PA stonewalled the Goldstone vote

[bemildred]

On October 2, 2009, the UN Human Rights Council was widely expected to pass a resolution supporting the Goldstone Report, the UN’s probe of war crimes committed during Israel’s war in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009.

The Council instead agreed to delay a vote on the report until March 2010, following major reservations expressed by the Palestinian Authority, the United States and Israel.

A UNHRC endorsement of the report would have brought Israeli officials one step closer to prosecution before a war crimes tribunal, an event many Palestinians were anxious to see.

But, as The Palestine Papers reveal, the Palestinian Authority apparently sacrificed a potential victory for Palestinian victims in exchange for favorable assurances on negotiations from the United States and, they hoped, from Israel.

http://english.aljazeera.net/palestinepapers/2011/01/2011126123125167974.html

Most interesting part of this to me, is that they got nothing for it. But the issue is still there too, there is plenty of comment on the subject (google news "Goldstone Report"), and it has not been forgotten. There is also a good deal of blather about PA foreknowledge of the Gaza war, which I would be more inclined to criticize if they had not expected it, since the only mystery was the exact date and time, but still, it looks bad.

[whosinpower]

1. That was noted in the palistinian papers

Stroke another mark on Abbas being a puppet to Israel.

[bemildred]

2. Another guy ruling under an emergency declaration, with not even rigged elections to back him up.nt

[azurnoir]

3. Israeli puppet via the US and I am disappointed to say George Mitchell

Quoting the minutes of a 2009 meet between Erekat and U.S. Mideast envoys George Mitchell and Davie Hale, the Al Jazeera report showed Washington as trying to sway the PA from backing a UN resolution supporting Goldstone, asking that the Palestinians "refrain from pursuing or supporting any initiative directly or indirectly in international legal forums that would undermine that atmosphere".

Erekat's response, according to the report, which was also released by the U.K. newspaper The Guardian, was to tell Mitchell: "On going to the UN we will always co-ordinate with you."

The chief Palestinian negotiator is later quoted as being unhappy as to the results of the Palestinian delay of the UN resolution, saying "first public response to the Goldstone thing came from Lieberman, who said Abu Mazen agreed to postpone the vote because the Israelis threatened to release the 'tapes' showing him coordinating the attack on Gaza with Israel."

The papers also show U.S. National Security Adviser James Jones attempting to calm Erekat's concerns during the October 2009 meeting, saying the U.S. was appreciative for what you did a couple weeks ago,” adding: “It was very courageous.”

Not long after the Palestinian deferral of the Goldstone vote, Palestinian and Israeli officials have told Haaretz that Abbas apparently made the decision under heavy U.S. pressure, with U.S. officials reportedly telling Palestinian leaders that a war crimes debate would complicate efforts to restart Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/palestine-papers-u-s-pressured-palestinians-to-defer-un-resolution-on-goldstone-report-1.339466?localLinksEnabled=false

[shira]

4. So? Goldstone has been completely discredited. Not surprising given the composition of the UNHRC

....with Libya (one of the very worst human rights violators on the planet) presiding on the council.

:eyes:

The UNHRC is a complete joke with Libya judging other nations' human rights, as was their choice to commision a rightwing, pro-Hamas, unrepentant and racist former Apartheid Judge to investigate the Gaza/Israel war.

No liberal Israelis take Goldstone seriously. The people at B'tselem and Breaking-the-Silence even have issues with the report.

If Abbas and the PA had any ethics whatsoever, they'd call on the UNHRC to flush the report down the toilet where it belongs.

[azurnoir]

5. Stating opinion as fact again? The Goldstone Report has not delegitimized or whatever

you wish to claim, the very fact that you find it necessary to make such a post would suggest that it is indeed very much alive and still being considered

Now shall we do the tiresome dance whereas you extort the very 'rock bottom' countries on the UNHRC as though they make the council in it's entirety and I once again show that to be 'misleading' as there are many other countries including the US that belong to the council

[shira]

6. Funny how some find a UN Human Rights Council credible with Libya on it.

Even worse, 155 of 192 nations thought it was a good idea to vote them into it.

Tells you all you need to know about the UN.

Oh yeah, Uganda, Qatar, and Mauritania were voted in at the same time - all beacons of liberty.

:eyes:

[azurnoir]

7. "Tells you all you need to know about the UN."? The UN Israel belongs to?

but thanks, it seems there is a "let he who is without sin" principle at work here

[shira]

8. What do you think about 3/4 of the UN voting Libya onto the UNHRC? n/t

[azurnoir]

9. I think that was their decision but does it seem to bother you that

3rd world countries get equal rights with 1rst world countries? If so that's ok it is quite common place that some feel 'those' people do not deserve a voice equal to those that some obviously feel are the superior parties

[shira]

10. So it doesn't bother you.

I have a problem with 3rd world dictators (who do not speak for the people they oppress) having more votes overall than liberal democracies, thus setting the agenda.

[Dick Dastardly]

11. That principle may be at work here but it doesnt mean that it should be, is a good thing

or is in any way proper for this situation. If you think its proper here to trust and put in charge of upholding human rights with those who routinely violate human rights then you obviously think its proper that bank robbers should be in charge of a bank or trusted to guard money.

You can quote all the principles you want in order to justify the makeup of the UNHRC and your support for it, but it does not change the bottomline fact that you are supporting despots of varying degrees to be in charge of upholding human rights.

[azurnoir]

12. so then who does 'deserve' to be on the UNHRC ?

The US, the UK, Israel as I said let he who is without sin, you can justify your attitude any way you see fit because IMO everyone has 'robbed the bank' but it seems the rich robbers in your opinion more worthy of guarding the money ? sounds so noble

[shira]

13. Only liberal democracies belong on the UNHRC. n/t

[azurnoir]

14. oh you mean like Sweden ? n/t