Although the United Nations Security Council, which some politicians believe is one of the most undemocratic organizations in the world, voted in favor of a fourth round of sanctions against Iran over its uranium enrichment program, global public opinion is well aware of the fact that 15 countries, 5 of which are entitled to remain in an unquestionable monopoly and dominance, cannot in reality represent the interests of the international community.
Israeli ambassador gestures during the UN Human Rights Council session, 24/03/10
Although the United Nations Security Council, which some politicians believe is one of the most undemocratic organizations in the world, voted in favor of a fourth round of sanctions against Iran over its uranium enrichment program, global public opinion is well aware of the fact that 15 countries, 5 of which are entitled to remain in an unquestionable monopoly and dominance, cannot in reality represent the interests of the international community.
The Security Council, which since its establishment has made discriminatory decisions against the world countries, especially the non-aligned nations who typically try to escape from the hegemony of superpowers, is notorious for its habitual exercise of double standards and it's clear to everyone that its resolutions are more often than not futile, ineffective, biased and unbinding.
Since 1948, the Security Council has adopted 223 resolutions in condemnation of Israel 's violations of international law, including the occupation of Palestinian lands, unilateral incursions into the Lebanese and Syrian soils, developing nuclear weapons, deporting the Palestinian citizens from their homes and building illegal settlements in the West Bank . Interestingly, the Israeli regime did not pay attention to any of these resolutions and the UNSC never pursued its demands to hold Tel Aviv accountable for its continued, flagrant defiance of international regulations.
For instance, the UNSC resolution 487 demanded Israel to put its nuclear facilities under the comprehensive safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Israel never heeded the call and the UNSC never sued Israel for its inattentiveness to the resolution.
As another example, the Security Council adopted six consequent resolutions in the wake of 1982 Lebanon War, calling on Israel to cease its military activities and withdraw its forces from the Lebanese territory, but Israel refused to accept the resolutions until the resolution 517 was adopted in which Tel Aviv was strongly censured for its failure to obey the UNSC resolutions since March 1982.
The criminal state of Israel , since its establishment, attacked all of its neighboring countries on various occasions and incited UNSC resolutions; however, these resolutions never went beyond political statements which were the least spontaneous reactions to Israel 's brutality in the Middle East . On March 21, 1968, Israel fought the Battle of Karameh by attacking the Karameh district of Jordan, killing 40 to 84 Jordanians and 100 to 200 Palestinians. The massive attacked was followed by UNSC resolution 248 in which the "flagrant violation of the UN Charter" was strongly condemned by all of the UNSC members, even the United States; however, this verbal condemnation was the sole reaction of the Security Council to Israel's violence.
In December 1968, Israel Defense Forces raided the Beirut International Airport , destroying 13 civilian airplanes belonging to Lebanon 's national flag-carrier Middle East Airlines. The assault was followed by UNSC resolution 262 which condemned Israel once again. The resolution cautioned Israel to retreat from repeating such actions to avoid being punished more severely; however, the further steps never were taken, even when Israel repeated the same criminal actions.
In 1985, Israel staged an air raid on Tunisia to target the Palestinian Liberation Organization headquarters in the country. The resolution condemned Israel and demanded that Tel Aviv refrain from further such attacks. It also noted that Tunisia had the right to repatriations considering the loss of life and material damage caused.
Having killed thousands of civilians since its creation, the criminal record of Israeli regime is clear to the world and every conscious man testifies that this brutal regime deserves the strongest measures to be taken against.
United Nations Security Council never went beyond propagandistic declarations regarding the unlawful and inhuman actions of Tel Aviv, its killing of innocent civilians and violation of international humanitarian law. If it were not the pressure of international community, UNSC even would have not issued these flimsy and ineffective resolutions against Israel .
UNSC never passed any resolution to impose sanctions against Israel even though the transgressions and felonies of Israel are so blatant and conspicuous that nobody can deny the claim that Israel is the most violence and vicious regime in the world, an identical and indistinguishable duplicate of the apartheid regime of South Africa .
The recent resolution of the Security Council against Iran was a clear exercise of double standards by this prejudiced international body and should be answered by the Islamic Republic of Iran categorically. The hypocritical stance of China and Russia regarding Iran 's nuclear program and the astounding accompaniment of independent nations such as Gabon , Nigeria , Uganda , Bosnia and Herzegovina and Mexico with the fallacious, deceptive trajectory of the big 5 leave no room for the continued diplomacy and peaceful interaction by Iran .
Iran has so far demonstrated a constructive and productive cooperation with IAEA, G5+1 and European Union, keeping all the doors open for negotiation and reconciliation; however, the time for diplomacy has come to an end. Now that the coalition of superpowers, including China and Russia, have taken a confrontational stance against Iran and want to go through a unilateralistic path, Iran should change its tactic and one of the best solutions it can adopt is to withdraw from IAEA. If Pakistan , India and Israel can enjoy international impunity to develop nuclear weapons simply because they are not IAEA signatories, Iran can have equally the right to progress its peaceful nuclear program by withdrawing from a treaty which had ratified voluntarily.
The Security Council, which since its establishment has made discriminatory decisions against the world countries, especially the non-aligned nations who typically try to escape from the hegemony of superpowers, is notorious for its habitual exercise of double standards and it's clear to everyone that its resolutions are more often than not futile, ineffective, biased and unbinding.
Since 1948, the Security Council has adopted 223 resolutions in condemnation of Israel 's violations of international law, including the occupation of Palestinian lands, unilateral incursions into the Lebanese and Syrian soils, developing nuclear weapons, deporting the Palestinian citizens from their homes and building illegal settlements in the West Bank . Interestingly, the Israeli regime did not pay attention to any of these resolutions and the UNSC never pursued its demands to hold Tel Aviv accountable for its continued, flagrant defiance of international regulations.
For instance, the UNSC resolution 487 demanded Israel to put its nuclear facilities under the comprehensive safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Israel never heeded the call and the UNSC never sued Israel for its inattentiveness to the resolution.
As another example, the Security Council adopted six consequent resolutions in the wake of 1982 Lebanon War, calling on Israel to cease its military activities and withdraw its forces from the Lebanese territory, but Israel refused to accept the resolutions until the resolution 517 was adopted in which Tel Aviv was strongly censured for its failure to obey the UNSC resolutions since March 1982.
The criminal state of Israel , since its establishment, attacked all of its neighboring countries on various occasions and incited UNSC resolutions; however, these resolutions never went beyond political statements which were the least spontaneous reactions to Israel 's brutality in the Middle East . On March 21, 1968, Israel fought the Battle of Karameh by attacking the Karameh district of Jordan, killing 40 to 84 Jordanians and 100 to 200 Palestinians. The massive attacked was followed by UNSC resolution 248 in which the "flagrant violation of the UN Charter" was strongly condemned by all of the UNSC members, even the United States; however, this verbal condemnation was the sole reaction of the Security Council to Israel's violence.
In December 1968, Israel Defense Forces raided the Beirut International Airport , destroying 13 civilian airplanes belonging to Lebanon 's national flag-carrier Middle East Airlines. The assault was followed by UNSC resolution 262 which condemned Israel once again. The resolution cautioned Israel to retreat from repeating such actions to avoid being punished more severely; however, the further steps never were taken, even when Israel repeated the same criminal actions.
In 1985, Israel staged an air raid on Tunisia to target the Palestinian Liberation Organization headquarters in the country. The resolution condemned Israel and demanded that Tel Aviv refrain from further such attacks. It also noted that Tunisia had the right to repatriations considering the loss of life and material damage caused.
Having killed thousands of civilians since its creation, the criminal record of Israeli regime is clear to the world and every conscious man testifies that this brutal regime deserves the strongest measures to be taken against.
United Nations Security Council never went beyond propagandistic declarations regarding the unlawful and inhuman actions of Tel Aviv, its killing of innocent civilians and violation of international humanitarian law. If it were not the pressure of international community, UNSC even would have not issued these flimsy and ineffective resolutions against Israel .
UNSC never passed any resolution to impose sanctions against Israel even though the transgressions and felonies of Israel are so blatant and conspicuous that nobody can deny the claim that Israel is the most violence and vicious regime in the world, an identical and indistinguishable duplicate of the apartheid regime of South Africa .
The recent resolution of the Security Council against Iran was a clear exercise of double standards by this prejudiced international body and should be answered by the Islamic Republic of Iran categorically. The hypocritical stance of China and Russia regarding Iran 's nuclear program and the astounding accompaniment of independent nations such as Gabon , Nigeria , Uganda , Bosnia and Herzegovina and Mexico with the fallacious, deceptive trajectory of the big 5 leave no room for the continued diplomacy and peaceful interaction by Iran .
Iran has so far demonstrated a constructive and productive cooperation with IAEA, G5+1 and European Union, keeping all the doors open for negotiation and reconciliation; however, the time for diplomacy has come to an end. Now that the coalition of superpowers, including China and Russia, have taken a confrontational stance against Iran and want to go through a unilateralistic path, Iran should change its tactic and one of the best solutions it can adopt is to withdraw from IAEA. If Pakistan , India and Israel can enjoy international impunity to develop nuclear weapons simply because they are not IAEA signatories, Iran can have equally the right to progress its peaceful nuclear program by withdrawing from a treaty which had ratified voluntarily.
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following comment
Flashback: UN Human Rights Council adopts 5 resolutions against Israel
14.06.2010 11:30
The UN Human Rights Council has roundly condemned Israel in resolutions tabled under the agenda item 7, “Human Rights Situation in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories”.
Five resolutions have been adopted against Israel, amounting to the greatest number of condemnatory resolutions on a single country:
1) Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan (voted on 24/03/2010: 31 in favour, 1 against, 15 abstentions)
In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.2) on human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan, adopted with thirty-one in favour, one against, and fifteen abstentions, the Council calls upon Israel to desist from its continuous building of settlements and from changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan, and emphasizes that the displaced persons of the population of the occupied Syrian Golan must be allowed to return to their homes and to recover their property; further calls upon Israel to desist from imposing Israeli citizenship and Israeli identity cards on the Syrian citizens in the occupied Syrian Golan, and to desist from its repressive measures against them and from all other practices that obstruct the enjoyment of their fundamental rights and their civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights; calls upon Israel to allow the Syrian population of the occupied Syrian Golan to visit their families and relatives in the Syrian motherland through the Quneitra checkpoint and under the supervision of the International Committee of the Red Cross, and to rescind its decision to prohibit these visits, as it is in flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; also calls upon Israel to release immediately the Syrian detainees in Israeli prisons, some of whom have been detained for more than 24 years; further calls upon Israel to allow delegates of the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit Syrian prisoners of conscience and detainees in Israeli prisons accompanied by specialized physicians to assess the state of their physical and mental health and to protect their lives; determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken or to be taken by Israel, the occupying Power, that seek to alter the character and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan are null and void, constitute a flagrant violation of international law and of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and have no legal effect; again calls upon States Members of the United Nations not to recognize any of the above-mentioned legislative or administrative measures; and requests the Secretary-General to report on this matter to the Council at its sixteenth session.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (31): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (1): United States of America.
Abstentions (15): Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, France, Gabon, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
______________________________
2) The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (voted on 24/03/2010: 45 in favour, 1 against)
In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.27) on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, adopted with forty-five in favour, one against, and no abstentions, the Council reaffirms the inalienable, permanent and unqualified right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including their right to live in freedom, justice and dignity and to establish their sovereign, independent, democratic and viable contiguous State; also reaffirms its support for the solution of two States, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security; stresses the need for respect for and preservation of the territorial unity, contiguity and integrity of all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; and urges all Member States and relevant bodies of the United Nations system to support and assist the Palestinian people in the early realization of their right to self-determination.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (45): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, France, Gabon, Ghana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (1): United States of America.
Abstentions (0):
______________________________
3) Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan (voted on 24/03/2010: 46 in favour, 1 against)
In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.28) on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan, adopted with forty-six in favour, one against, and no abstentions, the Council condemns the new Israeli announcement on the construction of 120 new housing units in the Bitar Elite settlement, and 1,600 new housing units for new settlers in the East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Ramat Shlomo, and calls upon the Government of Israel to immediately reverse its decision which would further undermine and jeopardize the ongoing efforts by the international community to reach a final settlement compliant with international legitimacy, including the relevant United Nations resolutions; urges the full implementation of the Access and Movement Agreement of 15 November 2005, particularly the urgent reopening of Rafah and Karni crossings, which is crucial to ensuring the passage of foodstuffs and essential supplies, as well as the access of the United Nations agencies to and within the Occupied Palestinian Territory; calls upon Israel to take and implement serious measures, including confiscation of arms and enforcement of criminal sanctions, with the aim of preventing acts of violence by Israeli settlers, and other measures to guarantee the safety and protection of the Palestinian civilians and Palestinian properties in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; demands that Israel, the occupying Power, comply fully with its legal obligations, as mentioned in the Advisory Opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice; and urges the parties to give renewed impetus to the peace process.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (46): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, France, Gabon, Ghana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay and Zambia .
Against (1): United States of America.
Abstentions (0):
______________________________
4) The grave human rights violations by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem (voted on 24/03/2010: 31 in favour, 9 against, 7 abstentions)
In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.29) on the grave human rights violations by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, adopted with thirty-one in favour, nine against, and seven abstentions, the Council demands that the occupying Power, Israel, end its occupation of the Palestinian land occupied since 1967, and that it respect its commitments within the peace process towards the establishment of the independent sovereign Palestinian State; strongly condemns the Israeli military attacks and operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; demands that the occupying Power, Israel, stop the targeting of civilians and the systematic destruction of the cultural heritage of the Palestinian people; condemns the disrespect for religious and cultural rights provided for in core human rights instruments and humanitarian law by Israel, in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; demands that Israel immediately cease all diggings and excavation works beneath and around Al-Aqsa mosque compound and other religious sites in the old city of Jerusalem; calls for the immediate cessation of all Israeli military attacks and operations throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory; demands that the occupying Power, Israel, immediately stop its illegal decision to demolish a large number of Palestinian houses in East Jerusalem; demands that Israel, release Palestinian prisoners and detainees including women, children and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council; calls upon Israel to lift checkpoints and open all crossing points and borders according to relevant international agreements; and demands that Israel immediately lift the siege imposed on the occupied Gaza Strip.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (31): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (9):Belgium, France, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Slovakia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and United States of America.
Abstentions (7):Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Japan, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, and Ukraine.
______________________________
5) Follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (voted on 25/03/2010: 29 in favour, 6 against, 11 abstentions)
In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.30) on follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, adopted with twenty-nine in favour, six against, and eleven abstentions, as orally amended, the Council reiterates the call by the General Assembly upon the Government of Israel to conduct investigations that are independent, credible and in conformity with international standards into the serious violations of international humanitarian and international human rights law reported by the Fact-Finding Mission, with a view to ensuring accountability and justice; reiterates the urging by the General Assembly for the conduct by the Palestinian side of investigations that are independent, credible and in conformity with international standards into the serious violations of international humanitarian and international human rights law reported by the Fact-Finding Mission, with a view to ensuring accountability and justice; calls upon the High Commissioner to explore and determine the appropriate modalities for the establishment of an escrow fund for the provision of reparations to the Palestinians who suffered loss and damage as a result of unlawful acts attributable to the State of Israel during the military operations conducted from December 2008 to January 2009; decides to establish a committee of independent experts in international humanitarian and human rights laws to monitor and assess any domestic, legal or other proceedings undertaken by both the Government of Israel and the Palestinian side, in the light of General Assembly resolution 64/254, including the independence, effectiveness, genuineness of these investigations and their conformity with international standards; and invites the International Committee of the Red Cross and interested parties and stakeholders to consider the launching of an urgent discussion on the legality of the use of certain munitions, as recommended by the Fact-Finding Mission. Draft resolution L.30 was presented by Pakistan at the end of yesterday’s meeting (please see separate release, HRC/10/45).
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (29): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovenia, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.
Against (6): Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Ukraine, and United States of America.
Abstentions (11): Belgium, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, France, Japan, Madagascar, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
______________________________
sources:
[1] Human Rights Council renews mandates on right to food and on elaboration of optional protocol to children’s rights convention
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights website, 24 March 2010
[2] Council establishes committee on experts in context of follow-up of Goldstone report, renews mandate on Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights website, 24 March 2010
______________________________
dandelion salad
Homepage:
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2010/03/25/un-human-rights-council-adopts-5-resolutions-against-israel/