Following Israel’s May operation to halt a flotilla seeking to
breach Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, the UN
Human Rights Council (UNHRC) — true to form — condemned the
Jewish State and passed a resolution calling for an
“independent international fact-finding mission
to investigate violations of international law… resulting from
the Israeli attacks…. ” The human rights paragons from the
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) demanded the
investigation, which has already been dubbed “Goldstone II.” The
original “Goldstone” refers to last year’s UNHRC-sponsored
fact-finding report, headed by South African judge Richard
Goldstone, which accused Israelis of committing war crimes and
terrorism during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-2009. The
controversy following its release should warn anyone
who is tempted to participate in another imminent
fact-finding charade.
Since its inception, the UNHRC, which succeeded the equally
shameful UN Commission on Human Rights, has been reliably
embarrassing. During the Bush era, the U.S. refused to partake in
the Council’s activities and lend it any credibility; the Obama
administration reversed that policy. The UNHRC’s agenda is
dictated by Arab theocrats who aim to
humiliate Israel and subtly impose an Islamic
agenda on the West through
such tactics as banning the
“defamation of religion.” Unfortunately, however, the UNHRC’s
very name (emphasizing “human rights”) and prominence within the
United Nations hierarchy automatically lends it credence in the
eyes of casual observers and
its Leftist devotees.
This might explain
why someone like Richard Goldstone, who
previously enjoyed significant international respect,
would join one of its
officially sanctioned fact-find missions. During Judge
Goldstone’s career,
he was the Chief Prosecutor
for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
(ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Many
also credited him with helping to heal the
wounds of South African apartheid. Certain
incidents in Goldstone’s past
raised ethical questions, such as his ICTY
indictment against someone who “wasn’t an appropriate first
person to indict… but if we didn’t do it, we
would not have got the budget.” Nonetheless, he
generally was respected as a
jurist and as someone who could preside over a fair fact-finding
mission. He was.
While Goldstone’s report condemned Israel for its war-time
tactics, many in the international legal community condemned
Goldstone’s politically-driven, disingenuous, and sloppy report.
It immediately became clear how badly Goldstone had been played
as a pawn, especially given
his eagerness to demonstrate
his objectivity in spite
of his Jewish heritage and supposed affection
for Israel.
Following the report’s release, Goldstone seemed genuinely
shocked by this criticism, and he repeatedly stressed his
intended impartiality and fairness. He publicly professed his
love for Israel and called himself a justice
and truth-seeking Zionist. But whatever his
good intentions, Richard Goldstone’s lasting legacy will be the
utter nonsense, endorsed by the UNHRC and the
UN General Assembly, to which he forever affixed his name — and
reputation.
UNHRC members may be
perverse, but they are not stupid. As they prepare to announce
new members to the flotilla fact-finding mission — it is rumored
that former ICC President and Canadian jurist Philippe Kirsch
will be named to Chair the mission — they will
seek others to serve as straw men — just like Goldstone.
Individuals who prize justice
and the rule of law, or who,
perhaps, sympathize with Israel
and its right to
self-defense, might be attracted
to an opportunity to serve as
judges on a UN fact-finding investigation. Those
who believe they could bring
evenhandedness and sensibility to such an
investigation might be especially tempted. That
sort of motivation would be highly naïve, however.
The UNHRC is incapable of serious
reporting. The institution’s very mission taints the legitimacy
of everything it does. Especially for
those who care about Israel,
it would be presumptuous — and inaccurate — to think
that their well-meaning participation in
future investigations
could erase that stain.
Instead, such participation
only will help to cloak the
UNHRC in a façade of sanity, while exonerating murderers and
terrorists. That is Richard Goldstone’s legacy. For anyone who
cares about Israel and international law, hopefully it will not
be theirs as well.
