel-bashing. What is good for UNESCO should be all the more relevant to the UN itself.

Historical Significance of the Balfour Declaration

The following points regarding the significance of ther Balfour declation were compiled by Dore Gold, the President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs since 2000. In June 2015, he was appointed Director-General of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where he served until October 2016.

On July 24, 1922, the British pledge to help build the Jewish National Home was explicitly incorporated into the text of the League of Nations Mandate, which called for "putting into effect” its terms. The Balfour Declaration thus was transformed into a binding obligation under international law. Moreover, it was approved unanimously by the Council of the League of Nations, made up of 51 member states. The Balfour Declaration is important because it recognizes the historical bond of the Jewish People to the Holy Land, a bond which existed long before the declaration. What was significant was its public and formal recognition and its incorporation into international law. In his testimony before the Peel Commission on Jan. 7, 1937, David Ben-Gurion noted: "I say on behalf of the Jews that the Bible is our Mandate, the Bible which was written by us, in our own language, in Hebrew in this very country. That is our Mandate. It is only recognition of this right which was expressed in the Balfour Declaration.” Thus, the British Mandate and the Balfour Declaration, upon which it was based, did not create Jewish historical rights, but rather recognized a pre-existing right. The historic Jewish attachment to the Land of Israel is the real claim to statehood. The tendency to justify Zionism on the basis of the Holocaust is totally misconceived. Not only was Zionism a thriving and successful movement prior to this tragedy, but the Holocaust destroyed its largest human reservoir and severely set it back. The Jewish population of Mandatory Palestine contributed large numbers of volunteers and committed its manpower, agriculture, manufacturing and expertise to the Allied cause. Unfortunately, this contribution was soon forgotten. When the State of Israel was born in 1948, it was invaded by a coalition of Arab armies which received their training and weapons from the main colonial powers: Britain and France. Ironically, the rise of Israel was an anti-colonial development accelerating the demise of European colonial empires. Israel's enemies seek to misrepresent and falsify the historical facts. They try to portray modern Israel as a product of European colonialism, with no roots in the land and no historical rights. Modern Israel is the heir and successor to ancient Israel. The Balfour Declaration recognized this bond.

Visit of UN Secretary General to Israel

This week UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres is conducting his first visit to Israel since his appointment. While in Israel the Secretary General will meet with PM Netanyahu, Defense Minister Liberman and senior figures from the IDF, as well as President Rivlin.

Following are the key elements of Israel's position on the substantive issues:

·      Israel sees this visit as a welcome opportunity for a new beginning in relations with the world body, and welcome the Secretary General as a friend.

·      The UN's and its agencies' obsessive pre-occupation with Israel must end if the world body is to make a constructive contribution to peace and stability in the region. 

The Secretary General must be challenged on the full array of problematic UN activity:

o   The UN  Human Rights Council shameless singling out of Israel

o   The repeated, outrageous UNESCO decisions rewriting the history Jerusalem and Hebron to exclude the Jewish people

o   The annual circus of anti-Israel resolutions in the General Assembly and the permanent committees they create.

o   The discriminatory anti-Israel activities of different U.N. bodies and their "industry" of reports, declarations and decisions.

Further the Security Council must act more resolutely to implement its resolutions forbidding Hezbollah rearmament and entrenchment in southern Lebanon. The Security Council must act to prevent a deterioration of the already dangerous situation.

The UN must act to stop the ongoing Palestinian encouragement of terror against Israeli civilians - online, through the payment of stipends to convicted terrorists and their families, through naming town squares after murderers. These fundamental obstacles to any kind of progress with the Palestinians.

Israel has the experience and the ability to make a meaningful contribution to the UN in many fields:

o   in cyber-security, water technologies, women's' empowerment, disabled rights, combatting desertification, and more. Israel is also a partner in the global effort to combat terror. 

UNHRC declares Israel No. 1 Human Rights Violator

Visiting Israel this week, Nikki Haley, US Ambassador to the UN,  stated “President Trump and I think that you (Netanyahu) have changed the discourse in the UN, have drawn new standards, and everybody's taking them up, and that's great. I think it makes a world of difference, both for Israel and the US. Again, I felt that the UN would collapse, you know, that whole scaffolding of lies would just collapse. I think you've put in that simple word, truth."

 Anne Bayefsky of the Truro Institute writes:-

https://tinyurl.com/y6uze46h 

According to the U.N.'s top human rights body, Israel is the worst human rights violator in the world today.

President Trump’s administration is currently a member of this reprehensible body. The Bush administration refused to join the Council when it was created in 2006.  

On March 31, 2009, President Obama – fully aware of its entrenched anti-Israel and anti-Jewish bias – made jumping on board one of his very first foreign policy moves. Moreover, in an unscrupulous attempt to control his successor, the former President obtained yet another three-year term for the United States on the Council that began on January 1, 2017.

If President Trump were to choose a swift departure from the Council as one of his very first foreign policy moves, it would demonstrate a principled reset of American values and priorities on the world stage. March 31, 2017, the anniversary of Obama’s decision, would be an auspicious date to make that point.

The reasons for leaving are many. Here are a few:

The Council plays a leading role in the demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state by the United Nations.

In its history, the Council has condemned Israel more often than any other of the 192 UN states. Comparative totals after this session’s pogrom tell the story:  Israel – 78 resolutions and decisions, Syria – 29, North Korea – 9, and Iran – 6.  As for Saudi Arabia, Russia, and China, there’s nothing at all.

Think of it this way:  500,000 dead in Syria, forced starvation and mass torture in North Korea, systematic and lethal oppression in Iran, gender apartheid in Saudi Arabia, and an elementary lack of basic freedoms affecting over a billion in Russia and China.

But at the U.N. Human Rights Council, little democratic Israel is the problem.

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley rightly objected to a recent UN report charging Israel with “apartheid.” But the malicious slur of “apartheid Israel” is a staple of the Council’s fixed agenda, which dedicates time for hate-speech and incitement at every session, and transmits it around the world via a U.N. webcast. Contrary to rule of law 101, the Council has an investigator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a license only to report on Israel.

 The “Human Rights” Council is now the principal U.N. engine of “BDS” – the campaign to boycott, divest and sanction Israel.  Economic strangulation is Plan B for Israel’s enemies, war and terrorism having so far failed to rid the world of a Jewish state.  The Council has sponsored the creation of a blacklist of companies around the world ‘directly or indirectly’ doing business with Israeli settlements – in effect, Israel period.

Make no mistake: there is no middle ground. Staying on the Council means American taxpayers will pay for the production of a blacklist of American companies doing business with Israel. The State Department representative told the Council Friday that it will not provide information for the blacklist. But, of course, the U.N. will simply get what it wants from the Palestinian entourage.

As Freedom House attests, less than half the members of the General Assembly are fully free democracies. The majority aren't going to create a club they can’t join.

It is understandable why Council members like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Cuba and China want to masquerade as human rights authorities. But why would the United States want to legitimize this charade by standing beside them?

Sure, we voted against – and we lost. In fact, of the 15 resolutions this session adopted  by vote, the United States lost 12 of them.  Setting ourselves up for target practice is not a foreign policy in which Americans can take pride. 

Mr. President, the UN “Human Rights” Council, is not your place.

UN to blacklist Israeli firms operating beyond Green Line

In the UN the Israel bashing game goes on and on. Richard Falk continues his "blame Israel for everything" campaign and now wants the Human Rights Council to ban doing business with YIsraeli companies in Judea and Samaria. The trouble is he has not read the regulations controlling the activities of the UNHRC

From Yisrael Hayom the following letter sets out the continuing double standards and anti-Israel obsession in the UN 

The United Nations Human Rights Council is reportedly working on a "blacklist" of Israeli companies operating beyond the Green Line with aim of declaring them illegal.
The list, an initiative prompted by the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, is scheduled to be released in March, but a source familiar with the issue told Israel Hayom Monday it may only come out in June.

The move reportedly aims to bar the presence of any Israeli company beyond the Green Line. If adopted, the list could deem even private security firms protecting Israelis in Judea and Samaria from terrorist organizations, as illegal.

The list is said to be the brainchild of known BDS activist Richard Falk, formerly the U.N.'s special rapporteur on Palestinian human rights. Falk first came up with the idea for the blacklist six years ago, while in office, and he has been strongly advocating for it ever since, this time with the support of several Arab U.N. members.

In an effort to thwart this initiative, NGO Monitor, a watchdog group that promotes greater transparency among foreign-funded Israeli nongovernmental organizations, has recently sent the Human Rights Council a position paper explaining that such a list would be a violation of international law and the UNHRC's own guidelines against discrimination based on national origin, arguing that as no such blacklists exist for any other conflict zone in the world, it would in effect be targeting Jewish-owned businesses.

"The U.N. Human Rights Council discriminates against Israel by applying double standards to international law," the position paper noted.

"The list may also harm companies conducting business with Israel, which is consistent with the ultimate goal of [the BDS movement], which is isolating and attacking the State of Israel and undermine the Jewish people's right to self-determination."

NGO Monitor's legal adviser Anne Herzberg called the initiative "another chapter in the U.N.'s double standards and long and shameful, anti-Israel obsession."

The Dangers of UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016)

by Amb. Alan Baker    

         

•            The Palestinian leadership, having initiated the UN Security Council resolution regarding Israel's settlement policy, is celebrating its adoption on Dec. 23, 2016, as an affirmation of its claims against Israel.

•            Israel sees this resolution as a major impediment to continued peace negotiations in light of the fact that it bypasses the negotiation process in an attempt to prejudge central issues that are on the negotiating table.

•            The resolution (as all previous resolutions regarding Israel) was adopted under the sixth chapter of the UN Charter (Pacific Settlement of Disputes) and as such is not mandatory. Its determinations as to the lack of legal validity of Israel's settlements are no more than declaratory.

•            Expressions not previously included in major Security Council resolutions regarding the peace process, such as "two-state solution based on the 1967 lines," as well as references to the "Arab Peace Initiative" and the "principle of land for peace" as additional bases for peace, clearly are intended to instill concepts that have never been agreed-upon elements in the negotiating process.

•            The reference to the "4 June 1967 lines" as a basis for negotiations would appear to be a new element, running counter to the 1967 Security Council resolution 242, which is the basis for all of the Arab-Israeli peace process, which calls for negotiation of "secure and recognized boundaries." The Israeli-Palestinian Oslo Accords make no specific reference to the 1967 lines. As such this reference would appear to be an attempt to prejudge or unduly influence the negotiating issue of borders.

•            The outrage voiced by Israel stems from five basic components:

1.           The text of the resolution, which is unprecedented in the extent of the      condemnatory language used.

2.           Israel's frustration at the irresponsible behavior by the Obama   administration.

3.           The evident irreversibility of the resolution and the potential for future       damage.

4.           The imbalance between accusations of Israeli violations of the Oslo Accords and the  Palestinians' blatant violations of international law in their incitement and payment to  terrorists.

5.           The issue of settlements is not the core of the conflict. It remains the Palestinians' refusal to recognize the Jewish State and its right to any part of the land west of the Jordan River.

At the U.N., Only Israel Is an ‘Occupying Power’

New research  conducted shows that the U.N.’s focus on Israel not only undermines the organization’s legitimacy regarding the Jewish state. It also has apparently made the U.N. blind to the world’s many situations of occupation and settlements.

The research shows that the U.N. uses an entirely different rhetoric and set of legal concepts when dealing with Israel compared with situations of occupation or settlements world-wide. For example, Israel is referred to as the “Occupying Power” 530 times in General Assembly resolutions. Yet in seven major instances of past or present prolonged military occupation—Indonesia in East Timor, Turkey in northern Cyprus, Russia in areas of Georgia, Morocco in Western Sahara, Vietnam in Cambodia, Armenia in areas of Azerbaijan, and Russia in Ukraine’s Crimea—the number is zero. The U.N. has not called any of these countries an “Occupying Power.” Not even once.

It gets worse. Since 1967, General Assembly resolutions have referred to Israeli-held territories as “occupied” 2,342 times, while the territories mentioned above are referred to as “occupied” a mere 16 times combined. The term appears in 90% of resolutions dealing with Israel, and only in 14% of the much smaller number of resolutions dealing with the all the other situations, a difference that vastly surpasses the threshold of statistical significance. Similarly, Security Council resolutions refer to the disputed territories in the Israeli-Arab conflict as “occupied” 31 times, but only a total of five times in reference to all seven other conflicts combined.

General Assembly resolutions employ the term “grave” to describe Israel’s actions 513 times, as opposed to 14 total for all the other conflicts, which involve the full gamut of human-rights abuses, including allegations of ethnic cleansing and torture. Verbs such as “condemn” and “deplore” are sprinkled into Israel-related resolutions tens more times than they are in resolutions about other conflicts, setting a unique tone of disdain.

Israel has been reminded by resolutions against it of the country’s obligations under the Geneva Conventions about 500 times since 1967—as opposed to two times for the other situations.

In particular, the resolutions refer to Article 49(6), which states that the “Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” This is the provision that the entire legal case against Israel settlements is based upon. Yet no U.N. body has ever invoked Article 49(6) in relation to any of the occupations mentioned above.

This even though, as Eugene Kontorovich shows in a new research article, “Unsettled: A Global Study of Settlements in Occupied Territories,” all these situations have seen settlement activity, typically on a scale that eclipses Israel’s. However, the U.N. has only used the legally loaded word “settlements” to describe Israeli civilian communities (256 times by the GA and 17 by the Security Council). Neither body has ever used that word in relation to any other country with settlers in occupied territory.

The findings don’t merely quantify the U.N.’s double standard. The evidence shows that the organization’s claim to represent the interest of international justice is hollow, because the U.N. has no interest in battling injustice unless Israel is the country accused.

At a time of serious global crises—from a disintegrating Middle East to a land war and belligerent occupation in Europe—the leaders of the free world cannot afford to tempt the U.N. into indulging its obsessions. Especially when the apparent consequence of such scapegoating is that the organization ignores other situations and people in desperate need of attention.

Eugene Kontorovich, a professor at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law, heads the international law department at the Kohelet Policy Forum, a think tank where Ms. Grunseid is a researcher.