Goldstone’s investigation
The central point in Israel's criticism of the Goldstone report -- the 574-page U.N. investigation of conduct during the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza last January -- is on clear display in an Op-Ed in Thursday's New York Times by the report's author, Richard Goldstone.
Israel, which refused to cooperate with the investigation because it believed the fact-finding mission's mandate to be inherently biased (the U.N. Human Rights Council tasked it last February with probing "grave" Israeli "violations of human rights"), charged after the report's release this week that it fails to recognize the distinctions between a democratic state of laws and the terrorist group bent on its destruction.
This is evident in Goldstone's Op-Ed. He writes:
- "In the fighting in Gaza, all sides flouted that fundamental principle... [that] in armed conflict civilians should to the greatest extent possible be protected from harm."
- "Our fact-finding team found that in many cases Israel could have done much more to spare civilians without sacrificing its stated and legitimate military aims. It should have refrained from attacking clearly civilian buildings, and from actions that might have resulted in a military advantage but at the cost of too many civilian lives. In these cases, Israel must investigate, and Hamas is obliged to do the same. They must examine what happened and appropriately punish any soldier or commander found to have violated the law."
- "Unfortunately, both Israel and Hamas have dismal records of investigating their own forces. I am unaware of any case where a Hamas fighter was punished for deliberately shooting a rocket into a civilian area in Israel — on the contrary, Hamas leaders repeatedly praise such acts. While Israel has begun investigations into alleged violations by its forces in the Gaza conflict, they are unlikely to be serious and objective."
- "Pursuing justice in this case is essential because no state or armed group should be above the law. Western governments in particular face a challenge because they have pushed for accountability in places like Darfur, but now must do the same with Israel, an ally and a democratic state."
It's almost as if a space alien landed on planet Earth and, in the blink of his cycloptic eye, issued a judgment.
Leaving aside for the moment the absurd comparison between Israel and Darfur, why would Hamas investigate attacks on Israeli civilians? Killing Israeli civilians is one of Hamas' central objectives. This is the group that organized suicide squads and dispatched its members to blow themselves up on Israeli buses in Tel Aviv, in hotel lobbies in Netanya and at restuarants in Jerusalem. This is a group that has spent much of the last eight years lobbing thousands of rockets at Israeli homes in Sderot, Ashkelon and other nearby towns with the aim of terrorizing the local Israeli population. This is a group that remains committed in word and deed to Israel's destruction.
Goldstone claims to hold Hamas to the same standards to which he holds Israel. But the notion that Hamas would invest even a moment in "investigating" its attacks on Israeli civilians is absurd. This is what Hamas believes it's supposed to do. Hamas has a problem with those who spare Israeli civilians lives, not take them.
Share
Facebook
8 Comments
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
“It’s almost as if a space alien landed on planet Earth and, in the blink of his cycloptic eye, issued a judgment. “
no, it’s as if a more or less detached observer, with pro-israel sympathies but attempting to be neutral and unencumbered by the author’s hardcore racial supremacist views, conducted as through an investigation as he reasonably could, guided by the principles of international law (which are strongly skewed in favor of occupiers, having been written primarily by colonial powers, but grant some rights to rebels), and applied the law to the results of the investigation.
Elements Ignored by the Report:
· The Report all but ignores the deliberate terrorist strategy of operating in the heart of densely populated civilian areas which dictated the arena of battle. Even when the Hamas terrorists mixed among civilians, the Report rejects the notion that there was an intention to put the civilian population at risk.
· Astonishingly, despite the many widely reported instances in the international press of the abuse of civilian facilities by terrorist groups, and the statements of Hamas own leaders praising women and children who acted as human shields, the Report repeatedly stated that it could find no evidence of such activities. This, even despite its admission that those interviewed were “reluctant to speak about the presence or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups”.
· The Report also ignores Israel’s extensive efforts, even in the midst of fighting, to maintain humanitarian standards. While it does, reluctantly, acknowledge Israel’s “significant efforts” to issue warnings before attacks, it does not find any of these efforts to be effective
· While the Report passes judgment against Israel in respect of almost any allegation, it seeks to absolve the Hamas of almost any wrongdoing. The word “terrorist” is almost entirely absent. Soldier Gilad Shalit, now held incommunicado in captivity for over three years, was “captured during an enemy incursion” and the Hamas members that the Mission met with in Gaza are thanked as the “Gaza authorities” for extending their full cooperation and support to the Mission.
· Even the thousands of rocket attacks against Israelis which necessitated the Gaza Operation are given the most cursory treatment, and indeed the Report indirectly blames Israel even for these by terming them “‘reprisals”.
http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com/2009/09/israels-analysis-and-comments-on-gaza.html
Goldstone is a “worthy” successor to the Judenratlers and Jewish Kapos that served the Nazis faithfully until their own demise.
Treating Israel and Hamas as virtual equals (as it appears to be the case in the Goldstone report) is the very height of absenity.
What more needs to be said?
•Israel did not deliberately target the civilian population of Gaza and, in fact, made efforts to prevent civilian casualties that no other army in the world would have done.
•Contrary to the assertions of Goldstone, Hamas did use Palestinian civilians as human shields.
•The Goldstone Report is not objective and is, in fact tainted by bias and politicization, both from the UN Human Rights Council and members of the mission itself.
•The report relied upon the contributions of anti-Israel non-governmental organizations and unreliable Palestinian “eyewitnesses.”
•Israel respects human rights and has a sophisticated legal and judicial system. Hamas does not. Yet the report has created an unjust equivalence of a democratic state with a terror organization.
CLAIM: ISRAEL DELIBERATELY TARGETED PALESTINIAN CIVILIANS
THE FACTS:
•The Goldstone Report states: “While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole…deeds by Israeli forces and words of military and political leaders prior to and during the operations indicate that as a whole they were premised on a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed not at the enemy but at the ‘supporting infrastructure.’ In practice, this appears to have meant the civilian population.”
•So why did the IDF drop thousands of warning leaflets, make over 200,000 telephone warnings to Palestinian civilians, abort missile strikes to prevent civilian casualties, open a field clinic for Palestinians on the Gaza border, and transfer tons of humanitarian aid during the conflict?
CLAIM: THE REPORT FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF PALESTINIANS USING HUMAN SHIELDS
THE FACTS:
•While Goldstone maintains that he could not find any evidence of the use of human shields by Hamas, even the terrorist organization admits it.
CLAIM: THE GOLDSTONE REPORT IS OBJECTIVE AND UNTAINTED BY BIAS OR POLITICIZATION
THE FACTS:
•It was clear that one out of the four members of the Goldstone Mission, Professor Christine Chinkin, had already made up her mind, having signed a letter before the conflict had even ended, clearly stating that Israel’s actions in Gaza amounted to “war crimes” and that Palestinian rocket attacks were not significant enough for Israel to exercise her right to self-defense.
•The UN Human Rights Council includes states known for having questionable records with regards to human rights or a history of hostility towards Israel, including Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Pakistan, Bahrain, Mauritius and Qatar. The UNHRC has consistently discriminated against Israel and the mandate for the Goldstone Mission was no different.
•The mandate was not supported by many leading democratic members of the HRC – the European Union, Japan, Canada and Switzerland all refused to back the resolution.
•The mandate (HRC Resolution S-9/1) for the fact-finding mission was “to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression” —already determining that Israel had committed “violations of international human rights law “ before the investigation even began.
•Additionally, the Resolution determined that Israel caused “ massive violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people and systematic destruction of Palestinian infrastructure” while demanding that Israel “stop the targeting of civilians and medical facilities and staff and the systematic destruction of the cultural heritage of the Palestinian people, in addition to the destruction of public and private properties.” This, too, before any investigation even took place.
•As Melanie Phillips notes: “So this ‘objective’ inquiry had been told before it was even established that the guilty party in Gaza was Israel, designated by the UN as the ‘occupying power’; that it was guilty of ‘aggression’ and ‘violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law’; and that the Palestinians of Gaza were the victims of this Israeli aggression.”
CLAIM: THERE IS NO REASON TO DOUBT THE RELIABILITY OF “EYEWITNESSES” AND NGOs
THE FACTS:
•Time and again, Palestinian “eyewitnesses” and non-governmental organizations have been proven to be unreliable, giving unverifiable evidence.
•Judge Goldstone has a long association with Human Rights Watch, even serving on its board until removing himself when it was pointed out that remaining with HRW would be inappropriate. Yet he cites HRW sources in the Report, including material by the Nazi memorabilia collecting Marc Garlasco, who is currently suspended by HRW pending an investigation.
•Some of the Palestinian witnesses heard by the mission were actually Hamas operatives directly involved in terrorism. One such witness, Mohammed Fuoad Abu Askar of Jebaliyeh, was actually a senior Hamas operative who used his house to store arms and ammunition, which lead to the IDF strike against the structure.
•The case of Khaled and Kawthar Abed Rabbo, as outlined by CAMERA, offers ample evidence of unreliable witnesses. While the Goldstone committee “found Khalid and Kawthar Abd Rabbo to be credible and reliable witnesses [and] has no reason to doubt the veracity of the main elements of their testimony,” Khaled Abd Rabbo and his relatives have given more than a dozen different versions of what happened to them on Jan. 7, 2009.
•In addition, as evidenced in the above case, Goldstone failed to take into account the loyalties of different Palestinian factions and the incentive for Fatah or Hamas members to blame Israeli soldiers for killings that were actually part of intra-Palestinian violence.
CLAIM: ISRAEL IS INCAPABLE OF HOLDING ITSELF TO ACCOUNT WITHIN A PROPER LEGAL FRAMEWORK
THE FACTS:
•Goldstone refers to Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists as “armed groups” while the IDF stands accused of targeting Gaza’s civilian population. The report has created an unjust equivalence of a democratic state with a terror organization.
•In addition, Goldstone calls for both Israelis and Palestinians to investigate alleged crimes. This despite the fact that Israel’s legal and judicial apparatus is fully equipped and motivated to address alleged violations of national or international law by its commanders and soldiers. Such allegations are reviewed through a multi-tiered system of independent and impartial proceedings before Israeli investigative, administrative and judicial authorities, including Israel’s highest judicial instance, the Israeli Supreme Court.
•How can Goldstone imply that Hamas or the Palestinian Authority operates a legal system that comes close to anything resembling that of a western democracy?
Expect to see more of the Goldstone Report in the media over the coming days and weeks. This UN report based on the work of investigators who publicized their opinions before the investigation began and reliant on unreliable and tainted sources, delivered exactly what we expected: a drawn out condemnation of Israel’s efforts to defend its citizens against Hamas’s rockets.
In reality, it is the UN Human Rights Council that should be investigated for its complete failure to take action to protect the human rights of Israel’s citizens.
FURTHER RESOURCES
•Gaza Facts: The Israeli Perspective, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs
•Goldstone Report: 575 pages of NGO “cut and paste”, NGO Monitor
•Analysis: Goldstone’s kangaroo court report, Gerald Steinberg, The Jerusalem Post
•The Moral Inversion of Richard Goldstone, Melanie Phillips, The Spectator
•Israel Ambassador to the US, Michael Oren interviewed on PBS
•Goldstone’s sins of omission, Dan Kosky, Comment is Free
•Goldstone Report Inaccuracies, Pts. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Elder of Ziyon
•The Goldstone Commisson: Something Happened On The Way to Gaza, Daled Amos
•The Goldstone Commission on human shields: Lies and damned lies, Israel Matzav
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, you must first be logged in to JTA. If you are not registered, please click here.
Already a JTA member?
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Claude S. on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Yaakov Cohn on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Herbert Kaine on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
- Lloyd Trufelman on Netanyahu doth protest too much?
- ASC on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
Michael Hess
09/17/09 02:36 PM
Hamas was elected to Palestinian government in a free and fair election. For more about the facts, and not the absurd denials like the one posited in the article above, I suggest that those interested in Israel’s future do themselves a favor, read the report.
The Goldstone Report factually debunks a lot of myths often seen in these comments sections and sadly, in articles like the above.
For those who actually care about Israel, this report makes clear there is serious internal soul-searching that needs to be dome within the state.