Alan Sabrosky analyzed the UN HRC vote on the Goldstone Report for the Palestinian Think Tank and surmised that the US has lost considerable leverage and influence at the UN after decades of defending Israel’s ‘rogue’ attitude toward UN resolutions and international law. The Gaza slaughter of 1,400 mostly civilian Palestinians including over 300 children now appears to be acting as the last straw.
Voting patterns on the HRC are important, as they provide insights into what might happen later on the Security Council (UNSC) and in the General Assembly:
1.Of the permanent members of the Security Council, Russia and China supported the resolution, Britain and France did not vote (the equivalent of hiding under the table!), only the US opposed it;
2.France and Norway did not vote for or against the resolution, but they did support the conclusions of the Goldstone Report;
3.Both major Sub-Saharan African states (Nigeria and South Africa) voted for it;
4.Two of the Asian “Big Three” (India and China) voted for it, the third (Japan) just abstained;
5.Two of the usual US supporters in SW and SE Asia (Pakistan and the Philippines) voted for it; and
6.Three of the four largest Latin American states (Argentina, Brazil, Chile) voted for it, the fourth (Mexico) abstained.
What makes this significant — since the US lobbied hard first to keep the Goldstone Report from even reaching the HRC, and then for others to vote against the HRC resolution — is that many states who voted for it, or abstained, would normally have been in the US corner.
Full article HERE.
Sabrosky also adroitly addressed US criticisms of the HRC resolution, which go beyond the Obama administration’s “parroting of Israel’s wishes.”
The resolution did not mention Hamas, an oversight, but there are at least five reasons including that the HRC focus in this case was on the actions of the oppressor (Israel) and not on those of the oppressed (the Palestinians). Then there is Israel’s right to self-defense, which is a specious claim because Israel, like all occupiers and oppressors, has no inherent right to defend itself against its victims. And third is the idea that holding Israel accountable for its actions will somehow endanger the Middle East peace process. Simply put, there is no peace process. Israel’s occupation and efforts to colonize the West Bank and East Jerusalem continue unabated as they have since the beginning of the Oslo period, and even before with the Peres government of the late 60s.
