“This resolution reaffirms the biased stance the U.N. Human Rights Council has had since its inception,” said BBI Executive Vice President Daniel S. Mariaschin. “Once again, the Council has released a document with unconscionable language attacking Israel while leaving its attackers relatively unscathed.”

The resolution, titled “The Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory particularly due to the recent Israeli military attacks against the occupied Gaza Strip,” criticizes Israel’s defensive action in the Gaza Strip as a “massive [violation] of human rights of the Palestinian people and systematic destruction of the Palestinian infrastructure.” While repeatedly attacking Israel for its actions, the resolution only briefly mentions the Hamas-launched rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip that incited this ordeal.

Included in the one-sided language are demands that Israel “immediately end its military action with a full withdrawal of forces and “end its occupation [of] all Palestinian lands occupied since 1967.”

“These sorts of resolutions act as a hindrance to the peace process rather than a catalyst,” said BBI President Moishe Smith. “Instead of identifying Hamas as the aggressor and focusing on the human rights violated by Hamas launching rockets into civilian populations in Israel, the Human Rights Council has once again created an extremely biased and unacceptable resolution that skirts the real issue.”

The resolution was adopted by a 33 to 1 vote, with 13 abstentions. Russia and several Latin American countries, including Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Cuba, Uruguay, and Mexico, all played key roles in passing the resolution. Canada was the only nation to vote against the resolution, while several European Union countries, Japan, and South Korea abstained.

Shortly before the Council voted on the resolution, Klaus Netter addressed the issue on behalf of B’nai B’rith International. His statement follows:

Mister President:

This is the fifth special session dealing with the Israel-Arab conflict. It will end, as night follows day, with a severe one-sided condemnation of Israel. The official media of the countries which called for this session will rejoice over yet another empty political victory in this hall. They will be indifferent to the uselessness of such resolutions in relieving the suffering of civilians on both sides. Certain critics of Israel in the media and the international community have emphasized the disproportionality between the number of victims on either side, while ignoring its immediate cause, namely the decision by Hamas to end the truce and fire hundreds of rockets into southern Israel. Israel, as a U.N. Member State, has the right and responsibility to protect its citizens from these terrorist attacks. In doing so, however, Israel has understood its humanitarian obligation to civilians in Gaza trapped under the illegal rule of Hamas by warning civilians ahead of strikes, allowing increasing humanitarian aid into the strip, and observing periods of calm to allow the aid to be disbursed. In contrast to Israel’s attempts to avoid harm to civilians when possible, Hamas has increased its targeting of Israeli civilians by launching rockets further into Israel to even larger population centers.

In the past year, Israel has engaged in negotiations with the Palestinian Authority towards a two-State solution to the conflict. During this same time frame, Hamas refused to recognize the very existence of the State of Israel and built up an arsenal of smuggled rockets. If this Council wishes to make a contribution to resolving the conflict in Gaza, it must recognize that Hamas is a major obstacle to peace in the region and directly address the terror and destruction wrought by Hamas, and its role in bringing about this current crisis. A truly meaningful and relevant resolution by the Council would be one calling for civilians to be protected from being used as targets for attacks from neighboring territory and as shields for combatants unwilling to face the consequences of their belligerency.

Thank you, Mister President.