Israel must withdraw all settlers or face ICC, says UN report

[Scurrilous]

Source: Guardian

UN Human Rights Council says Israel is in violation of Geneva convention and should face international criminal court

<snip>

"Israel must withdraw all settlers from the West Bank or potentially face a case at the international criminal court (ICC) for serious violations of international law, says a report by a United Nations agency that was immediately dismissed in Jerusalem as "counterproductive and unfortunate".

All settlement activity in occupied territory must cease "without preconditions" and Israel "must immediately initiate a process of withdrawal of all settlers", said the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Israel, it said, was in violation of article 49 of the fourth Geneva convention, which forbids the transfer of civilian populations to occupied territory.

The settlements were "leading to a creeping annexation that prevents the establishment of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state and undermines the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination," it said.

The UNHRC report broadly restated international consensus on the illegality of Israeli settlements. But its conclusions are likely to bolster the Palestinians following their admission last November to the UN as a non-member state, which potentially gives them recourse to the ICC."

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/31/israel-must-withdraw-settlers-icc

[lsewpershad]

1. About time.

[mrdmk]

2. They have been told this before

Resulting in Israel building more settlements!

[loudsue]

3. And Netanyahu doesn't give a shit.

Arrogant bastard.

[iandhr]

4. I have always been opposed to the settlements.

I think they are a symbol of how Israel is destroying itself.

For the record, past peace negotiations (Camp David under Clinton, Annapolis under Bush) have said that some of the settlements will remain part of israel in a deal and in exchange Israel would transfer some of there land in the north to the future state of Palestine.

[mountain grammy]

5. And will Israel's leaders listen?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

10. Probably about as much as Syria's have.

[leftynyc]

6. Meaningless

Neither Israel nor the US are part of the ICC.

[magical thyme]

8. Why would US membership be required?

Last I heard, it was Israel's illegal settlements in Palestinian territory that were at issue.

I was unaware that the US, too, is violating international law by building illegal settlements and/or committing genocide against the Palestinian people...or do you have some secret information?

[leftynyc]

13. Where did I say that

the US was building settlements? I know it chaps your asses that Israel is not part of the ICC so I'm just pointing out that the US isn't either. The fact that Israel isn't makes this whole story utterly meaningless. Didn't realize I had to spell things out to you but I'll be sure to be more careful and tedious so there is no confusion in the future.

[magical thyme]

30. you said it was irrelevant because neither Israel *nor the US* is a member

It is irrelevant that the US is not a member. It is Israel that is breaking international law in this situation.

I personally don't care whether you "spell things out for me" or not. I'm not wasting my energy trying to read your mind or your intentions. You can either write what you intend or not.

[eomer]

22. Whether Israel and the US are part of the ICC is irrelevant. If Palestine can join the ICC...

then the ICC will have jurisdiction over crimes committed in Palestine by any person regardless of what nation (ICC member or not) that person is a citizen of. That would include persons like Presidents or Prime Ministers of nations that are not ICC members. Such persons can (theoretically) be charged and convicted for crimes in ICC-member nations.

[mike_c]

7. now watch Israel thumb its nose at international law....

Again.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

9. "Counterproductive and unfortunate" will eventually translate to

kicking and screaming.

Israel, it said, was in violation of article 49 of the fourth Geneva convention, which forbids the transfer of civilian populations to occupied territory.

This can't be repeated enough.

[alfredo]

19. They won't cooperate with the courts.

I learned something of interest recently. The Mayor of Bethlehem is Christian. Though Palestinian Christians make up only 2% of the population, they make up 8% of the Palestinian Legislative Council. They are generally supportive of the Muslim neighbors in standing against Israeli seizure of Palestinian land. Of course US Christian leaders ignore or lie about the plight of the Palestinian Christian.




Palestinian Christians have suffered at the hands of religious zealots from Israel. They have also suffered by America Christians unquestioned support for Israel. When the Israeli government seized Palestinian land, cuts off water or electricity, it punishes Christian and Muslims alike.

[L0oniX]

11. If it were up to me I would kick the US and Israel out of the UN and move the UN. n/t

[leftynyc]

14. The right wing would love that

They've been wanting the US out of the UN forever. And as a New Yorker, I can say moving the UN ain't a threat.

[L0oniX]

15. The AIPAC loving Israel can do no wrong right wing? n/t

[leftynyc]

18. Yawn

When you'd like to discuss this as an adult, do let me know.

[pampango]

20. The Texas GOP party platform folks right wing.

United Nations – We support the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations and the removal of U.N. headquarters from U.S. soil.

Law of the Sea – Adopted by the UN in 1982, we still oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty.

UN Treaty on the Rights of the Child ― We unequivocally oppose the United States Senate’s ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

United Nations Agenda 21 -The Republican Party of Texas should expose all United Nations Agenda 21 treaty policies and its supporting organizations, agreements and contracts. We oppose implementation of the UN Agenda 21 Program which was adopted at the Earth Summit Conference in 1992 purporting to promote a comprehensive program of sustainable development projects, nationally, regionally and locally.

Cap and Trade – We oppose Cap and Trade (“Cap and Tax”).

International Organizations – We support U.S. withdrawal from the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization and the World Bank.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/texasgop_pre/assets/original/2012Platform_Final.pdf

Of course the Texas GOP right wing wants us out of every international organization we belong to, so the UN is not really anything special on their list of things they hate.

On second thought, you have a point. This could be something that the whole right wing could unify on.

[hack89]

25. There is something to be said for destroying the UN

[RedstDem]

17. If only de funding from the US could change them

They don't need a dime of US aid, if we withheld it, there would be no change, imo..

[cali]

16. I'm completely opposed to the settlements. I also think the UNHRC is still a

lousy organization. And yes, I think they focus excessively on Israel to the detriment of serious human rights abuses in other nations- more than a few of them members .

As of 2010, Israel had been condemned in 32 resolutions by the Council since its creation in 2006. The 32 resolutions comprised 48.1% of all country-specific resolutions passed by the Council.[59]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#.22Defamation_of_religion.22

In 2006, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan argued that the Commission should not have a "disproportionate focus on violations by Israel. Not that Israel should be given a free pass. Absolutely not. But the Council should give the same attention to grave violations committed by other states as well."[77]

On 20 June 2007, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement that read: "The Secretary-General is disappointed at the council's decision to single out only one specific regional item given the range and scope of allegations of human rights violations throughout the world."[7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#.22Defamation_of_religion.22

Resolutions condemning human rights abuses in such places as Uganda (member), Saudi Arabia (member) Sudan, Syria and more, are either non-existent or weak and far and few between. Mauritania, for instance, also a member is widely recognized as a country with more slaves than any other. Or the UAE, also a member:

UAE: Backsliding on Human Rights

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/01/31/uae-backsliding-human-rights


I'm all for the United Nations Human Rights Council highlighting Israel's abuses and investigating the U.S for targeted killings, but when they utterly ignore or downplay equally or more serious abuses in other countries- particularly abuses against women and gay folks, it makes it hard to respect the organization.

[Comrade Grumpy]

24. None of that negates Israel's crimes.

[cali]

29. and I didn't say it did. try reading.

[RedstDem]

21. Isreal is a right wing rogue state

nothing new..

[cali]

23. less so than many of those on the UNHRC

[RedstDem]

32. Pot Kettle Black

[Mosby]

26. is the UNHRC/ICC going to decide the western border?

Cuz there isn't one.

[question everything]

27. Screw the ICC

Israel does not need nor does it request the approval of anyone, including all the bleeding hearts in DU for its existence and actions.

When, by the way, will DU rally against Syria, Egypt, the Congo, Russia and so many other countries that terrorize its citizens and that, of course, does not have free press to report to the world about the actions?

[TheMadMonk]

31. Shall I quote yurmum. "If your friend jumped in the cesspit..."

Leaving Russia asside as a special case of centuries old institutionalised corruption, Syria, Egypt, Congo, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, and on and on and on are pretty much all the result of WESTERN IMPERIALISM, and borders deliberately drawn in a manner to promote internal conflict and discourage unity against the then invaders.

Furthermore, the minority populations were often used as the colonial's enforcers, and local agents, because they: a) didn't have any problem with lording it over the majority, indeed many relished the opportunity; b) were grateful for the power they were given; and c) while they were privileged they had no reason to side with the local majority and drive out the interlopers.

When the colonials finally did pull out, they did so leaving the minorities in charge, and with no realistic choice but to ramp up the brutality, or suffer anhilation at the hands of a very pissed off majortity.

And where the colonials moved back in in the shape of multi-national corporate conglomerates, they went right back to playing one local faction off against the other.


Now that's all a simplistic, but it does explain why Iraq has been such a cluster fuck. Siding with the majority, IMMEDIATELY led to that majority setting about evening up a lot of old scores and then backing the minority led to further and worse atrocities as that minority set about reestablishing it's power.

I could argue that Israel owes it's entire existence to the UN, but the truth is, it seemed like the easiest solution at the time to dealing with several million displaced Jews, nowhere to put them and no one willing to return to them property that was rightfully theirs.

Israel is just one more example of what happens when an indigent majority is forced to live under the rule of a minority when there is significant historical bad blood between the two.


BTW: People on DU often have a lot to say about all those countries you mention and a whole lot of others besides. What they don't have is a cheer squad so vocal and militant that they need to be quarantined in their own group just to preserve the sanity of the rest of us.

[zellie]

33. So true.

Israel should tell the ICC to go pound sand and tell them to shove it up their holier-than-thou a$$ .....puke.

And then tell the UN to really go **** themselves.

[bunnies]

28. Israel does whatever Israel wants.

Good luck with this. End of story.