Goldstone UN controversy exposes diplomacy and journalism

October 19, 9:35 AMNY Israel Conflict ExaminerRichard Shulman

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the NY Israel Conflict Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

A.P. Photo/ RIA Novosti, Alexi Druzhim, Pool -- Putin

The Goldstone UN controversy is an example of how diplomacy and reporting is done.

From the 10/17 NY Times  (Neil MacFarquhar, A4):

1. The UN Human Rights Council vote was done partly to press Israel and Hamas to “conduct their own credible investigations.”

2. “China and Russia voted for the measure, although the Russian ambassador’s speech detailed what he considered its many flaws.”

From the 10/17 Wall St. Journal  (Charles Levinson, A9):

3. The British Foreign Office said that “British PM Brown conditioned a ‘no’ vote against the UN report on Israel’s agreeing to setup an independent commission to investigate the Gaza war, granting improved access for humanitarian supplies into Gaza, and implementing a settlement freeze.”  PM Netanyahu objected strenuously.  Britain did not vote at all.

    Discussion

1. Don’t Mr. MacFarquhar and the UN know that Israel has and is conducting investigations, more credible than UN ones?

2. Russia knows the Goldstone report and the Council resolution have many flaws.  President Obama referred to its having many flaws.  Nevertheless, Russia votes for it.  You see the hand of international politics here?

3. Britain did not approve of the resolution, but it would have voted against it if Israel gave in on matters outside of Gaza.  That is not resolving issues by negotiation on their merits.  That is an attempt to extort an adverse decision. 

For more on the Goldstone report, click here