search
Christian Rudolf Hamann
Berlin, psychology, evolution

The UN’s Guilt for Terrorism

Historical background – Mandate period

Since its existence, the UN has passed more resolutions against Israel than against all other countries combined. These demonstrably violate its own charter as well as the principles of rational logic and fairness.1) But this partisanship was only the continuation of a torpedoeing of the Jewish homeland in Palestine by the mandate power Great Britain. Following simple psychological rules, its policy was absolutely unsuitable for creating harmony between Jews and Arabs.2)

According to Article 25 of the Mandate Treaty of July 1922, today’s Jordan, then Transjordan, formed the eastern part of Palestine, which was significantly larger, with over ¾ of the total area. However, because only a small Jewish population lived there, it was separated from the intended Jewish homeland in the west in September 1922 as the autonomous Emirate of Transjordan. Transjordan gained independence in 1946, two years before Israel.

But the historic decision of September 1922 remained incomplete, as the clear regulations regarding the Jewish homeland were neglected, which Article 2 of the Mandatory Treaty of July 1922 expressly requires: “The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, …”

By failing to clarify the claims of both sides, the territorial question in Palestine became a catastrophe that continues to this day. A responsible exercise of the Mandate would have required, when the (soon to become autonomous) Emirate of Transjordan was created in 1921, to present Transjordan as a purely Arab Palestine to all Arabs living in the Mandate area who did not want to live under Jewish sovereignty. Thus, the realization of the Jewish claim to the restoration of the historic homeland in Palestine was postponed indefinitely. This delay was psychologically devastating, encouraging the Arab side to adopt a revisionist attitude towards the Jew’s contractual claim and, since Israel’s foundation in May 1948, to endless revanchism.

The creation and expansion of a refugee problem

After 1948, the UN continued the British policy of grossly obstructing the Jewish homeland in Palestine. Since its measures also amounted to temporal procrastination and polarization between the population groups, little is now left of the timid Arab acceptance of the Jewish homeland at the beginning of the 1920s.

The UN’s counterproductive manipulations began in 1948/49, when it set up around 50 refugee camps for almost 750,000 Arab refugees. These people had, however, lost their homes as a result of a war that six Arab states had started with their attack on the newly founded Israel. Just as West Germany took in 14 to 15 million displaced persons from the East after 1945 and integrated them within a few years, the six aggressor states (including wealthy Saudi Arabia) were responsible for taking in and integrating the Palestine refugees.

By assuming this responsibility, the UN and its subsidiary organization UNRWA not only transformed a problem into a chronic state that normally resolves itself quickly, but also increased its extent to absurd levels over the decades. The original 750,000 refugees have now grown to almost 6 million – with almost no new refugee movements.3) This extreme demographic development was in particular the result of an atmosphere of liberation from personal responsibility in the UNRWA camps.

But self-responsibility is one of the most important principles of stability and should have been included as such in the text of the Charter. But even without being directly mentioned, it derives from the sovereign right of states according to Article 2. A state that claims non-interference in its actions must also take full responsibility for their results.

In contrast, the UN offers the Arabs a complete insurance package in addition to refugee aid, which also relieves them of any responsibility in terms of security policy in the dispute with Israel. In the countless resolutions on the Middle East conflict, it was not Arab violence that was admonished, but instead Israel’s self-defense, which should actually be protected under Article 51 of the UN Charter. In the absence of sanctions and other consequences, military aggression and never-ending terror could mutate into surreal zero-risk games of violence.4) Any UN resolution which was passed after one of the Middle East wars shows how they work.

When Egypt, Syria and other Arab countries unexpectedly launched the Yom Kippur War on October 6, 1973 with great numerical superiority, the UN Security Council saw no reason to act in its meeting on the Middle East conflict on October 8, nor in its meeting on October 11. In view of the rapid developments, this passivity represented a gross violation of Articles 24 and 36 of the Charter. Article 24 assigns primary responsibility for maintaining international peace to the Security Council. Article 36 calls on him to propose “appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment”. According to Article 24, from the Security Council is expected “… prompt and effective action…”

But only after the tide had turned, with Israeli troops crossing the Suez Canal on October 18 and advancing towards Cairo (and also in the north towards Damascus), Resolution 338 was hastily passed on October 22. This decreed an immediate ceasefire and called for subsequent negotiations.

These negotiations with Egypt were slow, but led to peace in 1979. In the almost 77 years of the Middle East conflict, however, this remained the only viable solution (while the Oslo Agreement led to a dead end). Even peace with Egypt would never have been achieved if Israel had followed the third provision of Resolution 338. Because this consisted – instead of the appropriate sharp condemnation of the peace-breaking Arab states – of a Reference to the anti-Israel Resolution 242, which was passed after the Six-Day War of 1967. In this resolution, the Jewish state was called upon to withdraw immediately – i.e. without any compensation – from the Sinai Peninsula, which it had just occupied. However, the demand was completely unrealistic. Historically, Strategic territorial gains have always been at the heart of warring parties’ efforts – with the conquered positions as the starting point for negotiations.

With Resolution 338, the Security Council violated the provisions of Article 36 by not proposing “appropriate procedures or methods of settlement” as required there, but demonstrably unsuitable ones. Forcing a withdrawal without conceptually considering the accompanying circumstances (which must include strategic necessities for defense) destroys the psychological prerequisites for productive negotiations, namely respect and the will for peace on the part of the losing side.

Despite the obvious peace-preventing effect of its inflationary resolutions against Israel, the UN repeats its calls for withdrawal like a mantra. In doing so, however, the UN has violated its own charter. Since 1948, the UN Security Council has been unwilling and/or unable to prevent the Arab side from its never-ending aggression against Israel, using Articles 24, 36 and 39-49 in particular, and has forced Israel into a permanent state of self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter.

In various resolutions, it has called on Israel to withdraw from occupied security zones such as that in southern Lebanon, thereby preventing it from adequately protecting its citizens from constant attacks from these areas. The inviolability of the state’s territory under Article 2 was thus given inappropriate priority over the right to self-defense under Article 51. – Of course, the inviolability of human beings in self-defense constitutes a higher legal good than the inviolability of the territory of attackers.

As a result of inadequate media coverage, this real context is kept outside the consciousness of Western citizens: Since around the year 2000, Hamas alone has fired about 10,000 rockets into Israeli territory – in the midst of peace, i.e. before the current 5th Middle East war. The attacks from Syria and Lebanon have also never stopped and have repeatedly forced Israel to intervene militarily in the territory of the neighboring states in question. This and the establishment of protective strips were warned against by the UN, without closing Israel’s security gap with appropriate measures against terrorist attacks.

The expensive puppet show with UNIFIL

The agitation at the UNRWA schools in the refugee camps in Lebanon brought forth a growing number of radicalized Muslims. These undermined the traditional harmony between Christians and Muslims, resulting in the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990).

This had serious effects. Firstly, persecution and refugee movements transformed the majorly Christian country into a Muslim one. Secondly, the EU countries took in Muslims as well as Christian refugees. Over the years, the autocratic leaders in the Islamic world must have realized that there is no more effective strategy for spreading Islam than to unleash crises, wars and civil wars in Muslim countries that trigger migration flows.

In this fatal detour, the well-intentioned steering of refugee flows to Western countries by organizations close to the UN unintentionally created a motive for unscrupulous Islamists to stir up unrest and violence.5)

In southern Lebanon, where Israel had temporarily set up a buffer zone to protect itself against terrorist attacks and shelling, the UN Security Council deployed the UNIFIL peacekeeping force in 1978 with Resolutions 425 and 426.

But as in the case of the UNRWA refugee camps, the problem was not only not solved, but could grow despite increasing efforts. Under the “supervision” of the peacekeeping force, terrorists were able to create a system of tunnels, weapons depots and combat posts in southern Lebanon and to repeatedly fire and advance into Israeli territory. Even an increase in the number of men to 10,500 today has not remedied the obvious uselessness of UNIFIL. Alone in the first year of the war after October 7, 2023, Hezbollah militias were able to fire around 9,000 rockets at northern Israel under the “strict” eyes of the peacekeeping force. The cost of maintaining UNIFIL amounts to around 800 million dollars per year.

Toxic resolutions

The chronic lack of peace in the Middle East is largely the fault of the UN. Their unfair decisions are supposedly justified by principles of the Charter, while in reality they reflect a fundamentally wrong setting of priorities. In the rivalry in particular between Articles 2 and 51, Article 2 has been wrongly given priority for decades. However, this corresponds to the egocentric view of autocratic rulers who are willing to sacrifice human lives to expand their sphere of power. Correctly, the inviolability of people in self-defense must take precedence over the inviolability of the territory of aggressors.

If Israel had complied with Resolution 242 in 1967 and evacuated the Sinai, it would have been defenseless against the Egyptian surprise attack (with 600,000 soldiers!) without this large-scale buffer in the Yom Kippur War in 1973 and would no longer exist. And if it had followed the repetition of the same reality-blind request in Resolution 338 in 1973, the Egyptian government would no longer have had any reason to negotiate. This would have prevented the 1979 peace agreement from coming about.

In every Middle East war, the UN has condemned Israel, which was existentially threatened or directly attacked, but allowed the aggressors to continue with their constant acts of terror and episodic military operations. Israel’s self-defense, protected under Article 51, was, however, wrongly condemned and warned as aggression from the moment it was successful.

The absurd misjudgment of Israel as an aggressor and the wrong prioritization of charter principles show an insufficient willingness to perceive facts conceptually and taking the context into account without bias. The primitive perceptual reception shown instead only takes in the superficially visible difference between the stronger and the weaker. Ignoring the causalities, the weaker party is reflexively given the role of the innocent victim, who receives sympathy and is given “justice.” In contrast, the successful defender is treated like an aggressor and bullied unfairly.

Concerted propaganda

Fueled by the publishing power of a biased media and thousands of “charitable” organizations, the general misjudgment has reached dangerous dimensions. The journalistic toolkit consists of a few, but constantly repeated, false pieces of information and a great deal of non-information.

The alarmingly widespread passing on of unverified casualty figures published by the Gaza Ministry of Health6) to citizens represents misinformation. This is because this Hamas propaganda organ engages in massive manipulation of the casualty statistics, which has been proven both in larger case studies and in systematic studies.7)

The non-information (or information kept to a minimum) concerns the routine practice of terrorists of setting up combat positions and weapons depots – more than irresponsibly – in heavily frequented civilian facilities such as schools and hospitals. The same deficit in media covering applies to the shelling of Israeli territory from these positions till the ceasefire.

In order to stop the attacks, the Israeli army is trying to eliminate the ever-changing positions in ground and air strikes. However, the defensive character is lost in the media coverage. It is even “morally” turned into its opposite, with the incorrect term regularly being “Israeli attacks”.

Western media consumers are even less aware of the exemplary humanitarian Israeli practice of announcing major military strikes in advance so that civilians can get to safety. Israel is paying a high price for this protection of Palestinian civilians. That’s because the well Hamas fighters are the first to be able to leave the endangered areas.

It is far more than just an unjust miscarriage of justice when the media, NGOs and the UN blame Israel for the civilian casualties rather than the terrorists. It is an attack on the principles of responsibility and fairness and a breach of the spirit of the UN Charter. In various places (namely in Articles 2 and 40), this stipulates the unbiased equal treatment of states as a fundamental principle.

But extreme positions on the Arab side that violate this and other Charter principles have not been combated by the UN. This actually became obvious with the total refusal to acknowledge Israel (no recognition of, no negotiations with and no peace with Israel) announced in August 1967 and practiced ever since.

Irresponsible slander

After decades of slowly increasing “moral” support for terrorists through falsification of history, the next stage of distortion of truth and morality has begun on October 7, 2023. By giving the terrorists the image of liberators, it becomes socially acceptable and common taking sides with them. In contrast, Israel’s necessary defense efforts are slanderously mislabeled as genocide.

By this distortion, the UN-led propaganda front is supporting a terrorist ideology, whose slogan “Liberation of Palestine” aims not at personal freedoms of civilized people, but at the annihilation of the democratic Jewish state. This aim was already propagated in the Hamas Charter of 1988: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it”8)

The propaganda atmosphere fueled by the irresponsible accusation of genocide against Israel is the root of terrorism. It even provides – intentional or not – a “moral” pretext for an actual genocide of Jews in the future.

The extreme bullying by the UN has revealed that a large number of its delegates are unable to cope with the office. This office requires – even more than that of a judge – the ability and willingness to conceptually grasp and evaluate facts without prejudice and thus to be fair.

Expert reports confirm that the world organization has developed over the decades into an insufficiently efficient administrative monster that misdirects resources.9) The great promise of peace made by its 1945 Charter can only be fulfilled if the UNO undergoes a profound, democratic reform.

References

  1. https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/index.php/en/book/chapter/staged-middle-east-conflict
  2. )https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/responsibility-for-the-middle-east-conflict-lies-with-great-britain/
  3. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/total-palestinian-refugees-1950-present
  4. https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/en/blog/immoral-liability-insurance-terrorists
  5. https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/blog/donald-trump-is-already-correcting-the-course-of-history-part-i/
  6. https://themedialine.org/life-lines/major-study-by-intl-research-team-challenges-medias-portrayal-of-gaza-casualties/
  7. https://fathomjournal.org/statistically-impossible-a-critical-analysis-of-hamass-women-and-children-casualty-figures/
  8. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/hamas-covenant-full-text
  9. https://www.davidmichaels-strategicsolutions.com/press/2004/5/3/fortress-un-the-new-world-order-the-fiefdoms-within-the-un
About the Author
Christian Rudolf Hamann was born in October 1949 in Berlin/ Germany. After having finished school in 1968, he studied Geography, Biology and Politics in Hannover and Mainz till 1973 and then worked as a secondary school teacher until his retirement. Since 2013, he lives alternately in Uruguay and Germany. Throughout his life, he has continued to study independently, especially in the fields of history, politics including sociology, economics and psychology. His credo is that democracy is not a finished model, but a living principle that must be improved in a historically never-ending process and strengthened against the grip of uncontrolled power - namely that of money. History presents itself as evolution (as a composite of biological, technical and socio-organisational evolution), while politics represents its current management. Therefore, especially socio-organisational evolution can only be steered back into stable channels and kept there permanently if political management respects the eternally valid rules of evolution. The simplest and most effective way for the necessary course correction is to detect the increasing violations of these principles.
Related Topics
Related Posts