8 No. 78 JUSTICE from which countries can be nominated or elected to UN bodies. Israel’s excluded status does not grant it the right to participate equally in the deliberations of the UN in violation of the UN Charter and the principles of the equality of nations, large or small. n The application of “double standards” is particularly evident in the indictments of Israel in the UN specialized agencies, as set forth above, beginning in 1974. n Examples of UN institutional bias continue to find expression: m The UN General Assembly Emergency Special Sessions, initially created to convene the UN General Assembly together to respond to the world’s gravest security problems if the UN Security Council failed to act, has been engaged in the singling out of Israel, yet again, for selective opprobrium and indictment. m The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Right of the Palestinian People is the only committee among all the subsidiary organs of the General Assembly whose resources are devoted to the one-sided advancement of Palestinians only, while calling for “boycotts, divestments and sanctions against … Israel.” m The Division of Palestinian Rights is the only division in the multi-layered UN Department of Political Affairs that is uniquely dedicated to one national cause with activities that are politically onesided, devoted to a discriminatory advancement of the Palestinian cause. This is well manifested in its convening of the annual International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, which prominently displayed a Middle East map that blatantly excluded the entire State of Israel – apartheid UN style. m The UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People is again the only separate committee in the entire General Assembly’s human rights structure devoted to the one-sided advancement of one single people — the Palestinian people — while ignoring any Israeli human suffering. m The reports of UN Special Rapporteurs regularly and unfairly demonize Israel, particularly the reports of Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In summary, there have been more resolutions adopted, more committees formed, more deliberations held, more speeches made, and more resources expended in the condemnation of Israel than on any other state, or combination of states. None of this is intended to suggest, nor should it be inferred, that Israel is above the law or that the Jewish People are entitled to any preference or privilege because of the horrors of the Holocaust or the persecutions and prosecutions of Jewish history. The problem is not that Israel should be exempt from legal responsibility, but that it is being systematically denied equality before the law. It is not that human rights standards should not be applied to Israel, but that these same standards are not being applied equally to all others. Nor is it that Israel should be exempt from respecting its obligation to respecting human rights law, but rather that its own rights are entitled to equal recognition and respect. The fifth strain, ideological antisemitism, also demonstrates that the embers of antisemitism were burning long before October 7, 2023. If the first four indicators – genocidal antisemitism, demonological antisemitism, political antisemitism, and legalized antisemitism – are overt, public and clearly demonstrable, ideological antisemitism is a much more sophisticated, and therefore arguably a more pernicious expression of the new antisemitism. Indeed, it may even function as an “ideological” support structure for the first four indicators, which are themselves sufficiently prejudicial and pernicious on their own. Ideological antisemitism finds expression not in any genocidal incitement against Jews and Israel, or overt racist denial of the Jewish People and Israel’s right to be; rather, ideological antisemitism disguises itself as part of the struggle against racism itself. Indeed, it marches under the banner of anti-racism, anchoring itself in the protective cover of the United Nations and the international struggle against racism. By ideological antisemitism I am referring not only to the discrimination against, denial of and delegitimization of the Jewish People’s and Israel’s raison d’être or right to be – including, among other things, the denial or distortion of Zionism as the legitimate national liberation movement of the Jewish People; nor am I referring only to the denial and distortion of the Jewish People’s historical and “aboriginal” connectedness to Israel — a form of “ideological cleansing” of the Jewish People’s juridical claim to Israel as the aboriginal homeland of the Jewish People. I am referring to the labelling of Israel and Zionism as being “triple racist,” as set forth below, and thereby warranting its dismantling as an anti-racist mandate.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=