Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Amid Pandemic, UN Still Finds Time to Bash Israel

Amid Pandemic, UN Still Finds Time to Bash Israel

Politicizing the pandemic, the UN falsely paints Israeli policy, not COVID-19 itself, as the primary threat to Palestinian health.

Do not let the United Nations fool you. Although it may have essentially closed its doors in favor of online meetings in the age of coronavirus, its obsessive anti-Israel bias is alive and well. Through its numerous bodies, the UN falsely paints Israeli policy, not COVID-19 itself, as the primary threat to Palestinian health.

Take, for example, the infamous United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which expressed anger at Israel for its efforts to quell the spread of the virus in East Jerusalem, which it says constrains free movement (currently experienced by practically every other civilized society on the planet). Unfortunately for UNRWA, the mukhtar (village chief) of the East Jerusalem village of Silwan, disagrees with their assessment, evident when he stated that the Arab sector desperately needs a lockdown to be enforced by the IDF Home Front Command.

While East Jerusalemites have complained about the government’s response to the virus in their neighborhoods (and their complaints may well be justified), Israel has by no means neglected the densely populated area. Writing on April 21st, Haaretz reported that an IDF Brigadier general was tapped to serve as an adviser to Mayor Moshe Leon for handling Coronavirus management, specifically in East Jerusalem. And according to OCHA, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Israel has established 10 Coronavirus testing facilities in East Jerusalem, and most local residents can be treated at other hospitals in the city.

Moving on to the next UN body.

Within the notoriously anti-Israel Human Rights Council, a group of independent experts accused Israel of discriminating against Palestinians when it released hundreds of Israeli prisoners as a protective step against an outbreak in the prison system, yet did not release Palestinian prisoners. These experts failed to mention that the released prisoners’ sentences were nearly completed, were not considered dangerous, or were not incarcerated for security-related offenses.

This is contrary to huge swaths of Palestinian prisoners, who are incarcerated for security offenses against Israel, sometimes even belonging to terrorist organizations like Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. The experts, among them notable anti-Israel academic Michael Lynk (who once claimed Hezbollah and Hamas are not “real” threats to Israel), besmirched the Jewish State for allegedly undermining efforts to ensure Palestinian testing. Clearly, the experts’ political preconceptions prevent them from seeing the genuine cooperation occurring between the two sides.

While it has not made any overtly hostile moves against Israel during the pandemic, it’s still worth mentioning the anti-Israel bias of the now widely scrutinized World Health Organization (WHO). For example, in its most recent report on Palestinian health care, “Right to Health”, published at the end of 2017, the WHO essentially blames Israel for the Palestinian health crisis. The UN body argues that Israel bears the “primary responsibility” for ensuring the health of Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.

As noted by the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), the report fails to mention that Israel completely withdrew from Gaza in 2005, that the Palestinian leadership routinely rejects vital medical supplies from Israel, and that they often choose to fund terror instead of build hospitals. Additionally, contrary to the WHO’s claim, Israel is not in fact responsible for the health, medical affairs and contagious disease response of the Palestinians, as stipulated in article 17 of the Oslo 2 Accords, which forms the basis of cooperation between Israel and the Palestinians until this day.

However, in a surprisingly positive string of statements, UN Secretary General António Guterres, UN special coordinator for the Middle East Nickolay Mladenov, and UN Development and Humanitarian Coordinator Jamie McGoldrick, all praised the Israeli-Palestinian cooperation. Since the onset of the pandemic, Israeli medical professionals have been training their Palestinian counterparts, and provided the Palestinians with aid, testing kits and medical supplies.

Furthermore, while highlighting the worrying increase in Coronavirus-related anti-Semitism, UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Ahmed Shaheed, voiced his concern about the ludicrous conspiracy theories being promulgated that Israel and the Jews manufactured COVID-19 as a biological weapon to control the world. In his statement, Shaheed called on the world to reject these anti-Semitic libels.

It is abundantly clear that there is a disconnect among players in the UN. It seems that some members of the supra-national organization are actually capable (sometimes) of recognizing legitimate positive steps taken by Israel and the Palestinians. Others, however, merely fall victim to longstanding institutional or personal anti-Israel biases. The UN and its experts should be familiar enough with the matters at hand to understand that Israel has a vested interest in ensuring stability inside the Palestinian territories. They must ask themselves: what good would a widespread outbreak of COVID-19 and mass death in the Palestinian territories do for Israel, especially during one of the most turbulent, destabilizing global events in modern memory? The answer is nothing, and the UN would do well to internalize that.

[Featured Image: Via YouTube]


Eitan Fischberger is an Israeli student and veteran of the Israeli Air Force. His writing has appeared in The Jerusalem Post, Jewish News Syndicate (JNS), Legal Insurrection, The Daily Wire, Algemeiner Journal, and the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


2smartforlibs | April 30, 2020 at 5:11 pm

No need to fix the problem when you can push you lame globalist agenda

Retired in Chicago | April 30, 2020 at 5:15 pm

The Un and the EU need to be ended. They are liberal with anti-conservative views. ( yet they take the money).

    The Birch Society had it right, way back in the 1960s, with its

    — Get US out of the UN campaign —

    Which, if I remember correctly, had a second part,

    — And Get the UN out of the US —

    meaning to send it back to its League of Nations HQs in Geneva.

      rocky71 in reply to fscarn. | May 1, 2020 at 4:41 pm

      Better yet an uninhabited island so they have only their own establishment to corrupt

healthguyfsu | April 30, 2020 at 5:18 pm

Are we coming to a global civil war at some point?

I’m not sure there are enough left on the good guys’ side sadly.

We can start by withdrawing from the UN rather than enabling this garbage, but we probably won’t.

UN performs an essential service. Planned Parenthood, too. #HateLovesAbortion

Defund that shithole, and move it out of the US.

Its presence in this country is an insult and a festering wound.

I oppose corvid19 related early prisoner releases here in the US. Doing so sets precedent for all sort of left-inspired ‘prison abolition’ mischief.

We’re also supposed to be thankful (mollified) because prison authorities only release non-violent prisoners? Gosh, thanks sir! May I have another, gov’nor?

How many of these supposed non-violent prisoners are actually non-violent?

Released prisoner #1 was convicted of break/entry and burglary of a liquor store.

After commission of said crime (all on security camera) he goes home, has a few pulls off a handle of cheap whiskey, and slaps his girlfriend around. She doesn’t report him since she’s no where else to go.

And the irony of it all? We’re the sad, abused girlfriend, suffering under the tyranny of our head-of-household.

    rocky71 in reply to Tiki. | May 1, 2020 at 4:54 pm

    While unknown to the general public many ‘offenders’ are considered non-violent variously based on convicted offense (to include pleading to lesser or ‘related!’ charges), their behavior while incarcerated, length of time since their last confirmed violent act, or any combination. This variation is not simply between states but also among individual jurisdictions in said states when counties & metro areas have their own separate systems. So it’s not only conceivable but known to have been the case where non-violent here&now had committed heinous acts elsewhere/previously yet were released anyway. And this ‘classification discrepancy’ has not only occurred under guise of the current ‘event’ but has actually been a recurring theme across the country for some time now.

Today’s BBC world service radio was
pressing home the UN narrative that Eitan Fischberger underscores in this article.