Reply #16: And there is the whole point but in a different way than you mean [View All]

[LeftishBrit]

The UN - partly because the Arab states tend to hang together on this one issue; partly probably because of the influence over a long period of the Soviet Union - have tended to be disproportionately critical of Israel as compared with other countries. (There are some signs that this might be changing, though Libya seems pretty determined that it shouldn't!)

It's not that the UN SHOULDN'T have criticized Israel's treatment against an occupied people. I think that most of the criticisms were justified. But why not some more criticisms of the Arab countries for their treatment of Jews, Palestinians, each other when not uniting against Israel, and often their own people? Why not some more criticism of the Soviet Union for its domination of Eastern Europe, or contemporary Russia for its occupation of Chechnya? Or China for its occupation of Tibet? Or Burma/Myanmar for its HORRIBLE treatment of its own people; only now truly in the spotlight? Or the Latin American dictatorships of the 1970s and 80s? Or Spain for being a fascist dictatorship up until 1975? Or the UK and USA for their immoral pre-emptive invasion of Iraq and current occupation? Or...

Now why is this relevant? Because the UN are the people who really SHOULD be acting as honest brokers. They should be the international police, to whom people on all sides can go when suffering from grievances. If they were willing and able to do their job - which would involve honest criticism of, and pressure on, Israel AND Palestinians AND the Arab states, then perhaps a lot of the problems would be less severe by now, and Israel might never have become so dependent on American support.

Now there are lots of things involved, and I have no wish to scapegoat the UN, whose existence, with all its limitations, has probably helped to prevent a Third World War. But the fact that the UN has criticized Israel more than other countries is not a sign that Israel is worse than any other countries; it's a sign that the UN is unwilling, or perhaps unable, to act impartially. The UN is, up till now, biased against Israel, and the US is doubtless biased toward Israel - but the latter is to quite a degree *caused* by the repercussions of the former. It's better for any person or country to depend on the equal and impartial protection of the law, than on special help from a bigger friend - but if you can't get the former, you're much more likely to welcome the latter.