Remarks by US Ambassador Nikki Haley, Permanent Representative to the United Nations, before a UN Security Council briefing on the situation in the Middle East, December 18, 2017:
Thank you, Mr. President. In this meeting, I will not use Council’s time to address where a sovereign nation might decide to put its embassy, and why we have every right to do so. I will address a more appropriate and urgent concern.
This week marks the one-year anniversary of the passage of Resolution 2334. On that day, in this Council, in December 2016, the United States elected to abstain, allowing the measure to pass. Now it’s one year and a new administration later. Given the chance to vote again on Resolution 2334, I can say with complete confidence that the United States would vote “no.” We would exercise our veto power. The reasons why are very relevant to the cause of peace in the Middle East.
On the surface, Resolution 2334 described Israeli settlements as impediments to peace. Reasonable people can disagree about that, and in fact, over the years the United States has expressed criticism of Israeli settlement policies many times.
But in truth, it was Resolution 2334 itself that was an impediment to peace. This Security Council put the negotiations between Israelis and the Palestinians further out of reach by injecting itself, yet again, in between the two parties to the conflict.
By misplacing the blame for the failure of peace efforts squarely on the Israeli settlements, the resolution gave a pass to Palestinian leaders who for many years rejected one peace proposal after another. It also gave them encouragement to avoid negotiations in the future. It refused to acknowledge the legacy of failed negotiations unrelated to settlements. And the Council passed judgment on issues that must be decided in direct negotiations between the parties.
If the United Nations’ history in the peace efforts proves anything, it is that talking in New York cannot take the place of face-to-face negotiations between the regional parties. It only sets back the cause of peace, not advance it.
As if to make this very point, Resolution 2334 demanded a halt to all Israeli settlement activity in East Jerusalem – even in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City. This is something that no responsible person or country would ever expect Israel would do. And in this way, Resolution 2334 did what President Trump’s announcement on Jerusalem as the capital of Israel did not do: It prejudged issues that should be left in final status negotiations.
Given the chance today, the United States would veto Resolution 2334 for another reason. It gave new life to an ugly creation of the Human Rights Council: the database of companies operating in Jewish communities. This is an effort to create a blacklist, plain and simple. It is yet another obstacle to a negotiated peace. It is a stain on America’s conscience that we gave the so-called BDS movement momentum by allowing the passage of Resolution 2334.
To the United Nations’ shame, this has been a disproportionately hostile place for the Middle East’s most enduring democracy.
The United States refuses to accept the double standard that says we are not impartial when we stand by the will of the American people by moving our US embassy, but somehow the United Nations is a neutral party when it consistently singles out Israel for condemnation.
For decades, Israel has withstood wave after wave of bias in the UN and its agencies. The United States has often stood beside Israel. We did not on December 23, 2016. We will not make that mistake again.
This week marks the one year anniversary of a significant setback for Middle East peace. But the United States has an undiminished commitment to helping bring about final status negotiations that will lead to lasting peace.
Our hand remains extended to both parties. We call on all countries that share this commitment to learn the hard lessons of the past and work to bring Israel and the Palestinian people in good faith to the peace table.
Thank you, very much.
Trump now has a list of the dirty rats who ask for American blood and money and influence yet diss its sovereignty at the UN. He also has a list of the cowardly abstainers who might have well have voted yes, including, shamefully, my own country Canada. Those who voted yes include those who falsely claim to be friends of both the US and Israel including many countries who eagerly shipped Jews to the ovens for the Nazis in WW2. Sic 'em President Trump.ReplyDelete
I gotta tell you, Doodad, I am a bit surprised that Trump is sticking his neck out as far as he seems to be doing for Israel. It gives me a glimmer of hope that maybe he'll close the deal by actually moving the embassy.Delete
As far as I am concerned the Jerusalem recognition is good and important, but moving the embassy is necessary to concretize that recognition.
Originally thought Huckabee would be better, but was mistaken. Haley has been nothing, but great!ReplyDelete
When it comes to being friends of Israel and Jews, wonder how progressive Zionists see things these days, from Jerusalem to vetoes at the UN to diversion of Operation Cassandra and the lies behind the Iran deal.
The media narrative is that Trump's announcement came "out of the blue." This, despite his campaign promise, and despite the Senate's expressed support for Jerusalem as Israel's capital not six months ago by a 90-0 vote.Delete
What does that tell you?
"State Department spokesman" Chris Matthews thinks the announcement and implications are just horrible, horrible, horrible! Poor Chris isn't feeling that tingle up his leg lately.
How do progressive ZIonists explain away Obama's "abstention" of 2334, to a standing ovation at the (anti-)Security Council for Samantha Power?Delete
He did this the day after a Hanukkah ceremony at the White House! This is the new definition of chutzpah.
Is the MSM even covering the Obama / Hez story? My assumption is that they are going to bury this.Delete
...in a pauper's grave.Delete
One could be forgiven for thinking the UN's real name is the "World Organization for the Promotion of Antisemitism."ReplyDelete
Threats to defund are just that, threats. Believe it when you see itReplyDelete
True. I doubt he has the power to do it himself and I suspect the rats in congress would fight him on it. He should start by removing more funding from the UN than he already has done.Delete
The US announced it's cutting $285 million US from its contribution to the UN operational budget. Which is distinct from its peace keeping budget.Delete
Meanwhile the peaceful Pals are holding peaceful demos; throwing peaceful Molotov cocktails, peaceful rocks, and other peaceful sh*t. And the peace loving world just loves those peaceful rascals.ReplyDelete
"What such UN-eze means for real people is this: There has never been an emergency special session of the General Assembly on anything but Israel-bashing in twenty years. 500,000-plus dead and seven million displaced in Syria over seven years – and not one emergency special session. Neither a million dead in Rwanda, nor two million dead over two decades in Sudan, ever prompted a single emergency special session.
The issue Thursday was not about Jerusalem. It was about Jew-hatred. The resolution is the General Assembly’s twenty-first resolution in 2017 slamming Israel for violating “rights” and “law.” There was one resolution on North Korea. One on Iran. And one on the United States – criticizing U.S. Cuba policy. Altogether, there were nine resolutions critical of human rights records in specific states in the rest of the world combined."
Read the whole powerful article by Anne Bayefsky where she lays out ways the US can react.
Based on Trump's past performance, would not be surprised to see something similar to what Bayefsky suggests.Delete
She's to be admired for her constant voice in support of Israel and human rights.
There may be nothing on the planet as corrupt as the UN budget, unless it's the mechanisms of the UN like the HRC and UNESCO.
There are so many ways to show displeasure and make other states think twice in the future.
It would be nice to see the Trump effect take hold on the Middle East, which is ready for change, even if the UN and its Establishment isn't.
Agree with the substance presented in this article:ReplyDelete
"Palestinians" have only themselves to blame for their sorry state.
Yes. The Falestinian-Arabs are the only people in recorded history to emerge "as a people" for the sole purpose of robbing another people of self-determination and self-defense on their own historical homeland. Why anyone - particularly Jews - should respect them for that is beyond me.Delete
Hey Nikki you're so fine you're so fine you blow my mind. Hey Nikki. Hey Nikki.ReplyDelete
I haven't heard that one in forever!