Amnesty International = Bias Against Israel
We have written a letter to Amnesty International in response to their extremely biased report against Israel titled “Israel’s Apartheid Against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime Against Humanity”.
Dear Amnesty International,
We, the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, an Israeli NGO fighting to promote human rights, defend democracy, and improve the overall quality of life for Israelis and Palestinians alike, find it of the utmost importance to address your recent report titled “Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel system of domination and crime against humanity”.
We believe the report’s attempt to allege that Israel has maintained “a system of oppression and domination” over the Palestinians that meets the international definition of apartheid is a preposterous and baseless claim. Israeli Arabs take an active part in Israeli life, as military and police commanders, as ministers, as diplomats, and as Supreme Court judges. In addition, there’s an Arab party in the current coalition and in June 2021 Israeli Arab Parliament Members held a conference in the parliament of the so called apartheid regime of Israel titled: “Between Occupation to Apartheid”. The report also accuses Israel’s “apartheid” of extending “over Palestinian refugees whose right of return to their homes remains controlled by Israel.” To claim that Israel imposes a system of oppression and domination on Palestinians that live in Lebanon, Jordan, or the United States is completely absurd.
We condemn the terminology used in the report referring to the terrorist organization “Hamas” as solely an “armed group”, whereas this organization clearly falls under the various definitions for terrorism. Furthermore, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States have all designated it as a terrorist organization. Hamas periodically violates International Humanitarian Law by firing rockets and mortars from densely populated areas, thus placing Gazan civilians in grave danger as “human shields.” In the most recent Israel-Gaza conflict, in May 2021, Hamas (the armed Palestinian groups that the report refers to) fired thousands of indiscriminate rockets towards Israeli towns, killing thirteen Israelis. Hamas also misfired hundreds of rockets that fell into the Gaza Strip, killing Palestinians and damaging Palestinian property, these acts are heinous war crimes, yet your report does not mention them even once. The report only mentions alleged war crimes committed by Israel.
Moreover, this report is above all a blatant means to delegitimize the State of Israel and criminalize Israeli laws and practices that are designed to safeguard Jewish identity, such as the Law of Return. The report infers that this law is a form of oppression of Palestinians: “This unequal and separate citizenship structure has resulted in stark discrimination against Palestinian citizens in several ways”. To propose that the law constitutes a form of discrimination towards Palestinians is outrageous, since its sole purpose is to safeguard Israel’s Jewish character. Furthermore, this law and others are enshrined under international law and parallel the practices of many nation-states.
Yours sincerely,
Flavia Sevald, CEO,
Jerusalem Institute of Justice,
If you agree with this letter and want to send a petition to Amnesty International letting them know that you stand up for Israel and believe their report is biased click the button below to sign the petition. It will get sent to Amnesty International’s London
headquarters.
PETITION TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
Dear Amnesty International,
I stand with the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, an Israeli NGO fighting to promote human rights, defend democracy, and improve the overall quality of life for Israelis and Palestinians alike, and find it of the utmost importance to address your recent report titled “Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel system of domination and crime against humanity”.
We believe the report’s attempt to allege that Israel has maintained “a system of oppression and domination” over the Palestinians that meets the international definition of apartheid is a preposterous and baseless claim. Israeli Arabs take an active part in Israeli life, as military and police commanders, as ministers, as diplomats, and as Supreme Court judges.
Moreover, this report is above all a blatant means to delegitimize the State of Israel and criminalize Israeli laws and practices that are designed to safeguard Jewish identity.
We call upon Amnesty International to cease their attack on Israel!
I declare that the State of Israel does not perpetuate apartheid and has a right to exist as the homeland of the Jewish people.
Signed by
Stop the Apartheid Lie - Petition Against the UNHRC
With an extremely wide scope, an unreasonable budget of $18 million, 18 full-time employees and three members with a track record of hostility towards Israel chosen to lead the inquiry, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has initiated a permanent “Commission of Inquiry” (COI) into Israel, which constitutes a blatant and unprecedented direct attack on Israel.
The United Nations (UN) is perhaps the most biased global human rights organization in modern history when it comes to Israel. During the 70 plus years of Israel-UN relations, much ink has been spilled on the disproportionate preoccupation of the UN with Israel. Starting with a disgraceful resolution determining that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination, to an unequivocal recognition by former UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon officially confirming that the UN is biased against Israel. But every time you think they hit rock bottom, a new low is waiting around the corner. This time the hypocrisy and prejudice that characterize the UN’s approach toward Israel have reached new lows.
With an extremely wide scope, an unreasonable budget of $18 million, 18 full-time employees and three members with a track record of hostility towards Israel chosen to lead the inquiry, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has initiated a permanent “Commission of Inquiry” (COI) into Israel, which constitutes a blatant and unprecedented direct attack on Israel.
The pretext for this inquiry was to investigate the May 2021, 11-day conflict between Israel and Hamas, in which Hamas fired thousands of indiscriminate rockets towards Israeli towns, killing innocent Israelis and Palestinians alike. The real reason for this inquiry though is to accuse Israel of systematic discrimination and repression based on the national, ethnic, racial or religious identity of Palestinians. In other words, to classify Israel as an Apartheid state.
The UN refuses to allow the facts and the reality on the ground to divert it from its course. A reality in which Arab Israelis are intertwined in all aspects of the Israeli society. They are leading commanders in the Israeli Defense Forces, they hold high positions in the Israeli Police Forces, and they serve as ministers, diplomats, and even judges at the Israeli Supreme Court. But all of this is completely irrelevant for the UN.
As part of the orchestrated apartheid campaign, Amnesty International, the world’s largest human rights organization and a leading player in antisemitic campaigns, published a 211-page report accusing Israel of implementing an institutionalized regime of Jewish oppression and control over the Palestinians. The report denies Israel’s right to exist as the nation state of the Jewish people. It is a clear and blatant demonstration of modern antisemitism. It features twisted legal analyses and a series of fabrications intertwined with ridiculous terminology. One that describes, inter alia, the designated terror group Hamas, as an “Armed Group”.
The publication of the report at this time is intended to strengthen the legitimacy of the UNHRC Committee and its conclusions. A foregone conclusion. In addition, Amnesty calls on the international community to exercise pressure on Israel by calling for an Arms Embargo on Israel and calling on the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in The Hague to investigate Israel for committing the crime of Apartheid.
Israel understands very well that this is a rigged game. The committee’s conclusions were reached even before the committee began its work. I expect that the committee will determine that Israel is an apartheid state.
A similar process took place several months ago when the International Criminal Court in The Hague announced the opening of a criminal investigation against Israel, in a disgraceful political decision that lacks any legal or moral justification.
Israel has officially announced that it will not cooperate with the UNHRC probe and will not allow its members to enter Israel. Israel has recently refused a request by Ms. Navi Pillay, the Commission’s chair to meet with Israeli officials. This will not be the first time that Israel chooses not to cooperate with initiatives and resolutions that meet all the characteristics of modern antisemitism. Open boycott instead of cooperation, is Israel’s new approach.
PETITION TO THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Dear United Nations Human Rights Council,
I stand with the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, an Israeli NGO fighting to promote human rights, defend democracy, and improve the overall quality of life for Israelis and Palestinians alike, and find it of the utmost importance to reject the so-called independent commission named “The United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel”.
The mandate and structure of this “inquiry” have been designed to rewrite history from 1948, to find Israel guilty of apartheid and to declare the “root causes” of “conflict” to be Jewish infringement of Muslim rights. The commission’s plan is to falsely accuse Israel of racism, to validate criminal prosecutions of Israelis and to call upon “third states” and “business enterprises” to boycott, divest and sanction Israel.
Also, the three members of this Commission are anything but independent. The head of the commission, Navi Pillay, was a key leader of the 2001 UN Durban World Conference against Racism which called Israel a racist state. As United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights during the 2008-9 and 2014 Gaza wars, Pillay played a pivotal role in promoting the Goldstone report and the outrageous slander that Israel targeted and murdered children. Since leaving office, she’s made a habit of promoting BDS and accusing Israel of apartheid. In addition, the two other members of the committee, Miloon Kothari and Chris Sidoti, both hold anti-Israel extremism and Palestinian partisanship records.
The result of this witch hunt is a foregone conclusion. Therefore we demand the Human Rights Council to revoke the resolution forming this commission.
Human Shields = UN War Crimes
Jerusalem Institute of Justice- Submission to The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel
Dear Honorable Commission,
We, the Jerusalem Institute of Justice, are a not-for-profit human rights organization, with Special Consultative Status at the UN Economic and Social Council, fighting to promote human rights, defend democracy, and improve the overall quality of life for Israelis and Palestinians alike. Due to our hope of ever-lasting peace in the region, we find it of the utmost importance to address your call for submissions of relevant information and documentation to the mandate of the Commission.
The attached report concerning Hamas’s actions during Protective Edge Operation (the 2014 Gaza war) was filed by our organization at the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague on the 6th of March 2017. We argued that a full investigation of crimes committed within the Palestinian territories should be pursued, and a case should be lodged, against Ismail Haniyeh, head of the political wing of Hamas, for his role in the commission of war crimes during the 2014 Gaza war. Following this communication, and others, an investigation of the “Situation in Palestine” was commenced by the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC on the 3rd of March 2021. The submission of this report is in accordance with the COI’s mandate to collect evidence and information of abuses of international human rights law and identify those responsible.
There were two primary war crimes committed by Hamas militants during the war within the Gaza strip. First, they consistently used civilians for military protection and purposes, placing the Gazan population in grave danger as “human shields.” This was done by firing rockets and mortars from densely populated areas, by encouraging (and sometimes forcing) civilians to remain in potential military targets, and by storing rockets in schools, hospitals, mosques, and other civilian structures. Second, the rockets Hamas used during the war are inherently indiscriminate under international law, and were therefore unlawful to use. These rockets are unable to be controlled, and therefore could not accurately be fired at lawful military targets.
These heinous crimes reoccurred during the most recent Gaza conflict in May 2021– Hamas fired more than 4,360 rockets and mortars from residential areas. Of those, approximately 680 misfired and fell into the Gaza Strip, killing Palestinians and damaging Palestinian property, and 3,570 of the remaining rockets struck Israeli towns and cities. Thirteen Israelis were killed, and hundreds were injured. These war crimes are also considered criminal activity pursuant to Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – “War Crime of Using Protected Persons as Shields”.
We urge the commission to look into these violations of Human Rights committed by Hamas and include them in their report due to be presented in the Human Rights Council’s June regular session.
Yours sincerely,
Flavia Sevald, CEO,
Jerusalem Institute of Justice,
Your Worst Enemy is Your Best Teacher
by JIJ intern
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict involves two peoples, the Jews and the Palestinians. The two groups often have two competing narratives, two contrasting histories, two sets of terminologies and even two different maps (Ipfatid, 2021). This contributes to a zero-sum mindset in which voices on each side view the other groups’ perspective as an existential threat.
Unfortunately, the international community often takes advantage of both parties distress by sharing incomplete, inaccurate or outdated information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This usually accentuates the divide between Palestinians and Jews (Ipfatid, 2021).
In order to move past this divide, I believe that Israelis and Palestinians, Jews and Arabs, must find common ground between their respective narratives. Luckily, important peace-builders, such as Yossi Klein-Halevi, New York Times best-selling author of Letters to my Palestinian Neighbour, are actively working toward integrating each group’s national narrative in an effort to achieve a lasting, warm peace (Klein-Halevi, 2021).
In Klein-Halevi’s brilliant talk on YouTube titled Israeli and Palestinian Narratives, he breaks down the strengths and the weaknesses of each party’s narrative (JBS, 2015). For the Palestinians, there is the advantage of being the majority presence in Israel/Palestine prior to 19th century Zionist immigration. Meanwhile, for the Jews there is the advantage of identity: a consistent story linking the Jewish people to the land of Israel for 3,500 years.
The more the conflict between the two parties has intensified, the more each side has learned to compensate for deficits in their own story through the other group’s narrative (JBS, 2015). For instance, Zionist immigration to the Land of Israel starting in the 19th century allowed Jews to no longer be a minority within the Holy Land. Meanwhile, in the 19th century, the Palestinians did not have a distinct national identity. To compensate for this lack, Palestinians cultivated a national identity separate from the broader Arab and Muslim world (JBS, 2015).
That being said, the friction between Jewish presence in the Holy Land and a distinct Palestinian identity is often at the heart of the divide between the two parties. There are people on both sides of the conflict that declare the other group is an illegitimate, foreign interloper with no rights to live or self-determinate in this land (Behan, 2021).
Despite this sentiment, in some ways both parties have already succeeded in their national aspirations: there is now a large Jewish presence in the Land of Israel and there is also a distinct Palestinian national identity. Given that the Jews and the Palestinians, whether it was unintentionally or purposefully, learned from each other how to strengthen their own national movements, this may present a potential pathway to conflict resolution: recognizing similarities (JBS, 2015).
Bridging the gap between both parties’ national narratives may involve acknowledging the commonalities between Jewish and Palestinian aspirations. This includes recognizing the legitimacy of both peoples’ identities and recognizing the right for both peoples to live in this land (Behan, 2021).
Finally, this includes acknowledging that both sides have at times experienced the Israeli-Arab conflict as victims. Israelis often see themselves as a minority within the broader Arab and Muslim world, most of which has historically sought to destroy the Jewish state. Meanwhile, Palestinians usually perceive themselves as a marginalized population resisting a well-established country (Ipfatid, 2021). Ultimately, to move forward there must be a willingness from both Jews and Palestinians to humanize, empathize and integrate each other’s national narratives on the conflict (JBS, 2015).
References
Behan, Daniel (2021, March 16). Palestinians and Ashkenazi Jews: Co-Indigenous To The Same Land. Retrieved February 1, 2021, from https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/ palestinians-and-ashkenazi-jews-co-indigenous-to-the-same-land/ [@ipfatid] (2021, June 2).
Why is Approaching the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict With Nuance So Difficult [infographic]. Instagram. https://www.instagram.com/ipfatid/ [JBS] (2015, April 14).
Yossi Klein Halevi: Israeli and Palestinian Narratives [Video]. Youtube. YouTube.com/watch?v=_bLOfHov7IY&t=399s Klein-Halevi, Yossi (2021, November 23).
To The Students Who Walked Out on Palestinian Israeli Dialogue. Retrieved February 1, 2021, from israel.com/to-the-students-who-walkedout-on-palestinian-israeli-dialogue/?fbclid=IwAR1Ks61fQ8HhWDKnpwZ2ACVEhJ9eOxnCGfJE_mxkDUGGvvBMypUJ0KAqc
THE ULTIMATE BONE OF CONTENTION
“Jerusalem is, without doubt, the ultimate bone of contention,” declares international law scholar Jacques Gauthier. He says that a title search in The Law of Nations shows that the Israeli ownership of Jerusalem is res judicata, decided law. (Gauthier, YouTube, “Who Owns Jerusalem?”)
“By denying a Jewish history and a Jewish Temple, the Palestinians are also denying Christianity its heritage. For without a Jewish Temple, the events of Jesus could not have taken place.” So writes author Barry Shaw. He notes that BDS churches subscribing to Replacement Theology have no problem with that. “Leaders of the Methodist, Anglican, and some Baptist churches fall in line with the Palestinian argument against Israel.” (Barry Shaw, Israel, Reclaiming the Narrative)
The Palestinians and their credulous followers in the BDS-supporting Western churches blatantly propagate the twin falsehoods that Israel has neither a legal claim nor a historical connection to Jerusalem. They use that line to promote the idea that Jerusalem should be divided or internationalized. Leftwing Israeli politician Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former foreign minister, revealed their deeper assumption: “At the deepest level, they are not ready to recognize that we have any kind of title here.” (Shaw, Reclaiming)
Let’s look at the Palestinian BDS claims in light of the legal and historical facts. In 2001 Ikrima Sabri, the Mufti of Jerusalem, audaciously lied to Die Welt, saying that “in the whole city, there is not even a single stone indicating Jewish history.”
In contrast, at various times plenty of Arab and Islamic sources have been more honest about it. In 1930 the Supreme Muslim Council in Jerusalem published a booklet called “A Brief Guide to al-Haram al-Sharif” (the Temple Mount). It states that the Temple Mount’s “identity with the site of Solomon’s Temple is beyond dispute.” Multiple similar examples can also be found. Even the Qur’an talks about Solomon’s construction of the first temple (34:13) and the destruction of the first two temples (17:7). (Bard, Mitchell, in “Myths and Facts”)
Recently we’ve seen attempts by BDS supporters to claim that the Jews have no authentic historical connection to Jerusalem. As Prime Minister Netanyahu quipped in his 2016 address to the United Nations, “That’s like saying that the Great Wall of China has no historical connection to the Chinese people.” The Palestinians are so fanatical about denying Israel’s historical connection to Jerusalem that they resort to destroying material evidence by massively excavating under the Temple Mount. Their BDS-aligned partners in Western religious circles go right along with this dishonest madness.
The Mandate for Palestine was passed in 1922 by the League of Nations and confirmed afterward by the United Nations. It has never been superseded. As an article of international law, it detailed what the boundaries were to be for Palestine as a Jewish national home. Those same legal boundaries continued to exist after the Jewish state succeeded the Mandate in 1948. Jerusalem is entirely within those boundaries. Therefore, quite simply, Jerusalem is within the boundaries of Israel.
At the end of the 1948 war, in which five Arab countries invaded Israel, Israel had control of western Jerusalem, while Jordan controlled eastern Jerusalem. However, Jordan had acquired that control by illegal aggression and continued to hold it illegally for 19 years until 1967 (during which time a ceasefire agreement was in effect). Jordan’s broader occupation and annexation of Judea and Samaria was also illegal. Moreover, in violation of the armistice agreement, Jordan refused during those years to allow Jews into eastern Jerusalem. Because of that, eastern Jerusalem became known in popular conception as “Arab” Jerusalem.
The outcome of the 1967 Six-Day War reinforced Israel’s claim to Jerusalem. Rejecting Prime Minister Eshkol’s peace offer to Jordan, King Hussein mounted an attack on Israel anyway. Of course, Israel defended itself, resulting in Jordan losing control of the West Bank and Jerusalem (gained by aggression in 1948). This victory allowed Israel to extend its jurisdiction and administration to eastern Jerusalem. Based on the principle that a state acting in self-defense has greater right to a territory than an aggressor attacking the territory, distinguished international lawyer and later president of the International Court of Justice, Stephen Schwebel, stated, “Israel has better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem.”
Ironically, the Palestinians insist on returning to the “1967 border,” the same ceasefire line that Jordan had insisted was temporary in 1949. Indeed, the armistice line was never a border; it was expressly temporary. But by an absurd stretch, the Palestinians base their claim on the premise that the real estate was Jordan’s and therefore it’s theirs – as if the Palestinians were identical to Jordan. Jordan and the Palestinians are in fact two different entities. The armistice agreement was between Israel and Jordan, two sovereign nations. It had nothing to do with the Palestinians. So there is no legal reason to divide Jerusalem.
The Qur’an makes no explicit reference to Jerusalem, and Muslims praying in Jerusalem turn their backs to the Temple Mount, facing Mecca. So why is the Palestinian national movement so adamant about displacing the Jews and establishing Islamic sovereignty over Jerusalem? As Barry Shaw observes, it’s not so much about their own claims, but about using their interpretation of Islam to further their political agenda: “It’s all about destroying Israel and planting their Palestinian flag over Jerusalem as a statement of conquest.” Sadly, that would appear to be just fine with the pro-BDS Christian denominations who are driven by their Replacement Theology with its implicit anti-Semitism.