THE UN Human Rights Council’s (UNHRC) backing of the Goldstone Report into the savage violence in Gaza this January offers a considerable opportunity to Hamas, but it must be doubted if the rulers of Gaza will have the wisdom to seize it.
Goldstone found that both Hamas and the Israelis had committed war crimes. The UNHRC now requires that each side mount a proper investigation of the incidents Goldstone uncovered. If such inquiries do not take place, the UN could refer the cases to the International Court of Human Rights at The Hague.
Israel has from the outset condemned the Goldstone investigation, claiming it was biased. Unfortunately, the UNHRC opened the way for Washington’s vote against its resolution Friday by permitting the inclusion of references to other Israeli actions in the occupied territories, which were not part of Goldstone’s report. Nevertheless the vote does present Hamas with a chance to enhance its status internationally while undermining that of Israel.
The war crime of which Hamas stands accused was the firing of rockets into Israel, which managed to kill three civilians during the Gaza invasion. It has been calculated that of the thousands of homemade rockets launched into southern Israel from Gaza since 2000, one Israeli is killed or injured for every 40 rockets. Hamas has argued it was entitled to strike back against Israeli aggression. However, the harsh truth is that firing these relatively primitive weapons toward civilian rather than military targets is a crime.
The Israeli crimes in their turn are even more heinous. The argument that Israel’s response to Hamas rocketing was disproportionate, in that 1,400 Palestinians were slain and thousands injured, does not in any way justify the Hamas attacks. As Goldstone indicates, both actions were illegal. The quantity of victims on either side is irrelevant.
If Hamas is prepared to accept this, if it is prepared to mount the investigation the UNHRC is demanding and bring to trial and punish those found guilty of ordering and carrying out the rocketing of Israel, it would transform the organization’s standing. It could be the precursor of the reunification of Palestine with Fatah being obliged to recognize the newfound moral strength of its once bitter rival. There is no guarantee that it would finally oblige the Obama administration to recognize that Hamas simply has to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. All we can say is that Washington may be led to bring the moribund Middle East peace initiative back to life. But it would certainly strengthen the hands of those in the Fatah who want to see an end to the division in Palestinian ranks and are working for it.
Israel has long snubbed the UN when it suited it. The only thing that could be worrying the Netanyahu government over the UNHRC’s acceptance of the Goldstone Report is that Hamas will actually undertake the proper investigation and subsequent actions that the UN requires, however painful or embarrassing they may be to those in Hamas connected with the rocket attacks. Unfortunately, Hamas has a track record of playing into the Israeli hands. The likelihood must be that once again Gaza’s rulers will get it wrong.
Kremlin rules
EXCERPTS from an editorial that appeared in Saturday’s Washington Post:
It’s become so commonplace that the world little noticed last Sunday when Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin staged another phony, Soviet-style election. As in the old days, the ruling party (now known as “United Russia” instead of “Communist Party of the Soviet Union”) won a smashing victory in local jurisdictions across the country, with opposing party politicians reduced to bit parts permitted for decorative effect only. Medvedev, who frequently impresses Western politicians with his statements in praise of democracy, hailed the elections as “well organized,” which we suppose is undeniable.
Putin, who is less sentimental about these things, dismissed protesting politicians as whiners: “Those who don’t win are never happy,” he sniffed.
So it was gratifying to hear US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, coincidentally visiting Moscow in the days after the election, speak firmly in defense of true democracy. To a group of civil society leaders, increasingly embattled and in danger in Putin’s Russia, Clinton said, “Both President Obama and I want to stress strongly how the United States stands with those who work for freedom, (who) campaign for justice and democracy, and who risk their lives to speak out for human rights.”
She repeated the message at Moscow State University, telling students that the innovation Medvedev says he wants to foster in society can’t flourish without “core freedoms, free speech, freedom of the press, the freedom to participate in the political process.” She granted an interview to Echo Moskvy Radio, one of the few remaining independent media outlets of any significance, where she expressed “no doubt” that “democracy is in Russia’s best interests, that respecting human rights, an independent judiciary, a free media are in the interests of building a strong, stable political system.”
And, at the civil society meeting, she was specific, noting that 18 journalists have been killed in Russia since 2000, with only one of those crimes solved. “When violence like this goes unpunished in any society,” Clinton said, “it’s undermining the rule of law, chills public discourse, which is, after all, the lifeblood of an open society. ...”
