Responding to a new round of fighting between Israel and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad on Friday, the United Nations special coordinator for the Middle East peace process released an idiotic statement.
Rather than simply call for the protection of innocent life, Norwegian diplomat and U.N. representative Tor Wennesland took the opportunity to emphasize further the U.N.’s endemic anti-Israel bias. Four of Wennesland’s points were particularly silly. Let’s consider each of these in turn.
First off is Wennesland’s claim that “I am deeply concerned by the ongoing escalation between Palestinian militants and Israel, including the targeted killing today of a Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader inside Gaza.”
It obviously makes sense to be concerned by the escalation and the prospect of civilian suffering. What does not make sense, however, is Wennesland’s disquiet over the killing of a terrorist who was actively plotting to murder innocent Israeli civilians. That terrorist commander, Tayseer Jabari, wasn’t sipping tea when he was killed. Instead, he was preparing a campaign of murder. Whether it made strategic sense for Israel to strike Jabari is debatable. But what is not debatable is that this terrorist made his choices over a period of decades. He deserves no sympathy. Certainly not from a U.N. official who is supposed to be an impartial arbiter in the cause of peace.
Next up is Wennesland’s complaint that “in the past few hours, at least 10 Palestinians were killed by Israeli airstrikes. I am deeply saddened by reports that a five-year-old child has been killed in these strikes. There can be no justification for any attacks against civilians.”
Let’s be clear. The death of a child is always extremely sad. Let’s be clear that Israeli forces sometimes use force beyond their stated rules of engagement. But let’s also be clear that it is incredibly complicated to conduct military operations against targets inside Gaza.
Hiding among civilian populations and making command centers in residential apartment blocs, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad makes Israel choose between holding fire, and thus risking terrorist attacks on its own citizens, or using force and risking Palestinian civilian life. It would be one thing if Wennesland noted this moral challenge. Or if he paid even quick lip service to those Israeli civilians in southern Israel who have spent the past three days under lockdown in fear of a Palestinian Islamic Jihad attack. But no. Wennesland instead paints the conflict in the most biased and puerile armchair general terms.
Next comes Wennesland’s brilliant observation that “the continuing escalation is very dangerous.”
Thanks, Sherlock.
Finally, there’s his ridiculous concluding commitment that “the UN is fully engaged with all concerned in an attempt to avoid a further conflict.”
See the hypocrisy? Having spent the near entirety of his note underlining his utter bias on the conflict, Wennesland now assumes that he can positively influence a resolution to it. He appears to have no awareness as to why, just maybe, Israel might not care much for what he has to say.
