Statement by Lebanon before the General Assembly 64th Session

Agenda Item 64: “Report of the Human Rights Council”

New York

4 November 2009

[ET: 0:23:09-00:37:34 - Lebanon]
LEBANON REPRESENTATIVE:  Mr. President, Israel accused Judge Richard Goldstone, Chief of the United Nations fact-finding mission in Gaza with being biased.  Yes indeed, Mr. President, Judge Goldstone is biased.  In point of fact, he has always been biased, biased for one thing and one thing only, namely the truth.
He was biased when he participated in his country, South Africa, when he participated in investigations of acts of terror and violence.  He was biased when he joined the international war crime tribunal in the former Yugoslavia and the war crimes tribunal in Rwanda and when he joined the investigation report for ... [00:23:54] activities in Argentina and the independent and international commission on Kosovo and war crime commission for investigation in the oil for food program in Iraq.
In point of fact, had it not been -- had he not been biased to truth only, he would not have been successfully qualified to assume any of these high judiciary positions.  
Mr. President, Israel also accused Judge Goldstone as seeing only with one eye.  This is also true.  Just Goldstone rejects but to see with one eye, but it is the eye of justice as he perceives it.  He rejected the first mandate issued by the Human Rights Council for the fact-finding mission in Gaza because that plan called for investigations of violations committed by Israel and he did not accept that assignment until his request to expand the mandate was accepted in order to include all violations of human rights and international humanitarian law which were committed in the framework of military operations carried out in Gaza.
Mr. President, inside Israel, there are some who attack the conclusions reached by the fact-finding mission, considering that the political objectives were guiding the work of Judge Goldstone.  The paradox here is that if we assume only for the sake of argument that Judge Goldstone had political ends behind the report of this mission, that objective is only to save Israel against itself.  
Richard Goldstone identifies himself first and foremost that he, and I quote, A Jew who always his life supported Israel and its people, -- end of quotation -- as he himself wrote in an article in the Jerusalem Post on 18, October 2009.
In point of fact, his daughter Nicole said in an interview with Israeli army radio on 16 September last, that her father, and I quote, a Zionist who loves Israel.  End of quotation.  
Mr. President, in addition to challenging the independence of Goldstone, his neutrality and credibility, in Israel there were those who were casting doubts on the methods of work and professionalism of the mission.  In point of fact, the mission pursued a comprehensive approach and a scientific method based on collection of data from its original sources like interviewing the victims and witnesses and going on field visits, analyzing of video tapes and photographs including those images -- satellite images, reviewing medical reports and requesting forensic analysis of the remnants of weapons and the munitions and organizing public hearings in Gaza and Geneva.
In this regard, the mission conducted 188 individual interviews and reviewed over 300 reports and written notes and other documents and all amounted to over 10,000 pages and more than 30 videotapes and 1,200 pictures.
Mr. President, this aggressive avalanche of attacks against Judge Goldstone and the work of the fact-finding mission has no purpose in our judgment accept to divert attention from the essence of the matter, namely the conclusions reached by this mission.  Therefore, we would like to focus on the most important of these conclusions, primarily the mission concluded that the military operation in Gaza cannot be understood or assist in isolation from developments and subsequently.  
The operation fits into a continuum of polices aimed at pursuing Israel's political objectives with regard to Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territory as a whole.  Many such policies are based on or a result of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.  And the most important aspect of this continuum is evident most immediately with the policy of blockade that preceded the operation and that the mission amounts to collective punishment intentionally inflected by the government of Israel on the people of the Gaza Strip.
The mission points to the convergence of objectives with the Gaza military operations.  Such measures include increased land expropriation, house demolitions -- demolition orders and permits to build homes in settlements, greater and more formalized exodus and movement restrictions on Palestinians, newer and stricter procedures for residents of the Gaza Strip to change their residence.  
Regarding the nature of the Israel military operations and its objectives, the mission concluded that while Israel tried to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defense, the objective was in furtherance of an overall policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population for its resilience and for its apparent support of Hamas and possibly within the intention to force a chance in such support.
Two, the repeated failure to distinguish between combatants and civilians appears to the mission to have been the result of deliberate guidance issues to soldiers described by some of them.   
Three, evidence shows that -- evidence gathered by the mission shows that the destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factors and residential houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy by the Israeli armed forces, not because these targets were a military threat, but to make the process of living and dignified living more difficult for the civilian population.
Fourth, there seems to have been an assault on the dignity of the people.  This was seen not only in the use of human shields and unlawful detentions sometimes in unacceptable conditions, but also in the vandalizing of houses when occupied and the way in which people were treated when their houses were entered.  
The graffiti on the walls, the obscenities and often racist slogans all constituted an overall image of humiliation and dehumanization of the Palestinian population.
Five, what happened was a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population, radically diminish its local economic policy both to work and to provide for itself and to force upon it an ever-increasing sense of dependency and vulnerability.
Regarding the legal consequences, the most important conclusion was first Israel failed in many instances to take feasible precautions required by customary law, reflected to avoid or minimize incidental loss of civilian live, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.  
Two, deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian objects was in violation of the fundamental humanitarian law principal of distinction resulting in this and serious injuries.  
Three, Israel failed to respect the principal of proportionality, thus violating the norms of international law as was clear when it attacked the police centers and killing a large number of police officers in the early moments of the military operations.
Four, the use by Israel of white phosphorous, which is restricted or even prohibited in certain circumstances by virtue of the principals of proportionality and precautions necessary in the attack. 
Five, the use by Israel of human shields is prohibited by international humanitarian law.  It further constitutes a violation of the right to life guaranteed by the internet covenant right on -- international covenant on civilian political rights.
Six, the detention of groups of civilians for a protracted period of time in inappropriate circumstances tantamount to collective punishment prohibited under the fourth Geneva Convention and the La Jai ... [00:33:44].  
Seven, Israel committed serious violations of the fourth Geneva Convention, especially wanton killing, torture, inhuman treatment, widespread destruction of properties without military necessity and this entails criminal responsibility for those individuals who committed these violations and crimes.
Eight, and this is more serious, depriving the Gaza population of decent livelihood including work, shelter, food, water, freedom of movement and the right to leave their homes and return to their homes could amount to the crime of persecution which is a crime against humanity.  
For all these reasons, and because we, Mr. President, cannot accept the pretext that the called-for accountability could impede the peace process -- quite the opposite.  Impunity is a prerequisite for justice that is needed for comprehensive and abiding peace.
My delegation calls upon all members of this distinguished Assembly to vote in favor of a draft resolution before the Assembly which calls for the adoption of the report of the independent fact-finding mission regarding Gaza.  
Given or against that background, we have heard the President of the State of Israel claiming that this would deprive Israel from its right to self defense, especially in the face of terrorists, and therefore may I conclude by some other words from Israel sources, words that appeared in an editorial in the Jerusalem Post newspaper on the 7th of October last.  
We are entitled to do whatever the hell we want to the Palestinians because by definition, whatever we do to them is self defense.  They, however, are not entitled to lift a finger against us because by definition whatever they do to us is terrorism.  That's the way it has always been.  That's the way it was in Operation Cast Lead and there are no limits on our rights to self defense.  There is no such thing as disproportionate.  We can look at Gaza.  We can answer ... [00:36:46] with F-16s and Apaches.  We can take 100 eyes for an eye.  We can deliberately destroy thousands of Gazan homes, the Gazan parliament, the ministry of justice, the ministry of interior, courthouses, the only Gazan floor plan, the main poultry farm, a sewage treatment plant, water wells and god knows what else deliberately.  After all, we are acting in self defense by definition.  And what do the Palestinians have to defend themselves against this?  None.  
That was the Jerusalem Post, Mr. President.  Thank you very much.