Daphne Anson: David Singer On His UNESCO Petition & His Facebook Group "Help Restore UNESCO's Funding"

Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East. (From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Saturday, 11 February 2012

David Singer On His UNESCO Petition & His Facebook Group "Help Restore UNESCO's Funding"

In his latest article (entitled "UNESCO On The Nose") via the antipodean J-Wire service, Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer pinpoints five main reasons for opposition to his petition from some perhaps unexpected quarters, and urges a rethink on the part of those who have proved reluctant to sign. He also draws attention to a group he has set up on Facebook, called "Help Restore UNESCO's Funding" and urges readers to join.

Writes David Singer:

'UNESCO seems set to preside over a looming global humanitarian crisis as it continues to struggle in its efforts to cope with the loss of $260 million – 22% of its projected budget – until the end of 2013.
Trying to make up the shortfall – including lobbying America and Israel to resume the payment of their dues and establishing an Emergency Fund to solicit donations from its other 193 member states and the public at large – have clearly failed so far.

UNESCO‘s finds itself in this sorry situation because of its decision to admit “Palestine“ as its 195th Member State on 31 October last.

In an effort to recoup the shortfall – I have proposed to UNESCO that it approach the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on whether the requirements of UNESCO’s Constitution were satisfied in admitting “Palestine”.

If the Court rules that the provisions of the Constitution were complied with – then this avenue as a means of recouping the $260 million would be closed – but the provisions of the Constitution would have been judicially interpreted to prevent a repeat of the current controversy when dealing with other applications to join UNESCO in the future.

If however the Court found the decision to be unconstitutional – then the $260 million would start to flow into UNESCO’s coffers immediately and the emerging global crisis impacting on scores of millions of people world wide would be averted.

Faced with continuing UNESCO resistance to discuss my detailed submission to it on 1 December last – I started an online petition on 1 January seeking public support for this proposal – which has so far attracted more than 1000 signatures from people in 26 countries. Please also sign it if you agree with the views expressed in this article.

What has been surprising – and very disturbing – has been the opposition expressed to signing my petition – which I have been able to attribute to five main reasons gleaned from the responses received so far to my proposal:

Some have expressed their utter contempt for UNESCO and its continued existence – suggesting it has become ineffectual and politicized and should be shut down.
They delight in the financial difficulties being faced by UNESCO – which they see as a self-serving organization that exists to feed an over bloated bureaucracy of overpaid and well travelled employees – rather than spending its budget on helping the hundreds of millions of people world wide who are crying out for some hope to relieve their distressing lives.

Some Americans are supportive of their country’s decision to stop the payment of its financial dues – automatically suspended as a result of an American law dating back to the 1990’s which prescribed such action should any UN agency act as UNESCO did.

These people are more than happy to see this money – about $100million yearly – go towards helping America solve its own pressing domestic financial problems.
They are hostile to UNESCO‘s lobbying attempts to try and get America to change its law or to otherwise circumvent the legislation to get America‘s dues back via some back door manoeuvre.

Some have shown a total lack of concern or compassion for the difficulties facing hundreds of millions of people world wide if UNESCO is forced to curtail its humanitarian assistance.

This attitude was succinctly expressed in the following comment:
“Palestine suffers from the actions of the world, the world can suffer from Palestine for once”

Some have expressed no confidence in the International Court being able to arrive at a fair and unbiased opinion – a waste of time and money

By far the largest number of those refusing to sign the petition are those who are opposed to UNESCO taking any steps that could possibly lead to Palestine’s admission to UNESCO being ruled unconstitutional.

People are entitled to their viewpoints – and to be criticised for holding those views. I have urged many expressing these views to think again and sign the petition – but to no avail.

UNESCO cannot allow its decision on Palestine – and its dire consequences – to simply end in UNESCO cutting its programs and its employees for 2102-2013 in accordance with a drastically revised budget – until it has explored every option to avoid this happening.

The consequences of such program cutting will clearly impact on the lives of millions of people world-wide. UNESCO would be clearly irresponsible if it failed to take any possible action available to arrest this emerging humanitarian landslide.

Spending $100000 approaching the International Court in the hope of avoiding this parlous situation is an option that UNESCO should grab with both hands.

The International Court cannot possibly hope to satisfy all of the above objectors.

If Palestine’s admission to UNESCO is found to be lawful – those espousing the views in groups 3 and 5 above will be happy and the rest will not . The status quo now existing will be maintained.

If Palestine’s admission to UNESCO is found to be unlawful – only those in group 4 may be persuaded to rethink their view of the International Court. None of the other 4 groups will be happy – but the status quo existing at 30 October 2011 will be restored – for better or for worse.

UNESCO should not be afraid to institute such legal action for fear of upsetting these objectors – since the number of people signing and still continuing to sign my petition clearly outnumber those opposed to signing it.

I have been encouraged by such response to set up a Facebook group called “Help Restore UNESCO’s Funding”.

I urge everyone – in favour of or opposed to UNESCO approaching the International Court – to join, have their say and to follow developments as they unfold at UNESCO and in the international arena..

UNESCO needs to be very careful that it does not create the impression that it can ignore its own constitution with impunity. Its failure to even discuss my detailed submission on the legality of its decision renders it open to such a charge and only serves to reduce its status and credibility among those signing the petition.
Seeking to resolve the current impasse by resorting to the law is not a known or an accepted practice in a large number of the 195 member states that make up UNESCO – where the rule of law and respect for the law in such countries is unknown.

Approaching the International Court in the present circumstances will help these states understand this still remains the best system yet devised for finally resolving issues between people with different viewpoints.

The law is not perfect and its decisions are often controversial and open to criticism and different interpretations.

However it beats bullets, demonstrations and dying, tear gas and trauma – hands down.'

13 comments:

Empress Trudy11 February 2012 at 14:16
UN organizations have no rule or law or principle that they need follow except to foment another Holocaust. That's essentially the UN's only role.
ReplyDelete
Replies
Anonymous11 February 2012 at 20:12
Isn't the ICJ a hotbet of antisemitism ? It ruled that Israel's separation barrier is illegal.
ReplyDelete
Replies
david singer12 February 2012 at 10:25
To Empress Trudy

I thought UNESCO was bound to act legally - not illegally.

UNESCO is not above the law and must ensure it always acts in accordance with the law.

That is why this particular decision to admit Palestine must be judicially reviewed - since there is a strong argument that it breached the provisions of UNESCO's constitution.

That UNESCO even refuses to discuss this opinion is very strange. If it is correct then UNESCO's financial crisis could end overnight.

Given UNESCO has lost $226 million to 2013 - you think it would be interested in seeing whether this opinion has merit or not.

They obviously don't give a damn - happy to consign scores of millions of people world wide to misery and hardship - when $100000 spent on going to the International Court could possibly help them out of the financial bind they find themselves in now.

Go figure....
ReplyDelete
Replies
david singer12 February 2012 at 10:45
To Anonymous

The International Court's advisory opinion on the security barrier was based on an incomplete brief presented to the Court by then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan - which failed to include any reference to the Mandate for Palestine or article 80 of the UN Charter - two critical pieces of international law that were directly relevant to the security barrier issue.

A court can only give an advisory opinion on the material presented to it.

That is why one would have to be very careful in ensuring that UNESCO's request to the International Court for an advisory opinion on Palestine contained all the relevant material necessary to enable the court to reach a fair decision.

At the moment this is theoretical only - since UNESCO appears totally disinterested in trying to rescue its organization by going down this route to try and save it from the financial disaster and humanitarian crisis it faces.
ReplyDelete
Replies
Rita12 February 2012 at 19:34
@ David Singer:

"...UNESCO appears totally disinterested in trying to rescue its organization by going down this route to try and save it from the financial disaster and humanitarian crisis it faces"

Am I too optimistic in thinking that UNESCO might see the end of the UN et al in its present ..ahem..."form", and think: "what's the use"?
ReplyDelete
Replies
Anonymous12 February 2012 at 21:14
Afterall It is Israel and the US who are opposed to the admission of Palestine. Why cannot they approach the ICJ ?
ReplyDelete
Replies
Anonymous13 February 2012 at 02:31
I don't see how a non-entity gets a seat at the U.N. unless, of course, politics rules the roost. In which case, that is the bed which the U.N. made and they should sleep in it. Let's not forget how UNESCO money went to Palestinian publishers who exalted in the efforts of Hitler in their writings to Palestinian children.

When the Palestinian leadership accepts peace and makes an effort to accept any of the 3 latest states offered by 3 different Israeli Prime Ministers, then they can get their seat at the U.N. and on UNESCO. Of course, that's a tricky deal in which Palestinian leadership will have to give up on violence and their goals of "destroying the Zionist entity".

Then again, a new state of Palestine would end up replacing the failed status of UNRWA, deliverers of billions of dollars in aid every year while maintaining refugee camps and international funding.

Maybe I'm missing something, but if the U.N. is going to constantly avoid the realities of Israel's existence and her peace efforts, then there is absolutely no reason to continue funding its current efforts.
ReplyDelete
Replies
Anonymous13 February 2012 at 16:02
The US and Israel are opposed to the recognition. SHouldn't Israel approach the ICJ instead of Unesco ?
ReplyDelete
Replies
david singer14 February 2012 at 07:51
This option is not available to member states - only to UNESCO.

The financial hole and looming global humanitarian crisis in which UNESCO now finds itself has been caused by UNESCO's decision to admit Palestine.

UNESCO - as a UN agency - can possibly solve this crisis by approaching the Court - as a matter of right - for an advisory opinion on the legality of its decision.

By the way 87 of the 194 countries in UNESCO did not vote affirmatively for the admission of Palestine. Many of those abstained and many didn't even turn up. They would all be entitled to say UNESCO's current problem was not of their making.

Singling out Israel and the US seems a little mischievous. Try to be more objective.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

'For as long as these antisemites wrap themselves up in the Palestinian flag, too many people are willing to turn a blind eye. Only against Jews is this type of racism openly tolerated. It is flourishing in schools, colleges, universities, unions and in city councils. In fact, so rampant is the disease now, in some settings you can be ostracised if you do not partake in the frenzy yourself. Bashing Jews has becomes a trendy position for the ignorant social justice warrior. "Palestinianism" is a viral "ponzi scheme" and as it spreads, it carries antisemitism in the undergrowth.' David Collier (2017)

'This new rise in antisemitism, which I had thought long dead, was not shaven-headed white imbeciles from the far right. It was Muslims, a large chunk of it.... Suddenly I grasped that the British far left didn’t want people to know about antisemitism because it pointed the finger at people they really, really liked. From that moment on, it all fell into place.... Time and again the same tropes emerged, the same sort of stuff that Streicher and Goebbels would have commended – and uttered.... And from that a whole bunch of other stuff emerged: the old blood libel business (a favourite of the repulsive Jenny Tonge).... Nice, avuncular, Jeremy Corbyn, with his peace badges, happily laying a wreath at the graveside of Palestinian terrorists who murdered innocent Jewish athletes, oh, and much much more.... It is the same antisemitism, exactly the same: the obsession with Israel to the exclusion of everything else, the conspiracy theory paranoias, the derangement.... Here’s the test – if you cannot see the flagrant racism in the BDS movement, and if you are obsessed with the perfidy of the Middle East’s only democracy to the exclusion of all else, you are an antisemite. That means a good proportion of the Labour Party, including the leader, and almost all of Momentum: no brown shirts, no marching bands, but the same old filth, dressed in the clothes of a polytechnic geography lecturer.'
Rod Liddle (2018)

'Before the June 1967 Six Day War, there were no such things as "settlements". Palestinians were trying to destroy and displace Israel anyhow. The core problem is not, and never was, "settlements," but the right of Israel (or any non-Muslim nation) to exist inside any borders in that part of the world.
If you take a stand that is based on a lie, then that stand cannot succeed. If you try to oppose antisemitism but pretend it is the same thing as "Islamophobia," then the structure on which you have made your stand will totter and all your aspirations will fail. If you try to make a stand based on the idea that settlement construction rather than the intransigence of the Palestinians to the existence of a Jewish state is what is holding up a peace deal, then facts will keep on intruding.' Douglas Murray (31 December 2016)
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9685/britain-little-lies

'Islamophobia does NOT come from the same wellspring of hatred as antisemitism. Antisemitism is a true prejudice because the hatred and demonisation it promotes derive entirely from lies and a repudiation of rationality itself.
Islamophobia is a false allegation of prejudice which is deployed to silence rational criticism based on actual facts about attitudes and practices within the Islamic world.
[L]ethally compromised even-handedness is to misunderstand, and thus minimise, antisemitic attitudes and behaviour while shutting down legitimate and necessary discussion of the threat from the Islamic world – even to demonise as “Islamophobic” anyone who draws attention to the extent and consequences of Muslim antisemitism.' Melanie Phillips (14 December 2016)

Jews have re-assumed the role of the canary in the mine and are the first to be targeted, but the world would face the same threat if Jews did not exist. Israel has been at the front lines confronting Islamic extremism but has received scant support... For Jews, the writing has been on the wall for a long time. The virulence of the antisemitic hatred closing in on Jews in Europe (and elsewhere) is horrifying...
Europe is today facing a crisis as serious as the confrontation with Nazism. If Western leaders continue behaving like Chamberlain and fail to stand up to this global threat, it could usher in a new Dark Age in which the Judeo-Christian culture is subsumed by primitive barbarism. The writing is on the wall Isi Leibler (12 January 2015)

Expose The Lies!

There is a war of lies and deceit on the internet generating unbelievable hate by denigrating and delegitimising the legal rights conferred on the Jewish people by the League of Nations in 1922 and the United Nations in 1945. The idea that there are two narratives on the Arab-Jewish conflict is rubbish. There is only one – the factual truth that details the return of the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in its ancient biblical, ancestral and historic homeland after 3500 years of dispersion with the unanimous endorsement of the nation states then comprising the League of Nations.... Generals can’t fight a war without soldiers. Jews around the world need to join the fight or vacate the internet to the Jew-haters and their lies that repeated often enough eventually become accepted as truth. David Singer (2016)

The "Apartheid" Slur

The division of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) into three separate areas “A”, “B” and “C” was agreed on by Israel and the PLO pursuant to the Oslo Accords.
95% of the West Bank Arabs live in Areas A and B and their daily lives are under the total administration and control of the PLO since the Palestinian Authority was disbanded by Abbas in January 2013. The PLO has total security control in A and shares security control in B with Israel. Israel has total administrative and security control in C.
Israel is entitled to and will continue to take responsibility for the security of Jews living in the West Bank.
Jews were given the legal right to settle in the West Bank under article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the UN Charter. They did so for decades until they were driven out in 1947 and not able to return there until 1967.
There are Arab roads only in the West Bank that Jews are not allowed to use. Jews are also forbidden from entering Area “A”. Selling land to Jews is forbidden by the PLO under pain of death. The PLO runs the daily lives of 95% of the West Bank Arabs and Hamas runs the daily lives of 100% of the Gazan Arabs. They have been under occupation – and subjugation – by these two evil groups for the last ten years and given no say in their future or any opportunity to elect others to lead them following the disastrous political decisions of their leaders over the past ten years. Hamas and the PLO do not accept the continued existence of a Jewish State and call for its disappearance.
The narratives did not begin in 1948 – they began in about 1917. How do you make peace with an enemy that has been obsessed with not recognising any Jewish national rights in former Palestine for the last 100 years? David Singer (2016)

The Jews of the Holy Land ... are surrounded by hostile states 650 times their territory and sixty times their population. Yet their last, best hope of ending two millennia of international persecution - the State of Israel - has somehow survived. When, during the Second World War, the island of Malta came through three terrible years of bombardment and destruction, it was rightly awarded the George Cross for bravery. Today, Israel should be awarded a similar decoration for defending democracy, tolerance and Western values against a murderous onslaught that has lasted twenty times as long. Andrew Roberts (historian)

Israel is understandably obsessed with security, but its greatest security lies ultimately not in the Israeli Defence Forces, but in political warfare.... Most of the world is not deeply interested in what happens in Israel, and probably does not want to be deluged with legalistic defences of particular actions. What it wants is a clear, calm, repeated case. It is a case – aimed more at public opinion than at foreign ministries – about freedom, democracy, a Western way of life and the need for the whole of the free world to fight terrorism. Sometimes you hear Israelis say: “It doesn’t matter what we say. The whole world is against us.” You can see why they say it, for they are indeed unfairly treated. But when they say it, they are uttering a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they won’t say what needs saying, no one else will say it for them. Charles Moore (2010)

Once again the armies of the Arab nations are coordinating their military efforts to destroy Israel - whatever they say about wishing merely to regain the lost territories.... [I]f the present Arab offensive had been launched at the pre-1967 frontiers, then the Israelis would indeed have been fighting to avoid annihilation. It seems now that the Israelis were right to maintain the ceasefire lines gained in 1967, and that to do so is the only guarantee of their continued safety.
Alan Sillitoe (The Times, 11 October 1973)

Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam... In this deadly game of thrones, there’s no place for America or for Israel, no place for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don’t share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone... [T]he greatest danger facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can’t let that happen...[T]he days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over. We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend our home have boundless courage. For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves....Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand. But ... I know that America stands with Israel... You stand with Israel, because you know that the story of Israel is not only the story of the Jewish people but of the human spirit that refuses again and again to succumb to history’s horrors. Bibi Netanyahu (12 Adar 5775; 3 March 2015)

The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews. Other nations drive out thousands, even millions, of people, and there is no refugee problem.... [N]o one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees.... Other nations - when they are defeated - survive and recover, but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed.... [A]s it goes with Israel, so it will go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us. Eric Hoffer (1968)

Most of the present Arab countries were given their freedom after the 1914-18 War, or after the 1939-45 War.... Yet to listen to Arab spokesmen one might think that they had been cheated ... because they have not also got Israel. Israel is only .2 per cent of the land where Arab States have been established. Surely no fair-minded man can begrudge the Jews their own promised land when it is remembered that for every 2 acres that went to make up Israel, 1,000 acres became Arab.... Why is there an Arab refugee problem? The oil-rich countries have the money. There is no shortage of land, and the Israelis have the technical knowledge to show how it could be developed and made fertile. Bring those things together and the problem could be solved. 3rd Earl of Balfour (1968)

January 7, 2015 has already its place in the history of infamy, but also will be the date when the defenders of freedom and democracy will rise and pay tribute to those who died for their freedom and ours. Therefore, we must not forget on which side we are and who are our allies in the defense of the West and its values. Whether we admit it or not, the West is at war with an enemy who will not stop to destroy us...
The State of Israel boasts a commandment that, in one of the darkest hours in the fight for liberty Winston Churchill taught: "Never give up". Israel has proven to be a key ally in the fight against Islamism and also an example of how a liberal democracy can resist the jihadist stake and thrive as a Western nation ... Not only France but also all the West should look to Israel to defeat Islamism...
friendsofisraelinitiative.org

[I]t’s impossible to believe that an active antisemite wouldn’t – if only opportunistically – seek out somewhere to nestle in the manifold pleats of Israel-bashing, whether in generally diffuse anti-Zionism, or in more specific Boycott and Divestment Campaigns, Israeli Apartheid Weeks, End the Occupation movements and the like....[T]ell me that not a single Jew-hater finds the activity congenial, that criticising Israel can “never” be an expression of Jew-hating, not even when it takes the form of accusing Israeli soldiers of harvesting organs... Howard Jacobson (The Independent, 27 May 2013)

For Western countries to side with those who question Israel's legitimacy, for them to play games in international bodies with Israel's vital security issues, for them to appease those who oppose Western values, rather than robustly to stand up in defence of those values, is not only a grave moral mistake, but a strategic error of the first magnitude. Israel is a fundamental part of the West. The West is what it is thanks to its Judeo-Christian roots. If the Jewish element of those roots is lost and Israel is lost, then we are lost too. Jose Maria Aznar

Israel is, for us, a normal and a special country. A normal country, because it is just like any other democracy. A special country, because the Jewish culture, which eventually became the Judeo-Christian culture of the dignity of man, is the conceptual foundation of liberalism and democracy. This is why attacking Israel is tantamount to attacking Europe and the West. This is also why disputing Israel's legitimacy and its right to existence means questioning democracy. And this is why we are Friends of Israel. By defending Israel, we are defending ourselves. Marcello Pera

Israel ... is beset today by a unique combination of threats. It must defend its people from attack while defending its very right to exist. No other nation in the world faces this dual challenge. To deny Israel's right to confront some of the world's most vicious terrorist groups in order to ensure the safety of its citizens is to corrode international norms from within ... The assault on Israel is one part of a more general assault on the West, on democracy, and on the moral and cultural heritage that grew from the fruitful interaction of Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome ... Should these efforts succeed, similar efforts will certainly be turned against other western democracies. George Weigel

Apart from America itself, Israel still stands as the world's brightest model of national self-liberation based on ideals of individual responsibility and human freedom. Israel's ability to withstand Arab attempts to destroy it in one of the longest and most lop-sided wars ever fought serves as an indelible testimony to the strength of democratic culture.... We know from the past that the West paid dearly for ignoring Hitler's war against the Jews. One can only hope it will not pay as dearly for having ignored or underestimated for so long the Arab war against Israel and the Jews. Ruth Wisse

I am duty-bound to defend freedom, culture, peaceful coexistence, the civic education of children, and all the principles that the Tablets of the Law have rendered universal. Principles which Islamic fundamentalism systematically destroys. This means that, since I am a Gentile, a journalist and a leftist, I have a triple moral commitment to Israel. Because, if Israel were to be vanquished, modernity, culture and freedom would also be crushed. Even though the world has failed to wake up to this fact, Israel's struggle is the world's struggle. Pilar Rahola

DISCLAIMER

Commenters are kindly requested to avoid posting material which violates or infringes the rights of others (including their privacy and publicity rights, or which is unlawful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, invasive of privacy, vulgar, obscene, profane or which may harass or cause distress or inconvenience to, or incite hatred of, any person.
The opinions expressed by posters of comments on the Daphne Anson blog are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Daphne Anson. Daphne Anson is not responsible for the content of the comments.
This blog's posts sometimes include links to other websites. Such linked websites will have their own terms and conditions of use and commenters are advised to familiarise themselves with them.
The Daphne Anson blog
* does not sponsor, endorse or necessarily approve of any material posted on this website or on websites linked from or to this website;
* does not make any warranties or representations regarding the quality, accuracy, merchantability or fitness for purpose of any material on websites linked from or to this website;
* does not make any warranties or representations that material on other websites to which this website is linked does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any person anywhere in the world;
* does not authorise the infringement of any intellectual property rights contained in material in other websites by linking this website to those other websites.