Tuesday (Nov. 9, 2021) and Thursday (Nov. 11, 2021) the United Nations General Assembly’s Fourth Committee (the “Special Political and Decolonization” Committee) will vote on a number of anti-Israel draft resolutions that will then go on to the full General Assembly for final passage. Though this is a committee vote, it usually ends up mirroring the final vote at the GA, as countries rarely change their vote after the committee votes.
Though this is not the only avenue for anti-Israel votes at the UNGA (resolutions also come out of some of the other committees and are also occasionally brought straight to the GA floor, bypassing the committees entirely), the votes being taken at the Fourth Committee this week represent a chunk of the annual resolutions attacking Israel at the UNGA.
Among the important resolutions being voted upon are:
The “Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices…”
This is the most critical vote this week. The “Special Committee” is one of three pro-Palestinian propaganda bodies that are embedded within the U.N. in New York. The other two—the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) and the Division for Palestinian Rights (DPR)—were renewed last year for the first time with two year mandates, so they will not come up for a vote this year. Unlike most of the other GA resolutions, which are usually declarative in nature, these three have a special budget that come out of your tax dollars, and the Special Committee is the only one up for a vote this year.
B’nai B’rith and our affiliate AJIRI-BBI have been working throughout the year in New York, Washington, Israel, Latin America, Europe and around the world to advocate that countries move in more positive directions with their votes on these three resolutions. And, indeed, there has been a noticeable erosion on the vote in favor. Last year, only 76 countries voted in favor of the Special Committee (less than half of all U.N. member states), and the number of European countries turning from mere abstentions to “No” votes on CEIRPP and DPR is thought to be a reason that the Palestinians started making it a two-year mandate—to avoid having to take votes every year that were getting increasingly embarrassing. While it is great that the movement is in a positive direction, the situation is still bad—all three mandates still pass (and CEIRPP and DPR now for two years at a time) and cause damage to Israel and all who believe in the dream of a peaceful Middle East.
The Special Committee is perhaps less well-known than the other two bodies, but no less dangerous. It acts as an amplifier of talking points and lies spread by Palestinian NGOs, the Palestinian Authority and other actors hostile to Israel. It is part of the continual noise machinery of the U.N. focused squarely (and only) on Israel. The resolution calls on the committee to carry on doing what it is currently doing, especially “investigating” the conditions of (terrorist) prisoners. It also, with no small amount of chutzpah, demands that Israel—as a U.N. member state—cooperate with the committee whose sole purpose is to demonize and delegitimize the Jewish state. The resolution continues to fund the operations of the committee and gives it support staff through the U.N.’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The resolution will pass, as always, but it will be interesting to see if the voting trends on this resolution improve this year when it is the only of the three “Palestinian committees” to get a vote.
This resolution seeks to put the onus of the moribund state of the peace process on Israel, claiming that the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria (or, if you prefer the term imposed during the Jordanian occupation of 1948-1967, the West Bank) are the main obstacles to peace. Whatever one may think about these communities, they are not the obstacle—it is the Palestinian leadership’s refusal to negotiate with Israel’s government that has consistently sidelined the peace process.
This resolution also obsesses (by devoting multiple operative paragraphs) over “settler violence,” which is not a phenomenon that is incredibly widespread, unlike Palestinian terrorism, which has been the ultimate foil of all peace efforts since the 1990s. To show what goes for balance at the U.N., acts of violence and terror on “both sides” are quietly condemned too, but the drawing of a moral equivalence in this case does not show balance—it shows the moral bankruptcy of the institution. Palestinian terrorism, after all, has led to the deaths of thousands of Israelis and Palestinians.
Finally, there is also a roundabout call for boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS). The roundabout is necessary because only the Security Council has the power to enforce sanctions on entities. This resolution calls on the U.N. to abide by a UNHRC resolution on businesses in the settlements. Again, the UNHRC does not have the power to issue any orders on business activities, but the elements hostile to Israel at the U.N. are falsely trying to make it appear as if this is call is legitimate. It is not.
Unfortunately, this resolution—which, it should be underlined, is declarative and has no teeth—will also likely pass, and easily.
The Golan Heights
You might think that a resolution sponsored by the Syrian regime complaining about Israel’s presence on the Golan Heights—which Israel won in a defensive struggle in the Six Day War following years of harassment and threats to annihilate the Jewish state by invasion from the strategic area—could not possibly be taken seriously. But alas, this is the U.N. In fact, it will pass, however, the voting on this resolution has also turned a corner since Assad went on a genocidal rampage against his own people.
More countries recognize the absurdity of this resolution but not enough to have it banished forever, sadly. Adding to the absurdity—there are more annual resolutions at the UNGA and the UNHRC about Israel’s Golan Heights than about all of the horrors happening next door in Syria, committed not only by Assad, but also by his allies Iran and Hezbollah.
Assistance to Palestinian Refugees
This is a resolution praising the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). No mention is made of the longstanding issue of hate being taught at UNRWA schools, although there is a section that acknowledges (note: not affirms or endorses) UNRWA’s commitment to operate under the principles of “neutrality, humanity, independence and impartiality,” which is undoubtedly a nod to the scandals that have hit the agency in recent years, especially the blatant anti-Semitism in educational materials. This commitment is not really credible, though, given UNRWA’s history.
Operations of UNRWA
A companion resolution to the one above, this is a very long plea for donor countries to keep funding or even increase contributions to UNRWA, which claims its budget is in a big hole. The resolution does not address the causes of why countries might be pulling or holding back funding. UNRWA is not merely a humanitarian and educational agency, unlike UNHCR, which handles all other refugee situations. UNRWA regularly engages in politics and pushes a nonexistent “right of return,” in which all descendants of Palestinians who fled in 1948 would be allowed access to immigrate to Israel, thereby ending the existence of the democratic Jewish state. Beyond that and the incitement mentioned above, UNRWA facilities have been used by terrorists. During the latest conflict, a tunnel was found under an UNRWA school. Prior to that, rockets were found to be stored in an UNRWA facility. This resolution addresses that—as only the U.N. could—by calling on Israel to safeguard the security of UNRWA facilities, even though it is Hamas who actually puts those facilities in danger by using them for military purposes.
The resolution will, of course, pass by wide margins. But given the controversies surrounding UNRWA (those mentioned above and also, not insignificantly, a corruption scandal), it’s clear that there is a reason why donor countries have been holding back on funding this agency.
This week’s votes are important, but they are only the beginning of the annual Israel-bashing cycle at the UNGA. Another series of votes will be taken at the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Issues) next week, followed by final consideration of all of these resolutions (and any other resolutions brought straight to the floor) at the full General Assembly, starting after the observance of the U.N.’s self-declared International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People at the end of the month.
Another U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) General Debate session is in the books, and—as we have in years past—B’nai B’rith has been actively engaged throughout the week, meeting with presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers and other diplomats from over 30 countries. The countries we met with this year spanned the Middle East, Europe, Latin America and Asia. B’nai B’rith not only meets with these leaders, but also has the special role of coordinating many of the meetings for a group of major American and international Jewish organizations. We are not the only Jewish organization that meets with world leaders during that week, but we are distinguished by having this role during this time of year at the U.N.
Usually one of the Jewish holidays (either Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur or Sukkot) will fall during UNGA week. However, this year the Chagim started late, which meant that for the first time in a few years, we had a full, uninterrupted week of meetings.
The broad issues that are on our advocacy agenda for the week—Iran, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, global anti-Semitism, and U.N. bias against Israel—are similar from year to year. However, within each issue area, the topics of discussion can change based on developments on the ground in the Middle East and around the world. The importance of the UNGA week is not due to a specific meeting that we may or may not have in a given year, but because it facilitates an ongoing dialogue with the leadership of an expanding list of countries, so that the specific concerns of the global Jewish community are understood. B’nai B’rith International’s reach, including our offices, units, members and supporters around the world, allows us to play this role.
Though marathon speechmaking of the General Debate has ended--as has our own diplomatic marathon--for the General Assembly (G.A.), the work is now just beginning. The G.A. is quickly moving to start its business for the year, as the G.A.’s committees convene and start negotiations on many resolutions that will be brought up to the floor of the G.A. for voting later this fall. B’nai B’rith will be monitoring the key resolutions that are annually voted upon each year at the G.A., including the resolutions that renew the mandate of the Palestinian propaganda bodies housed within the U.N. system (most notoriously, the Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People and the Division for Palestinian Rights) and the renewal of the mandate of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), among other important resolutions.
The start of the Jewish new year and the U.N.’s calendar year often intersect (and, as stated above, sometimes directly conflict). The start of a Jewish new year is a time for optimism and hope for good things to come; the start of a new year at the U.N., sadly, does not inspire the same feelings. At the U.N., we hope for slow progress towards having a world body that lives up to its own goals, and often prepare ourselves for a hard struggle to ensure that the U.N. does not backslide to even more absurd and dangerous positions.
Oren Drori is the Program Officer for United Nations Affairs at B’nai B’rith International where he supports advocacy and programming efforts that advance B’nai B’rith’s goals at the U.N., which include: defending Israel, combating anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and promoting global human rights and humanitarian concerns. He received a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Minnesota in 2004 and an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Chicago in 2006. Click here to view more of his additional content.
Earlier this month, the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) commemorated the 70th anniversary since its founding meeting in 1946. That meeting was held not in the city most associated with the institution, New York, but in London, a city still recovering at the time from heavy Nazi bombardment. Anniversaries are a good time to reflect and analyze about the past, and to look forward to the future. Unfortunately, when it comes to the UNGA, the list of shortcomings is long, while accomplishments are few.
At the outset, it should be noted that the General Assembly played a role in the independence of the State of Israel. The British relinquished to the U.N. the decision of what to do with the British Mandate over pre-state Israel after rising tensions. The UNGA passed a resolution in November1947 that the land should be partitioned into a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Yishuv (the pre-state Jewish government) accepted the partition and declared independence for the State of Israel. The Arabs rejected the plan and launched a failed war of annihilation against the fledgling Jewish state. Zionism did not need the U.N. to create a state (indeed, there was already the Yishuv, a pre-state government, and the Haganah, a pre-state army, to create and defend the Jewish state), but the legitimacy granted by the community of nations approving of Jewish self-determination in our ancient homeland was important. Israel was admitted as a U.N. member state in 1949, following approval by the Security Council and General Assembly.
After that point, however, the relationship soured. By the 1960s and 1970s, the U.N. General Assembly became an intensely hostile venue for Israel and the Jewish people. The low-point was the “Zionism is Racism” resolution (see prior blog post on this resolution). The UNGA also created during this period a set of Palestinian propaganda units housed within the U.N. bureaucracy: the “Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People” and the “Division for Palestinian Rights.” These units, whose combined yearly budget is over $6 million, continue to be active participants in the global Palestinian propaganda campaign against Israel from within U.N. Headquarters to this day. In the 1980s the Arab states, along with some Third World dictatorships and Soviet states, tried, unsuccessfully, to remove Israel from the General Assembly.
The 1990s saw the repeal of the “Zionism=Racism” resolution (one of the few resolutions ever to be rescinded) after concerted effort by Israel, the United States., other allies and B’nai B’rith and the Jewish community. Israel’s diplomatic horizons expanded dramatically in the 1990s, thanks in part to the end of the Cold War and the peace process. At the U.N., however, the only tangible benefit was the repeal of the patently absurd “Zionism=Racism” resolution. The number of annual biased resolutions attacking Israel did not decrease. For perspective—there are now around 20 resolutions each year that condemn Israel. A handful of other states (and only the most egregious ones—Iran, Sudan, Syria, North Korea) will be condemned by one resolution apiece.
More On The United Nations:
The General Assembly has called Emergency Special Sessions to discuss urgent issues relating to peace and security only 10 times. Six of these 10 sessions have been called on issues relating to the Middle East. In 1997, the UNGA called the Tenth Emergency Special Session (to condemn Israel for building in Jerusalem), and then decided to suspend the session so that it could be re-opened later. In the years since, it has been re-opened 13 times to issue one-sided condemnations of Israel for counter-terrorism activities during an onslaught of Palestinian suicide bombings in the early 2000s and rocket attacks. Needless to say, the Palestinian violence that necessitated measures such as Israel’s security barrier and counter-terrorism operations was routinely ignored.
The situation at the UNGA in the last 10 years is very serious, but not utterly bleak. The General Assembly passed, 60 years after the fact, resolutions on Holocaust remembrance and Holocaust denial, and created a program within the United Nations to educate about the Holocaust throughout the world. The assembly also passed, by wide margins, for the first time two Israeli-initiated resolutions on agricultural technology and entrepreneurship. A series of Israeli diplomats have also been elected by their peers to important positions at the General Assembly, a recognition that diplomats recognize that Israel has contributions to make at the U.N. beyond the conflict.
Overall, however, the persistent anti-Israel obsession continues to plague the General Assembly, which radiates outwards throughout the U.N. system since the assembly controls the budgeting and prioritization of issues at the U.N. The UNGA also is the parent body of the discredited Human Rights Council, and conducts elections for seats at the Human Rights Council, Security Council and other bodies. General Assembly resolutions are non-binding and do not carry significant weight in international law when compared to Security Council resolutions, but we must not fall into the trap of believing that because of this that the UNGA is completely irrelevant.
The UNGA gives those who are hostile to the existence of the State of Israel a global platform from which they try to legitimize their hateful bigotry. Israel and other democracies engaged in counter-terrorism efforts will continue to feel negative effects from the endemic bias and corruption of the General Assembly until the many nations who are not hopelessly anti-Israel, but vote against Israel in order to avoid making waves in the powerful regional groups, stand up and refuse to take part in the relentless campaign against Israel at the UNGA.
Oren Drori is the Program Officer for United Nations Affairs at B’nai B’rith International where he supports advocacy and programming efforts that advance B’nai B’rith’s goals at the U.N., which include: defending Israel, combating anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, and promoting global human rights and humanitarian concerns. He received a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Minnesota in 2004 and an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Chicago in 2006. To view some of his additional content, Click Here.
B'nai B'rith International has widely respected experts in the fields of: