Amb. Alan Baker: Why Does the UN Coddle Iran?
Threats to annihilate Israel emanate daily from the Iranian political and military leadership. The Charter of the United Nations in its preambular paragraphs calls on all its members "to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors." Above all, member states commit to "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."Israel’s Two Big Lies
But UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres shamefully ignores Iran's blatant violations of the UN Charter. While Guterres and his staff regularly demonstrate alarming alacrity, enthusiasm, and efficiency in rushing to condemn Israel, even by relying on false, inaccurate, and questionable data provided by UN bodies openly hostile to Israel, as well as on slanted media reporting, they turn a blind eye to Iran's behavior in openly abusing the UN Charter.
Is it not high time that serious world powers rethink the entire concept of a world organization, in light of the fact that the UN has been utterly hijacked and taken hostage by those bent on destroying the international community rather than enhancing its effectiveness? Is that what the founding fathers of the UN intended?
Last week, Amit Segal, one of Israel’s finest journalists, revealed that the military prosecutor’s office has instructed the IDF not to target Gazan civilians who actively participated in the Oct. 7 massacre, including those who reportedly kidnapped the Bibas babies and their parents. The IDF’s legal eagles, members of the country’s caste of empowered jurists, argued that because the international laws of warfare permit targeting only individuals who belong to a fighting force, the thousands of Palestinians who reportedly executed, raped, and kidnapped Israelis but do not officially belong to Hamas or Islamic Jihad are considered civilians and are therefore out of bounds.Israel’s new judge in ICJ case is a law professor who blasted UN court as manipulative
“This direction was given even though, after October 7, the government promised that Israel will hold accountable anyone who participated in the massacre,” Segal said on Channel 12 News. “Despite this fact, if the IDF or the Shin Bet learn of the location of Gazan individuals who murdered, pillaged, raped, or kidnapped Israelis, there will be no legal authorization to target them.”
Israelis barely had a moment to digest this absurdity when a second one hit even harder: Earlier this week, Israel released 50 Palestinian terrorists, including Muhammad Abu Salmiya, the director general of Gaza’s Al-Shifa hospital. At the time of his arrest, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit released a statement saying that it had concrete evidence that Abu Salmiya assisted the terror group in using hospital resources to maintain a vast network of tunnels underneath Al-Shifa and to use the hospital as its headquarters. It’s unclear why Israel would release Abu Salmiya, especially as Hamas continues to flaunt basic humanitarian codes of conduct and refuses to allow the Red Cross access to the civilian hostages it still holds.
The decision to release Abu Salmiya unconditionally is, alas, a perfect embodiment of the second big lie Israeli elites tell their charges: namely that they’re doing everything they can to win this war. Because while a democratic and law-abiding nation is beholden to a host of rules even—or especially—when fighting a war, it also has a duty to assure its own survival and the well-being of its citizens.
To argue that the Bibas’ kidnappers deserve a pass because their particular group, the grimly named Lords of the Wilderness, was not considered a terror organization at war with Israel prior to Oct. 7 is a bit of maddening sophistry. To allow such intellectual self-pleasuring to dictate military strategies when a five-year-old and a one-year-old are held captive is nothing short of national suicide. Ditto for releasing terrorist masterminds mid-war with no conditions and no returns.
Again, truth must be told: Even under the strict ethical constraints it rightly imposed on itself while fighting a genocidal enemy hell-bent on its destruction, Israel is still failing to understand precisely which war it is fighting and how it must fight if it has any chance of winning. What we’re seeing in Gaza and, increasingly, on the Lebanese border, isn’t merely the latest skirmish in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; it’s the first battle of the Israeli-Iranian war, one likely to last years, if not decades, and have significant, even existential, outcomes.
And while Israel has registered some undeniably impressive tactical achievements since October, its leaders seem remarkably confused, if not outright dishonest, about the long-term strategic shifts this realization requires. The idea that the United States, for example, is Israel’s ally despite the Biden administration’s adherence to Obama’s disastrous and Tehran-centric realignment policy; the idea that one can achieve anything of any worth by negotiating with Hamas; the idea that Israel must refrain from seizing and holding on to territories it clearly needs to maintain the safety and security of its citizens; the idea that the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens from their homes due to terrorism is a painful but ultimately acceptable price to pay—these are all lies. All must be abandoned and replaced, posthaste, with a renewed commitment to the reality of the region, one in which we win nothing and lose everything by futzing around with preening, one-sided humanitarian gestures.
Israel has decided to appoint Prof. Ron Shapira as Israel’s ad hoc judge in South Africa’s International Court of Justice case, accusing the country of genocide in Gaza, a spokesperson for the Prime Minister’s Office tells The Times of Israel.
Shapira will replace former chief justice Aharon Barak, who had been a member of the 15-judge panel at the top UN court until he stepped down last month, citing “personal family reasons.”
Shapira, an attorney, is the rector of the Peres Academic Center in Rehovot and a lecturer on law at Bar-Ilan University and Tel Aviv University, though his judicial credentials are nowhere near those of Barak.
In January, when Barak was announced as the judge, Shapira wrote on Facebook that the former Supreme Court chief was being sent to “a body that almost all residents of Israel think is unworthy of any level of trust.
“The consensus in Israel is that this entity embodies and takes to the extreme all the flaws of legal discourse in existence: intellectual dishonesty, manipulative use of ambiguous definitions, overly cumbersome tools for fact-checking and lie-debunking, and concealment of ulterior motives of the judges themselves via wording that falsely poses as neutral,” he wrote.
While expressing respect for Barak, Shapira concluded that post by stressing that sending such an esteemed legal expert “does not stem from respect we have for such decision-making.”