As Israel rushed to eliminate senior terrorists operating freely in Gaza, a communication was distributed by the primarily European-backed “Security Council Report”, which announced that China, France, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Russia were requesting “consultations”. More than a dozen extremely unhelpful subtexts lurk in this communication. Instead of promoting peace, these subtexts stoke violence by providing gains for Palestinian agitators. Any positive spin on Palestinian Arab violence constitutes a gain and acts as an irresistible incentive to continue violence. Here are some of those subtexts:
Only Palestinians matter
The topic of the “consultations” is framed as “The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question”. The subtext is that “Palestinians” matter more than others (such as Israelis), in the eyes of the powerful European diplomats running the Security Council. Other people (Israelis) are not even mentioned.
Dignifying wild anti-Israel rhetoric
The communication solemnly includes, and thereby dignifies and legitimizes, wild anti-Israel rhetoric such as allegations that Israel wants “to deliberately target and murder Palestinians”, as well as references to “the occupation’s open war against [the Palestinian] people”.
Terrorist organizations don’t exist
The communication refers to “Palestinian armed groups” rather than acknowledging them to be terrorist organizations recognized in the international community.
Bias against Judaism’s most holy site
The communication refers to the Temple Mount in English, the international language, but also in Arabic (“Haram al-Sharif”). The communication should either have stuck to English or cited both the Hebrew (“Har HaBayit”) and Arabic names for this holiest site in Judaism.
Leaving out crucial context
The communication states that “Israeli security forces deployed stun grenades, beat Palestinians with batons and rifles and fired rubber-coated metal bullets” against Palestinian “worshippers” who “threw fireworks and stones.” The subtext is that what the Palestinians deployed are barely weapons. But in fact, rocks (particularly when used with slingshots) can kill, and “fireworks“ are simply explosives readily available online. Official law enforcement reports warn that explosives sold online as fireworks are “so powerful that when used as weapons they pose a serious threat”, due to “impact (being hit by a dense, fast moving object)”, “heat (ie pyrotechnics burn at incredible temperatures and cannot be realistically extinguished once lit)” and the explosion itself; “fireworks” can be readily adapted into blast bombs, “by addition of nuts/bolts as projectiles”.
Israel self-defense is “unacceptable” – pre-meditated terrorist violence is not
Presiding diplomat Tor Wennesland condemned the “deaths of civilians in the Israeli airstrikes as “unacceptable” even though these were unintentional deaths in an operation in which “the PIJ confirmed that three of its commanders had been killed”. Two terror organizations, PIJ and Hamas, threatened to respond – which Wennesland did not find “unacceptable”.
Penalizing civilized countries, favoring terrorists
Council members “condemn violence against civilians”, and the EU mentions “regretting the loss of civilian lives “. While this sounds good, it means civilized countries who put armed forces between terrorists and civilians (so terrorists harm “only” soldiers) are twice panned by diplomats: once when they lose “only” soldiers whom diplomats seem to regard as fair game for terrorists, and again when they unintentionally kill civilians that terrorist organizations aren’t not bothering to protect. Terror organizations get a break, both times.
“Pro-children” rhetoric – with fatal effect
The communication says “Some members may express concern at the impact of the conflict on children” and UNICEF tweeted that “[a]ll children must be protected, according to international law”. While this sounds good, it means a UN agency is giving immunity to teenage terrorists who set out to kill innocents, and there are such. The terror organizations who recruit these children should be denounced, and Israel’s right to neutralize any attacker of innocent Israelis – regardless of her/his age – should be acknowledged.
Israel arguably not entitled to self-defense
“Some members” are likely to say they recognise Israel’s right to self-defence, the communication says. This suggests it is equally acceptable NOT to recognize Israel’s right to self-defence.
“Solution” for Jews
Wennesland and several Council members will delight anti-Israel Palestinians by again urging creation of a fully armed hostile and anti-Semitic entity a bike-ride away from Jerusalem, Tel-Aviv and Israel’s sole international airport.
This is termed a “solution” (two-state solution) which choice of words is reminiscent, for many Israelis, of “solutions” proposed in Europe for the Jewish question in the past.
Disclaimer: Opinion expressed in this article are solely of the author and may not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of this newspaper
It is noticed that Israel’s “good friend” the UAE was also involved. Beware!
One should also read Tom Bateman on BBC web site reporting today 17 May from Gaza where he bemoans that when Israel gave inhabitants of a block to be struck 5 minute notice because a resident was a IJ “Commander” – it was insufficient!!!!
Ms Dym has expertly and thoughtfully called out the many extremely “unhelpful subtexts” in the communication distributed by the primarily European-backed “Security Council Report”. The unbridled hypocrisy is there for all objective readers to see. I find it astonishing that those responsible for the communication do not seem to find the nearly 1,400 missiles launched by the PIJ target only Israel’s civilian population. This is regarded as perfectly legitimate in their view. I suppose that Israel’s successful use of the Iron Dome is a “crime against humanity.”
A method to denigrate israel is to omit context, chronological cause and effect, and to choose words which are inappropriate. Even reputable broadcaster like the bbc indulges in this practice. The essay by Susie Dym is also valuable in that it highlights the importance of using the right terminology and the complete context.