Hintergrund zum Bericht der Gaza-Untersuchungsmission
Am 15. September wurde von der Gaza-Untersuchungsmission der Goldstone-Report veröffentlicht. Er ignoriert praktisch Israels Recht auf Selbstverteidigung, stellt unbegründete Behauptungen zu seinen Absichten auf und stellt Israels demokratische Werte und Rechtsstaatlichkeit infrage. Die Pressekonferenz von Vize-Aussenminister Danny Ayalon am1.Oktober: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Speeches+by+Israeli+leaders/2009/MFA_briefing_foreign_press_Goldstone_Report_1-Oct-2009.htm
Die israelische Reaktion hier (pdf vom 15.09.09) http://berlin.mfa.gov.il/mfm/Data/164633.pdf
Ausführliche Informationen zur israelischen Perspektive auf die Militäroperation im Gaza-Streifen http://www.mfa.gov.il/GazaFacts
_____________________________
Vize-Außenminister Danni Ayalon nimmt zum Goldstone-Report Stellung.
„Der Goldstone-Report
ist ein arglistiges, parteiisches undunprofessionelles Dokument und gehört
zu jenen Dingen, die von IsraelsFeinen benutzt werden, um Israel zu verurteilen.
Es gibt einen Grunddafür, dass nicht nur Israel seine Stimme gegen diesen
Report erhobenhat, ebenso wie die USA, Kanada, Neuseeland und Australien, sondern
diegesamte aufgeklärte westliche Welt, so auch Großbritannien und
andereeuropäische Staaten. Und all jene, die diesen Report unterstützen,
sindgenau jene Länder, die nicht eine Spur Menschenrechte gewähren.
Um es klar zu sagen – was hat die Hamas getan? Sie hat auf unschuldige
Zivilisten Raketen abgeschossen und sich selbst hinter ihren eigenen Zivilisten
in Schutz gebracht. Sie hat zwei Verbrechen begangen. Es gibt Dinge, die untersucht
werden müssen, und es gibt Dinge, die wir untersuchen. Bis jetzt gab es
bereits 23 Untersuchungen. Eingehende Untersuchungen werden vorgenommen, sobald
ein glaubwürdiger Bericht vorliegt, der besagt, dass weitere Untersuchungen
notwendig sind. Das ist etwas, was wir selbstverständlich tun und weiterhin
tun werden, nicht wegen des Goldstone-Reports, nicht weil uns jemand sagt, dass
wir dies zu tun haben, uns rügt oder Moral predigt. Wir tun es unseretwegen
und wegen dem, an was wir glauben, denn moralische Werte sind mit dem Volk Israel
seit Generationen tief verwurzelt und auf ihnen basiert die Gründung des
Staates Israel. Wir werden damit fortfahren, zu untersuchen, aber ganz sicher
nicht wegen dieses Berichts, denn er ist rein politisch motiviert, um Israel
anzugreifen. Es ist wirklich eine Schande, dass die Palästinensische Autonomiebehörde,
von der wir einen Moment glaubten, dass auch sie den Bericht zurückweisen
würde, ihre Meinung aufgrund internen Drucks geändert hat. Das beweist,
dass es wirklich schwierig ist, sich auf Leute zu verlassen, die ihre Meinung
wegen Druckausübung ändern. Wie können Abkommen mit solchen Leuten
unterzeichnet werden? Das kann ich an dieser Stelle nicht beantworten und das
sollte separat erörtert werden.
Aber in Hinblick auf diesen Bericht wird es nicht dazu kommen. Die israelische
Knesset ist sicherlich nicht der Ort, das gesamte Spektrum der Militäroperation
„Cast Lead“ in irgendeiner Form zu diskutieren, in der der Goldstone
Report erwähnt oder berührt wird. Er ist eine Farce. Er ist ein Frevel.
Was ich ihnen vorschlage, sehr geehrte Knessetmitglieder, ist, diesen Tagesordungspunkt
vollständig von der Agenda zu streichen. Ich sage hier noch einmal dass
alles, was untersucht werden muss, untersucht wurde, untersucht wird und untersucht
werden wird. Danke.“ (MFA, 15.10.09)
_______________________________
Am morgigen Freitag, so
wird von den Palästinensern erwartet, wird der UN Menschenrechtsrat in
Genf einen fünfseitigen Resolutionsentwurf verabschieden, der Israel der
Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Jerusalem, der West-Bank und dem Gaza-Streifen
bezichtigt. Das Dokument
wurde zwei Tage vor der Sondersitzung am heutigen Donnerstag zu den Aktivitäten
Israels in Ostjerusalem und der Westbank von Ägypten, Nigeria, Pakistan
und Tunesien eingereicht. Der
Großteil der Sitzung wird sich mit dem Goldstone-Report beschäftigen,
der die israelische Militäroperation im Gaza-Streifen letzten Winter verurteilt.
Die Resolution erwähnt
in keiner Weise die palästinensische Gewalt gegen Israel, wie zum Beispiel
den achtjährigen Raketenbeschuss aus dem Gaza-Streifen auf die südlichen
Gemeinden und Städte Israels.
(jpost, 15.10.09)
___________________________
OTS0190 5 II 0438 IKG0001
Fr, 16.Okt 2009
Gesellschaftspolitik/IKG/UNO/Israel/Nahost/Menschenrechte
Israelitische Kultusgemeinde
sieht in Goldstone-Bericht Politjustiz
Utl.: Staaten, die selbst Menschenrechte missachten, versuchen über
Israel zu richten
Wien (OTS) - Der UN-Menschenrechtsrat,
als Nachfolger der wegen ihrer Untätigkeit bezüglich Menschenrechtsverletzungen
in islamischen Ländern aufgelösten UN-Menschenrechtskommission, ist
leider auf Grund der Mehrheitsverhältnisse denselben Weg der antiisraelischen
Politikjustiz gegangen. Auch
nach der Reform des Rates gelangten Länder wie Algerien, Aserbaidschan,
Bangladesch, China, Kuba, Pakistan, Russland, Saudi-Arabien und Tunesien in
den Besitz einer Stimme im Menschenrechtsrat, da sich jedes UN-Mitgliedsland
ohne Auswahlkriterien für den Rat bewerben kann und die Mitglieder durch
die UN-Vollversammlung gewählt werden. Dies wird von Kritikern als zynisch
und paradox bezeichnet, da diese Staaten dafür bekannt sind, zahlreiche
von der UN als verbindlich angesehenen Menschenrechte ihrer eigenen Bevölkerung
in unterschiedlichem Maße vorzuenthalten. Dies stehe im Gegensatz zu dem
Anspruch des Rates, ihre Mitglieder müssten höchsten Menschenrechtsstandards
entsprechen. Von Kritikern wird des Weiteren darauf hingewiesen, dass viele
Entscheidungen des Rates politisch motiviert seien und nicht aus der Perspektive
der Menschenrechte heraus getroffen würden. So würden die menschenrechtsverletzenden
Staaten sich und ihre Verbündeten gegenseitig schützen. Ein Beispiel
dafür war in der jüngeren Vergangenheit der Umgang mit dem Sudan und
mit Sri Lanka. Auf Betreiben der afrikanischen und asiatischen Staaten, die
im Menschenrechtsrat eine Mehrheit bilden, wurde eine scharfe Verurteilung der
schweren Menschenrechtsverletzungen im Darfur-Konflikt mehrfach verhindert.
In Sri Lanka wurde nach dem Ende des Bürgerkriegs gegen die Tamil Tigers
verhindert, dass das Vorgehen der Armee bzgl. Menschenrechtsverletzungen untersucht
wird. Delegierte jener
Staaten, die der Organisation der Islamischen Konferenz angehören, und
die ein Drittel der Sitze im Rat innehaben, verhindern nach Ansicht der Kritiker
regelmäßig Diskussion über Menschenrechtsverletzungen in ihren
Staaten. Sie berufen sich dabei darauf, dass das Rechtssystem der Scharia Bestandteil
ihrer Religion und somit jeder Kritik enthoben sei. Demgegenüber
beschäftigte sich der Rat allein im Jahr 2007 auf Betreiben der islamischen
Mitglieder 120 Mal mit dem Nahostkonflikt und verabschiedete zahlreiche israelkritische
Resolutionen, während der Antrag westlicher Staaten auf die Einbeziehung
und Verurteilung palästinensischer Menschenrechtsverletzungen jeweils abgelehnt
wurde. Der Staat Israel,
als einzige effektive Demokratie im Nahen Osten, besitzt einen unabhängigen,
sehr kritisch urteilenden Obersten Gerichtshof. Es besteht daher keinerlei Anlass
zu einem Einschreiten der UN. Es ist offensichtlich, dass hier die Menschenrechte
als Vorwand dienen, dem Land Israel, das selbst Opfer von Selbstmordanschlägen
und Raketenbeschuss ist, das Recht auf Gegenwehr abzusprechen. Besonders
infam ist der Versuch, in die Untersuchungskommission Personen zu entsenden,
die Israel bereits vorverurteilt hatten und den Vorsitz mit einem Richter jüdischer
Herkunft zu besetzen. Dies erinnert an die mittelalterliche Praxis der Jesuiten
und der Inquisition sich jüdischer Kronzeugen zu bedienen. Rückfragehinweis:
Mag. Raimund Fastenbauer, Generalsekretär, Israelitische Kultusgemeinde.
________________________________________
Middle East & Israel
Breaking News » Headlines News » Article
Oct 16, 2009 20:16
Goldstone slams UN resolution for failing to condemn
Hamas
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Judge Richard Goldstone criticized the wording of the UN Human Rights Council resolution that endorsed the his fact-finding commission's report on Operation Cast Lead, saying the resolution was wrong to targeting only Israel while failing to condemn Hamas. "This draft resolution saddens me as it includes only allegations against Israel," AFP quoted Goldstone as telling Swiss newspaper Le Temps prior to Friday's vote. "There is not a single phrase condemning Hamas as we have done in the report. I hope that the council can modify the text," Goldstone reportedly said.
________________________________________
UN Watch Briefing: "Speech of
the Year"
News and Analysis from UN Watch in Geneva Vol. 208 | October 16, 2009:
British Hero Tells U.N. Council: 'IDF
Most Moral Army in History of Warfare'
Today's emergency UN Human
Rights Council debate on the Goldstone Report predictably saw a line-up of the
world's worst abusers condemn democratic Israel for human rights violations.
In a heated lynch mob atmosphere, Kuwait slammed Israel for “intentional
killing, intentional destruction of civilian objects, intentional scorched-earth
policy,” saying Israel “embodied the Agatha Christie novel, 'Escaped
with Murder'.” Pakistan said the “horrors of Israeli occupation
continue to haunt the international community’s conscience.” The
Arab League said, “We must condemn Israel and force Israel to accept international
legitimacy." Ahmadinejad’s Iran said “the atrocities committed
against Palestinians during the aggressions on Gaza should be taken seriously”
and followed up by the international community “to put an end to absolute
impunity and defiance of the law.” What the world's assembled representatives
did not expect, however, was the speech that followed (see video and text below),
organized by UN Watch. We invited as our speaker a man who repeatedly put his
life on the line to defend the democratic world from the murderous Saddam Hussein,
Al Qaeda, and the Taleban. The moment he began his first sentence, the room
simply fell silent. Judge Goldstone, author of the biased report that prompted
today's one-sided condemnation, had refused to hear Col. Kemp's testimony during
his "fact-finding" hearings. But UN Watch made sure today that this
hero's voice would be heard -- at the U.N., and around the world.
UN Human Rights Council,
12th Special Session
Debate on Goldstone Report
Geneva, 16 October 2009
IDF Did More to Safeguard Civilians Than Any Army in History of Warfare
Delivered by Col. Richard
Kemp
___________________________________
Last update - 15:13 17/10/2009
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1121614.html:
Netanyahu:
Prepare for long struggle against Goldstone Gaza report
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent, Haaretz Service and News Agencies
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
warned on Friday that Israel must prepare for a protracted struggle against
a damning United Nations report on its winter offensive in Gaza, after the UN's
Human Rights Council endorsed the report. "The delegitimization [of Israel]
must be delegitimized," said Netanyahu at meetings Friday. He said the
battle against the report, which accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes,
would be legal and diplomatic, adding that Israel should take the appropriate
measures against it. While the UN investigation labeled Hamas rocket attacks
on Israeli towns as war crimes, the bulk of the findings focused on Israeli
actions during the three-week campaign. The 575-page document, authored by South
African jurist Richard Goldstone, concluded that Israel used disproportionate
force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields and
destroyed civilian infrastructure during the operation to root out Gaza rocket
squads. In his comments Friday, Netanyahu further said that the report was a
symptom of a broader phenomenon that has taken place in the West and UN institutions
over recent years. "The UN has returned to the dark days during which it
equated Zionism with racism," he added. Meanwhile, Israel will seek clarifications
from Russia, China and India in light of their voting for the motion on Friday.
The deputy foreign minister, Danny Ayalon, said Israel was disappointed by those
countries' behavior. "They needed to act with greater consideration, since
the report is unprofessional, false and takes the right to self defense from
democratic states, which in the end will also hurt them," said Ayalon at
a cultural event in Holon.
Israel rejects UN body support for report. Also Friday, Israel's Foreign Ministry rejected the council's decision to endorse the, calling the decision "unjust." The Foreign Ministry issued an official response to the UN vote, saying that "Israel will continue to exercise its right to self-defense and to preserve the security of its citizens." "Israel believes," the statement continued, "that the decision harms efforts to protect human rights in accordance with international law and hinders efforts to promote the peace process as well as encouraging terror organizations around the world." During the UN Human Rights Council session Friday, the Palestinian UN delegate said during the session that "Israel denies Palestinians basic human rights and this issue cannot be compromised." U.S. State Department Spokesman Ian Kelly on Friday defended the U.S. vote against adopting the resolution, saying it had an "unbalanced focus" and that the U.S. is concerned "it will exacerbate polarization and divisiveness." Kelly continued by saying that the U.S. vote against endorsing the report "in no way diminishes the deep concern that we have about the tragic events of last January and the suffering caused by the violence in Gaza and southern Israel." The parties need adequate time to study the report and establish accountability measures, said Kelly, adding that U.S. envoy George Mitchell will be meeting with Israeli and Palestinian officials this week and next. Jerusalem sources said that a marked improvement could be seen in Friday's UN Human Rights Council session, in comparison to the initial vote to establish the Goldstone commission, which investigated Israel and Hamas' conduct during the war, and subsequently compiled the damning report. "However," the ministry statement said, "Israel still feels that the UNHRC decision was one-sided." "Israel thanks the countries that supported our position, and those who, with their vote, voiced their opposition to the unjust decision which ignores the murderous Hamas attacks against Israeli citizens," the statement said. "The decision ignores the fact that the Israel Defense Forces took unprecedented measures to avoid harming innocent civilians, and the fact that terror organizations used civilians as human shields in Gaza."
Livni: UN body's vote was political and cynical. Former foreign minister and opposition leader Tzipi Livni also issued a response to the vote, saying that "since the inception of the Human Rights Council, it has viewed Israel in a distorted fashion, just as the report itself does. Today's vote was political and cynical. Israel will continue to do the right thing and to protect its citizens, and will continue the international battle against the report to ensure the legal protection of IDF officers, wherever they may be." Israeli Arab MK Ahmed Tibi welcomed the council's decision and said that the adoption of the report's findings was an important ethical and legal decision. "It is wrong to leave an entire population without the protection of the UN and the international community, who have now regained their honor," Tibi said. Shas Chairman Eli Yishai condemned the UN council's decision calling it an anti-Israel decision based on an anti-Israel report. Meanwhile, Friday, Hamas welcomed the UN vote, saying that the organization hoped it would lead to "the beginning of the prosecution of the leaders of the occupation." "The Palestinian government welcomes the endorsement on the Goldstone report and thanks the friendly countries which voted in favor of the report," Hamas spokesman Taher al-Nono said. Nabil Abu Rudeinah, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, added that what was needed was a follow-up on implementation of the recommandations in the report, "to protect the Palestinian people from Israeli aggression." "The most important thing now is to continue with steps to make sure that the Zionist criminals are brought to trial," said another Hamas spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri. Following the vote, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy wrote a joint letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Press Association reported. The letter acknowledged the sensitivity of the Goldstone report in Israel and encouraged Israel to handle it in a way that supports progress in the Middle East. Israel's right to defend itself was stressed in the letter, which included an invitation to Netanyahu to visit Europe for talks. Brown and Sarkozy laid out steps to move the peace process forward, including an independent and transparent investigation into accusations made against Israel in relation to alleged war crimes in Gaza; improved humanitarian access to Gaza; and a complete freeze on Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
________________________
Last update - 12:35 17/10/2009
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1121529.html:
ANALYSIS / U.S. using Goldstone report to punish Netanyahu
By Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent
Operation Cast Lead in Gaza was perceived in Israel as a shining
victory. Rocket fire from Gaza was brought to a halt almost completely. The
Israel Defense Forces emerged from its failure during the Second Lebanon War
and deployed ground forces with few casualties. "The world" let the
operation continue and did not impose a cease-fire. A wonderful war. Ten months
later, it seems the victory was a Pyrrhic one. Israel did not realize that the
rules have changed with Barack Obama's election as U.S. president. Prime minister
Ehud Olmert timed Cast Lead to take place during the twilight period between
the outgoing and incoming U.S. administrations, and rightly assumed that the
incumbent, George W. Bush, would fully back Israel. However, in contrast to
the Lebanon war of 2006, which ended with a cease-fire, the Gaza campaign continues
being fought - in the diplomatic arena and in public opinion - and Israel must
cope with its consequences in a less-friendly Obama era. During the first, military
round, Israel benefited from the decisive superiority of its firepower. However
the Palestinians moved the war's current round to an arena more comfortable
for them, and are benefiting from their advantage in UN institutions and in
public opinion. The calls to boycott Israel are getting louder. Turkey is shirking
off its strategic alliance with Israel and is presenting IDF soldiers as horrible
murderers of children. Hamas is gradually winning recognition as a legitimate
player, as it continues to amass a stock of rockets without hindrance. Meanwhile
Israel's leaders are busy defending the country against the United Nations'
Goldstone report (that accuses Israel and Hamas of perpetrating war crimes),
and some even have to worry now about being the object of arrest warrants in
Europe.
Hands are tied. Even if the legal process that Goldstone initiated ends up being halted, and Israel is not put in the dock in The Hague, its hands have been tied. The world, led by Obama, will not let it initiate a Cast Lead II operation. Certainly not when a right-wing government is in power in Jerusalem led by Benjamin Netanyahu, whom the world loves to hate. Netanyahu's clumsy attempt, in his Knesset speech this week, to link the war in Gaza to opposition leader Tzipi Livni did not really succeed. He is in power and the world considers him responsible. The Americans and the Europeans are using the Goldstone report to punish Netanyahu for his refusal to freeze the settlements. The same thing happened to the Palestinians between the two intifadas. When they hurled stones during the first intifada (1987-1993) and the confrontation was in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, the world cheered them on and forced Israel to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization and to let its leader Yasser Arafat establish his autonomy in the territories. The Palestinian violence at that time was perceived as appropriate resistance to occupation. During the second intifada, the Palestinians resorted to suicide attacks in Israeli cities. They succeeded in killing many more Israelis, but they lost in the diplomatic arena, especially after the September 11 attacks in the United States, when the rules changed. The world was fed up with terror attacks and it allowed then-prime minister Ariel Sharon to reoccupy the West Bank, lock Arafat in a cage (his headquarters in Ramallah) and eventually unload Gaza without a peace arrangement.
Operation Cast Lead was the most planned operation in the annals of Israel's wars. Its organizers filled out all the forms and checked off on all the procedural changes that had been recommended by the Winograd Committee after its investigation of the shortcomings of the Second Lebanon War. The campaign's goals were reasonable. The scenarios were rehearsed. The reservists were trained. Jurists anticipated the legality of every target and operational plan. The soldiers were properly outfitted with food, water and protective equipment. The local authorities in the Israeli rear functioned as they should have. The media obeyed. In short, the government and the IDF prepared exceptionally well for a Third Lebanon War. They only forgot that the conditions on the Palestinian front are different than in Lebanon. Not everybody shared the euphoria. The defense minister, Ehud Barak, wanted to halt Cast Lead after two or three days, but was overruled by Olmert who wanted to keep the campaign going, and then going further. Columnists and commentators warned of Gaza becoming a quagmire.
And most interesting:
The Winograd Committee anticipated the lurking legal danger to Israel, and in
its final report had warned of "far-reaching consequences" resulting
from the widening gap between the rules of warfare and the reality of fighting
terror launched from civilian surroundings. The committee recommended pulling
the legal experts out of the operation rooms, increasing and highlighting investigation
of irregular activities, and working with friendly countries to amend the rules
of warfare, a recommendation that is easy to make but difficult to implement.
The Winograd report did not warn against going into the next war before the
rules of warfare are changed. The legal recommendations, drafted with restraint
out of fear they would be used for anti-Israeli propaganda, were lost in the
sea of piquant items in the report. Upon returning to power, Netanyahu hoped
to leave the Palestinian issue on the side and focus on the Iranian threat and
on economic reforms. Now his government will have to cope with the consequences
of Cast Lead and do so under less than ideal conditions, heavy international
pressure and fear of arrest warrants and charge sheets.