There we are again with made in UN incitement and hate

Let’s call it as it is: persecution of the Jewish people. And since the world has had some experience with this, it should think for a moment about what is happening at the UN. In reality, to err is human, but to persist is truly diabolical.

The UN General Assembly once again voted upon a resolution dealing with Jerusalem that uses solely Arab and Muslim terminology and logic while condemning Israel for the mere fact of being in Jerusalem. This resolution is similar to the one taken by UNESCO this past October in which Italy not only expressed “shock,” but also profound regret. However, words and action are two completely different things. Out of 193 member states, 147 voted in favor of the resolution, i.e., against Israel, while seven voted against it and eight abstained.

So what did Italy do? We assumed that Il Bel Paese would have opposed this recent resolution after Prime Minister MatteoRenzi had declared his disappointment about abstaining on the UNESCO vote that denied the Jews its historical relationship with Jerusalem and handed over even the Western Wall to the Muslims, thereby giving them the Temple Mount. It was there that Jesus Christ – as if no one knew by now that he was a Jew – preached to the merchants. Yes, even Christian ties to the Holy City were erased.

Nevertheless, precisely due to the “automatism” that the Italian Prime Minister declared as the cause of the vote at UNESCO and which apparently hadn’t been mollified, almost all European states voted in favor of the resolution, including Italy, France, Germany and the UK. Those who abstained were Australia, Guatemala, Paraguay, Papua New Guinea, Honduras, Tonga and Vanuatu. The lion-hearted few who said no to this gargantuan historical and philosophical absurdity were Israel, the United States, Canada, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, Nauru and Palau. This resolution (A/71/I.22) is not only a stain upon the world’s common sense, but also upon its dignity. Most importantly, however, it begs the question as to whether or not it is truly capable of defending itself from Islamism.

Presented by an array of Islamic countries (among them Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, but also Indonesia and the People’s Democratic Republic of Lao), it was voted upon together with six other resolutions that were more about hate than condemnation so as to mark the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. It states that “any actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Holy City of Jerusalem were illegal and therefore null and void and have no validity whatsoever,” and then it calls Israel “to immediately cease all such illegal and unilateral measures.”

What are they talking about here? Doesn’t the UN take into account the fact that Israel’s management of its Capital grants the Arabs of the city the same rights as Jews, which hosts them as members of the Knesset, as university students, in hospitals as patients and doctors, and in academia as scholars? Are they failing to see that the city sparkles with its new buildings, gardens and offices where its citizens work on the most advanced high tech projects in the world? The wild desire to destroy all of this leads us to think that the resolution actually gives a free hand to terrorism: it cold-bloodedly wants to annihilateas many civilians as possible from Jerusalem. Moreover, it seeks to erase whatever is Jewish about it.

The UN’s actions vis-à-vis Israel can well ignite fires elsewhere, especially in Europe. Incitement is the primary result of anti-Israeli hatred. The six resolutions taken a few days ago, along with the thousands of other UN resolutions against the Jewish State, clearly demonstrate that there exists an inherent biasnot only against Israeli democracy itself, but also its determination to build a society where all three monotheistic religions are fully respected.

Thisleads us to ask the following: Why is Israel, a nation that advocates pluralism, under assault whileothers who violate human rights such as Syria, Saudi Arabia or China are ignored?

Translation by Amy K. Rosenthal

This article originally appeared in slightly different form in Italian in Il Giornale (December 2, 2016)

About the Author
Fiamma Nirenstein is a journalist, author, former Deputy President of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, and member of the Italian delegation at the Council of Europe.
Related Topics
Related Posts
Comments