The UN reaction — ranging from concern to condemnation — to the latest Israeli aggression, is much needed in this time of unbridled Israeli savagery against Gaza and its citizens. When John Dugard, UN special rapporteur on the human rights situation in the occupied territories, describes Israel’s targeting of a Hamas building that killed women and children as a war crime that should not go unpunished, and when UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warns that the Israeli government’s decision to close border crossings into Gaza will only worsen the humanitarian situation, it is all in keeping with close, fair and just UN involvement since the Arab-Israeli crisis began 60 years ago.
President Bush’s vision of a two-state solution actually goes back 60 years to when the UN partition plan not only provided for two states in Palestine but also made the proclamation of Israel contingent on the establishment of a Palestinian state. Bush’s unwillingness not to refer to the status of Jerusalem or Israeli settlements on Palestinian land is a far cry from steadfast US policy since 1967 that considers all Israeli settlements as “illegal and an obstacle to peace”, as stated by several US permanent representatives to the UN Security Council. Lastly, and most seriously, Bush adopted the latest Israeli position that demands recognition of Israel as “a Jewish state” — which goes against UN Resolution 194 of 1948, guaranteeing the return of Palestinian refugees and compensation for those who do not wish to return.
The recent UN declarations also appear to be trying to make a point, to counter remarks made by Bush on his Middle East tour that countless UN speeches and resolutions have not worked to resolve the dispute and that, instead, his way is vastly better.
Of course, it would be welcome if Palestinians and Israelis could negotiate an agreement on the so-called two-state vision of the US president. But Bush pressed upon the Palestinians to accept that there would be no deal granting them even the territories occupied by Israel during the 1967 war, and that there would be no right of return for Palestinian refugees. He also shrugged off the rights and fate of the close to two million 1948 Arabs who were in Israel by insisting on the Jewish character of Israel. Bush made no real demands on the Israeli government to stop its settlement activities. Nor did he demand a halt to Israeli military operations in the Palestinian territories that are taking a serious humanitarian toll on civilians. Bush’s only point of substance, if it can be called that, was to advise both Israeli prime minister and Palestinian Authority president to “make tough choices.”
There are many who consider Bush the most important guarantee for Israel’s continuing its aggression against the Palestinian people. The UN has never been seen as such. True, the UN has never been able to settle the problem and its appeals and urgings and declarations have been consistently ignored — by Israel. The difference, though, is that the UN tries; US administrations, including this one, don’t even do that.
