Crimea, and why Ukraine could not support Israel

netanyahu

 

2016/12/29 - 21:25 • Analysis & Opinion

Article by: Dmytro Homon

The Ukrainian representative at the UN Security Council voted against Israeli settlements in Jerusalem, which led to controversy and a diplomatic scandal.

The cancellation of the visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman to Israel has provoked a strong reaction in Ukraine. During the ongoing scandal, all possible problems in the Ukrainian-Israeli relations have been dragged to the surface. Many experts in the Arab-Israeli conflict, as well as those who consider themselves experts, have expressed themselves in social media.

But the storm is not limited to the social networks. Politicians have been divided in their reactions as well. Some have criticized the government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, while others believe the diplomats have acted properly.

Resolution on the settlements

The bone of contention was the vote on December 23, for the UN Security Council Resolution No. 2334, which states that the UN Security Council believes that ” Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders.”

Similar resolutions are submitted for consideration regularly. However, they were previously blocked by the US, using its veto. This is what happened in 2011.

This time, instead of using its veto, the US abstained from voting, effectively giving the “green light” for the adoption of the document. This is the result of the policies implemented in the Middle East by the outgoing president of the United States, Barack Obama, and his administration.

Why Ukraine supported the resolution

The position of the Ukrainian Ministry of  Foreign Affairs is based on the argument that taking Crimea into account, Ukraine simply could not and had no right to vote otherwise. “Our state has consistently stood for the respect of international law by everyone and everywhere, since, in our own case, we have experienced the tragic consequences that result from its violation,” the official Ministry statement declared.

To decipher: Ukraine’s position in the international arena regarding Crimea is based on the assertion that Russia is a gross violator of international law. Most countries have agreed with Ukraine on this matter still in February 2014 by supporting the resolution of the UN General Assembly on the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Israel did not support that document (it did not participate in the voting).

According to Ukrainian journalist Andriy Vasyliev, who has been reporting on the UN for several years, “to claim that Ukraine should have voted ‘against’ only because Israel is ‘our ally’ would have completely disregarded the principles of international law. The members of the Security Council  must make decisions based solely on security concerns and not on the basis of who is our ‘ally’ or solely in its own interests, as does the Kremlin,” he said.

Therefore, in matters pertaining to occupied territories, Ukraine has no other option than to vote against occupation. In fact, it was this very violation of  international law that was the reason for imposing the first sanctions on Russia.

“In my personal opinion Ukraine could not vote differently since the settlement of occupied territories is a direct conflict between Israel and Palestine. If Israel does not cease activities on the occupied territories, one can forget about the peace process between Israel and Palestine,” Vasyliev says.

He also cites the opinion of his source at the UN Security Council that “the Israeli settlement activity in the occupied territories is the main aggravating factor hindering the peace process in the Middle East. Furthermore, it is a violation of international law.”

It is a matter of violating Article 8 of the Rome Statues of the International Criminal Court and, in particular, paragraph 2 (b) (viii), which directly calls the transfer of one’s own population to occupied territories a war crime.

“I think that no one in Ukraine would like for Russia to begin construction in Crimea or Donbas, isn’t that right?” Vasyliev asks. “From the perspective of the Rome Statute, Israel’s actions in the occupied territories and the Kremlin’s actions in Crimea are war crimes. It is quite another thing that a similar resolution regarding Crimea cannot be passed in the Security  Council because Moscow immediately vetoes it. This is the weakness of the Security Council,” he says.

Why not abstain?

Those who accept the argument regarding Crimea have another objection: why didn’t the Ukrainian representative abstain, as did the US?

For Ihor Semyvolos, the director of the Center of Middle Eastern Studies, “there is a difference between abstaining generally and abstaining in this case. “If we had abstained, that would have meant ‘against.’ It would not have saved the Israelis, but we would have appeared inconsistent and biased, ” he explains.

The Israeli side and its supporters are putting forth an old argument in this case — namely, that the situation regarding the annexation of Crimea and the settlements on the territories of East Jerusalem cannot be compared. They say that these lands were not occupied, that this is (Jewish) historical land, that Jordan voluntarily gave it up, and so on and so forth.

One can offer a  counterargument, but this is a debate that leads nowhere. It  has been waged for many years already, and the Palestinians and Israelis have a longstanding and firmly formed opinions on the issue.

However, it is a fact that, along with Ukraine, all the members of the Security Council supported the resolution except for the US, whose “abstention” was an actual vote “for.” And when we speak of the insult to Ukraine and the cancellation of Groysman’s visit, we forget that Israel’s reaction had a much wider context.

Netanyahu’s violent reaction

The head of the Israeli government Benjamin Netanyahu, who is also the acting minister of foreign affairs, instructed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to minimize working contacts with the 12 countries which, according to Israeli media, “voted against Israel in the UN.” The media also reported that Netanyahu has forbidden his ministers to meet with colleagues from these countries and to visit them. The Ynet news website confirms that the ban extends to  Russia, Ukraine, Great Britain, Spain, and Japan. The ban will be in effect for three weeks.

Actually, except for Russia, this is not bad company. Netanyahu has also urged Israeli citizens to limit travel to these countries.

Additionally, Netanyahu has stopped funding five UN organizations he considers “especially hostile to Israel” and has warned there would be additional steps.

“Israel has decided to reconsider its position to the organization that had actually established it (the state’s independence was proclaimed on May 14, 1948, on the basis of the UN General Assembly Resolution No. 181 dated November 29, 1947). This is unprecedented,” Bohdan Yaremenko, chairman of the board of the Maidan of Foreign Affairs non-profit wrote on his Facebook page.

The Israeli government accuses  the US of coordinating the vote. “From the information that we have, we have no doubt that the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it, coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be passed,” Netanyahu said.

Israel summoned the US ambassador to Israel for an explanation. The other ambassadors, including the Ukrainian one, were summoned as well. “According to the BBC, “summoning ambassadors for explanations during the Christmas holidays is an unusual measure and indicates the seriousness of Israel’s claims.”

It is already clear that Trump is returning to the format of relations with Israel that existed before Obama’s change of direction. In other words, the countries will appear as a duo and there will be no discord similar to the resolutions on settlements. This is why the Ukrainian side tried to postpone the vote to have it take place under the Trump administration when there would definitely be a veto. However, the US categorically refused to   postpone the date.

“According to my source, Jerusalem had asked Washington to veto this resolution, but the most Samantha Power could do was to abstain, since the vote ‘against’ would negate the Rome Statute,” Andriy Vasyliev explained. Earlier, Obama’s administration also acted in unison with Israel. “The US line of conduct changed precisely because of Crimea. Because it was a precedent,” he said.

Has everything been lost and damaged?

When it comes to the consequences of the vote in the UN Security Council, it is important to keep in mind that Israel has not been an ally of Ukraine. We are referring to the government level, of course, not about the cooperation on the level of volunteers and public  diplomacy.

“For Netanyahu, relations with Russia are much more important, and he will not quarrel with Russia because of us,” Ihor Semyvolos pointed out.

Yes, Ukrainian soldiers are being treated in Israel. There are certain plans for military cooperation and the training of Ukrainian physicians is taking place. But we should not forget about the Israeli drones that are being used by the terrorists of DNR (“Donetsk People’s Republic”) and LNR (“Luhansk People’s Republic”) and about the scandalous speech by the Israeli president from the rostrum of the Verkhovna Rada where he called Ukrainians and the OUN accomplices of the mass killings of some 1.5 million Jews.

Three times Israel failed to vote for Ukrainian resolutions in the UN (we have already mentioned one of them). Yes, it supported the UN resolution of December 19, which recognized Crimea as occupied territory and the Russian Federation as the occupying country. However, it is unlikely this was a gift to Ukraine. It was more like a warning to Moscow regarding the settlement resolution.

Similarly, it is useless to regret that Israel does not recognize the Holodomor as genocide. According to Ihor Semyvolos, this question was removed from voting in the Knesset still in November. There is a similar situation regarding an agreement about a free trade zone. This issue has been discussed for years along with the question on visas.

There is a problem with the Ukrainian misunderstanding of Israeli reality. Some idolize this country excessively and compare the Palestinian terrorists with the action of the LNR and DNR fighters. But like any analogy it suffers from a number of inaccuracies.

“We have this image of Israel as a heroic country that we want to resemble, “Semyvolos says.  “This is attractive image, and I like it. But it is very different from the real Israel and furthermore from the policies pursued by this Middle Eastern country,” he concludes.

Netanyahu is not all of Israel.

Netanyahu’s position on Ukraine has already been sharply criticized by one of the leaders of the largest opposition force in the Knesset, the former minister of foreign affairs Tzipi Livni. The leader of the Hatnua  party ( which is included in the Zionist Camp bloc) has sharply criticized the cancellation of the visit of the prime minister of Ukraine Volodymyr Groysman to Israel. According to Livni, Israel’s prime minister has a pro-Kremlin position. He had appealed to Russian President Vladimir Putin to veto the Security Council resolution and was refused.

“Netanyahu is showing helplessness again. He does not control the situation and does not understand the effectiveness and benefits of his reactions for Israel,” Livni said.

Actually, we forget that the voting in the Security  Council is a personal defeat for Netanyahu. Let us remember, once again, that not only Ukraine voted for the resolution. It was approved by all the other members of the Security Council, even the US (by refusing to veto it). Groysman was unlucky that his visit was scheduled specifically for December 27-28. If the visits of the prime ministers of Great  Britain, Spain, Japan or any other country that supported the resolution had been planned for these dates, they would have suffered the same fate.

Translated by: Anna Mostovych
Source: Espreso TV

Tags: , , ,

  • Steve

    This just shows me how ignorant Ukraine and the author are of the “Palestinian” issue. There is NO Palestinian issue. Modern Day Palestine exists. Its name is the country of Jordan.

    If the Palestinians need a home why has not modern day Jordan taken them in? If the Palestinians need a home why has NO ARAB COUNTRY taken them in? The alleged Palestinian issue is nothing but a Red Herring used to destroy Israel and show the historical ignorance of the rest of the World. The World needs to go study history with special attention to the geography of nations to stop being fooled and looking like fools.

    And let us not forget the Israel-Arab wars of 67 and 73 that the Arabs started and Israel and Israelis fought, bled for, and died for that gained them the land they now have. And the UN wants to negate that !!!! You really think Israel is going to sit still while the UN says East Jerusalem, the Western Wall known as the Walling Wall will go to the control of Anti Semites?

    For the Ukrainian Gov’t to make a moral equivalence between Putin annexing Crimea and Israel fighting for, bleeding for, and dying for land is an abomination beyond compare.

    Forgive me but I hope God does not Damn Ukraine for this.

    • Putler the майданушка Polak

      No worries, God didn’t damn the Jews for killing Jesus until years later.

      • Turtler

        God also didn’t damn all Jews from here until eternity, any more than he did David.

      • Quartermaster

        They set their judgment when they turned Christ over to the romans to handle the murder for them. Christ had to die for the sins of the world, but The leaders of Israel stupidly did Satan’s dirty work for him. They’ve paid the price ever since.

  • freedom fighter

    COULDN’T GET A BETTER PIC OF THAT SYCOPHANTIC MONSTER?
    yeah we talk this and that but izrael having over 100nukes is the real problem, talking about
    occupiers and usa backing them for over half a century is just crazy, i mean izrael kidnaps palestinian kids under the age of not only 18 but 16 and 15 and even younger….i’m talking about kidnapping little kids and holding them for months at a time without giving them any human rights, where is the fking UN or human right groups? well yeah…….

    • freedom fighter

      even half the jewish people are against this, but nobody seems to care.

    • Turtler

      “COULDN’T GET A BETTER PIC OF THAT SYCOPHANTIC MONSTER?”

      Sycophantic to who?

      Of all the many things I would call Bibi Netanyahu, sycophantic is not one of them.

      “yeah we talk this and that but izrael having over 100nukes is the real problem, talking about occupiers
      and usa backing them for over half a century is just crazy,”

      No, it isn’t, and no it isn’t.

      This conflict started WELL Before Nukes were invented, by about a decade (Google “Amin al-Husseini Hitler” if you want) . And the reason why Israel developed them was a reaction to the frequent wars it had been torn by as a result of invasion. In short, they were defensive and never use din a conflict.

      Instead, the conflict has been the result of genocidal neighbors who have almost invariably refused to come to any peace agreement (even on massively favorable terms) and who instead prefer just killing all Jews and trying to destroy Israel as a whole.

      “i mean
      izrael kidnaps palestinian kids under the age of not only 18 but 16 and
      15 and even younger….i’m talking about kidnapping little kids and
      holding them for months at a time without giving them any human rights,”

      Citation needed.

      And no, captured children who were conducting terrorist actions (such as stabbings, molotvings, and suicide bombings) does not constitute kidnapping. It just constitutes an attempt to avoid having more people die as a result of a terrorist cult or two that literally sees its’ children as the ultimate weapon in a genocidal war.

      Especially considering kidnap, assassination, murder, and FLAGRANT violation of human rights for both captives and their people are freaking Routine among “Palestinian” groups.

      “where is the fking UN or human right groups? well yeah……”

      You seriously haven’t noticed how persistently Israel gets slagged, bot h justifiably and more often unjustifiably?

      Oh yes, and regarding your documentary, here’s this from Haaretz, a group NOT known to be slavishly devoted to the IDF or Bibi.

      http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/.premium-1.574802

      The Israelis are not perfect, no nation or people are. However, the conflict is a result of them being literally pushed against the sea and trying to survive amidst people who want them to completely Die Out for the crime of being Jews. Take away that and pretty much all the lawyer-crimping measures would fall apart in weeks.

    • Quartermaster

      Israel has been surrounded by peoples that wanted them shoved into the sea for longer than the country has existed. The problem for the Arabs is that God has prevented them from doing what they so much want to do. The Arabs have no intention of ever allowing Israel to exist in peace, and never has had such an intention. Israel has had to fight for her life since the beginning.
      You don’t like them, fine. I think they can live quite well with your ilk not liking them. Your ilk is why they have those nukes.

  • Y K

    Some of the criticisms of Israel in this article are justified (yes, Israel lacks a moral backbone in its dealings with Putin’s Russia – for pure Realpolitik reasons). Some are, frankly, made up, inaccurate, ignorant or just plain stupid. Israel – including official Israel – is not Ukraine’s adversary, much less an enemy. On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of Putinoids are rabid Israel and Jew-haters (a handy example can be found in the comments below). Ukraine’s vote for a resolution effectively denying Israel’s connection to Jerusalem is no less wrong than (official) Israel’s silence on the Holodomor (probably more in terms of practical, as opposed to symbolic, politics), even though both stands can be explained and rationalized (yes, Realpolitik again). The important thing is to look for ways of solving this crisis in a way that enables the two countries – who have many common values and basically no fundamental disagreements – to move forward towards a more mutually beneficial relationship.

    • Scradje

      Of all the nations in the world, one might expect that Israel would understand that Ukraine has suffered from fascist tyranny to an equal or even greater extent than itself. Given Ukraine’s rich Jewish heritage (now experiencing a modest revival), it would seem logical that the two nations should be enjoying close political, trade and military co-operation, instead of the present disfunctional relationship. Putlerskum is a far bigger threat to Israel than Asshat and all the other throwbacks and degenerates in the region combined. High time Bibi accepted that and reorientated strategies accordingly.

      • Vlad Pufagtinenko

        Absolutely right.

  • Turtler

    What absolutely none of this explains or even comes close to is
    justifying Ukraine’s abstention from the repugnant UNESCO resolution,
    which quite literally says:

    “5. Deeply deplores the failure of Israel, the Occupying Power, to cease
    the persistent excavations and works in East Jerusalem particularly in
    and around the Old City, and reiterates its request to Israel, the
    Occupying Power, to prohibit all such works in conformity with its
    obligations under the provisions of the relevant UNESCO conventions,
    resolutions and decisions;”

    In short, denying the Jewish presence in eastern Jerusalem and the Temple Mount/Mosque at all. Which is FREAKING LUDICROUS if you have ever seen the Arch of Titus Caesar or seen (and can read) the inscriptions by the individual masons. And in
    spite of the fact that there is no legal standard which made abstaining
    from this resolution consistent with the above.

    So the real purpose of this article is revealed: to try and shamelessly cover arse
    for a shameless decision, regardless of its’ merits.

    Now that that is said, let me dissect the rest. Please strap yourself in because
    this is gonna be loooooooong, however I figure it is better to be
    thorough than to be brief.

    “The position of the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs is based
    on the argument that taking Crimea into account, Ukraine simply could
    not and had no right to vote otherwise.”

    And I suppose this stance existed previously, and was not just dug out now
    for the sake of convenience? I do not know enough since that would
    require digging through UN Resolutions in the past and UN Resolution
    lookups are freaking tedious due to the way they are listed, but that is
    the first question that came to mind.

    ““Our state has consistently stood for the respect of international law
    by everyone and everywhere, since, in our own case, we have experienced
    the tragic consequences that result from its violation,” the official
    Ministry statement declared.”

    Yes, like terrorist organizations and sponsors that launch artillery on
    civilian targets, use human shields shamelessly, and in general break
    all of the covenants of war, even guerilla war?

    Oh wait. We’re not going to acknowledge that, are we?

    “To decipher: Ukraine’s position in the international arena regarding
    Crimea is based on the assertion that Russia is a gross violator of
    international law. ”

    Which is true.

    “Most countries have agreed with Ukraine on this
    matter still in February 2014 by supporting the resolution of the UN
    General Assembly on the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Israel did not
    support that document (it did not participate in the voting).”

    Alright, everybody note the intentionally misleading and frankly DISHONEST
    parsing of this statement, to insinuate that the Israelis did not back
    the Resolution (and thus provide more justification for the Ukrainian
    government putting the screws to Jerusalemites and the like).

    NEITHER Is TRUE.

    Israel did not participate in the voting for a completely SEPARATE reason,
    namely that its’ diplomats to the UN *WENT ON STRIKE* and thus refused
    to vote or even be present for such ON ANY MATTER, not just this. It is
    utterly stupid to insinuate that the Israelis did not support the
    resolution on the basis of THEIR OWN DIPLOMATS GOING ON STRIKE.

    And secondly, what actual records have come from Israel- including its’
    foreign ministry- tended to be sadly vague and has not identified Russia
    directly but DID support the resolution.

    So there is really no good reason why this paragraph is the way it is, and I can only conclude it was done intentionally. To try and insinuate something untrue and
    deeply insulting without passing the line into ACTUALLY, explicitly
    saying an untruth.

    Unfortunately, lying by omission is still lying.

    “According to Ukrainian journalist Andriy Vasyliev, who has been
    reporting on the UN for several years,”

    And I should care about this person and what he says why?

    ““to claim that Ukraine should have voted ‘against’ only because Israel is
    ‘our ally’ would have completely disregarded the principles of
    international law. ”

    So the principles of international law now state that the Jewish community that has lived in Eastern Jerusalem for about a thousand years has been part and parcel of a military
    occupation? That have been living in Eastern Jerusalem for ninety years
    (and there are some left) who dare to make routine maintenance or
    expansions of their house become international criminals?

    Farqing Hell.

    This is a sanctified, legal justification for Ethnic Cleansing in the name
    of lofty international coopeartion. Don’t you see that?

    Like what the Jordanian military actually did prior to its’ defeat

    How much do you want to bet that Putin WON’T try and twist this law and
    claim that it provides legal precedence for another deportation of the
    Crimean Tatars?

    Oh wait. You didn’t think that far ahead, did you?

    “The members of the Security Council must make decisions based solely on security
    concerns and not on the basis of who is our ‘ally’ or solely in its own
    interests, as does the Kremlin,””

    So according to Genius Reporter here, allies and what is in their own
    interest are not “security concerns” (a term used in government to refer
    to national goals, military strength, diplomatic standing, and yes
    ALLIES). Greaaaat.

    Ok, to play devil’s advocate I think I can guess what he was trying to say. That the members of the security council are meant to make decisions based solely on “security council concerns” and not others. Ok, that has not the least bit of merit either
    practically, in history, or even by the UN’s Charter (notably the UN
    did not expect members to be obedient lemmings, that would negate the
    value of having an open forum for them). Just take a look at the
    resolution to save South Korea in 1950.

    But it is at least a consistent stance.

    However, by making me make that inference and correction, it underlines that I
    was paying more attention to this than the reporter, his editor, or his
    English language translator. Truly a great indicator for expert
    testimony.

    “Therefore, in matters pertaining to occupied territories, Ukraine has
    no other option than to vote against occupation. In fact, it was this
    very violation of international law that was the reason for imposing
    the first sanctions on Russia.”

    I wonder, would you try to peddle this same “logic” regarding the other,
    much less historically connected region Israel occupies, the Golan
    Heights? Which Israel is actually considering annexing to end the
    endless legal problems? Whose inhabitants- while remaining Syrian
    citizens- are generally sympathetic to Israel, and who if the occupation
    ended would be turned over to FREAKING ASSAD, the Butcher of Aleppo and
    BFF of Putin?

    Somehow I don’t *think* so. But for the sake of
    the argument, let us allow for either possibility. Namely that the
    Ukrainian government would either be hypocritical or utterly dumb.

    The fact is the occupations happened in two completely different
    circumstances. In 2011 Russia invaded Crimea and Eastern Ukraine without
    a state of war or even the merest justification, with the explicit aim
    of permanently partitioning the country and annexing territory from it.

    Israel invaded Eastern Jerusalem after the King of Jordan refused to stay out
    of the explicitly genocidal 1967 coalition targeting it and commenced
    war by lobbing artillery shells across the border. The Israelis
    retaliating, encircled the city, and defeated the Jordanians before
    taking up control of the area. And since then have been willing to
    negotiate with the PLO (the supposed legal heir to the claims) in spite
    of the PLO frequently rejecting such peaceful overtures, even when
    overwhelmingly in its’ favor. Which has resulted in the limbo we see
    today where if the IDF pulled out, East Jerusalem and other areas of the
    West Bank would likely be plunged into genocidal violence and be used
    as a staging ground for attacks on the Western half of the city and the
    rest of Israel, as the Gaza Strip have been.

    ““In my personal opinion Ukraine could not vote differently since the
    settlement of occupied territories is a direct conflict between Israel
    and Palestine. ”

    Which “Palestine”‘s governing body has refused to resolve several times and instead resulted in the incitement of violence.

    Again, let’s take this statement and switch it to the Golan Heights, which are just as occupied.

    ““In my personal opinion Ukraine could not vote differently since the
    settlement of occupied territories is a direct conflict between Israel
    and Bashir al-Assad. “”

    “If Israel does not cease activities on the occupied
    territories, one can forget about the peace process between Israel and
    Palestine,” Vasyliev says.”

    In order for this to be remotely credible, there would have to be a remotely credible peace process.

    But there isn’t. And there hasn’t been for decades, for similar though
    vaguely less severe ones for why there is no peace process between
    Israel and *freaking Assad*, or between Israel and Hamas.

    Because the PLO/Fatah remains a corrupt regime with ties to terrorism and
    little to no incentive to come to a lasting peace. For Crying out Loud,
    it was ABBAS- the Chairman of this entity- that refused to listen to
    Kerry’s calls for the peace process and in fact never returned calls to
    either Obama or Kerry on the issue. So apparently this makes it ISRAEL’S
    fault in this genius’s mind?

    Again, do we really want this to happen?

    Do we REALLY want to see Putin apply these standards to the war in the
    Donbas with his proxies? Because we know he can. It is quite similar to
    his exploitation of Transnistria in Moldovan internal politics.

    “He also cites the opinion of his source at the UN Security Council
    that “the Israeli settlement activity in the occupied territories is the
    main aggravating factor hindering the peace process in the Middle East.”

    All of which is easily explained by his source being a moron.

    Firstly because it goes back to the inexplicable, tunnel visioned idea that the
    Israel-Palestine conflict is the cornerstone of the region’s
    instability, wars, terrorism, and the like. Which as a historian I can
    say is FREAKING STUPID.

    The largest single case of “non-peace” in
    the Middle East today is the Syrian Civil War. But is ANYBODY ON THIS
    PLANET stupid enough to think that if Israel came to yet another set of
    peace terms with the PLO (and the PLO magically accepted) Assad would
    stop being a totalitarian butcher? That the Islamic State would stop
    being a theocratic terrorist state? That the people under his yoke would
    stop being angered by his denial of their basic human rights?

    Or how about Yemen. Anybody here want to think the Houthis would just go
    home after decades at war against the government and non-Shiite
    extremists because “Hey Guys, East Jerusalem got sorted out!”

    What RATIONAL, sane reason does Hezbollah in Lebanon have to stop trying to
    crush its’ rivals under heel- or for its’ rivals to continue trying to
    overthrow its’ yoke and that of other pro-Assad terror groups- if
    Jerusalem got sorted out? How on Earth would any of this be affected?

    That is not to say the Israeli/Palestinian conflict should be ignored or we
    should not seek peace. Far from it. But the idea that it is magically to
    blame for all the problems in the Middle East is amoral and stupid. To
    mouth anything approaching that is dishonesty, and to pass the buck by
    claiming it is from someone else is merely to abdicate responsibility
    for knowing basic history.

    Ok, enough of that history rant.

    Secondly: “Israeli settler activity in the occupied territories” is-by this
    definition- again stretched beyond recognition to include the centuries
    old Jewish Quarter of Eastern Jerusalem and the people who have lived
    there. By this asinine law an Octogenarian Jerusalemite with Israeli
    citizenship but residence in Eastern Jerusalem becomes an illegal
    settler who can be punished by international law *merely by staying in
    their own house.*

    Do I have to explain how stupidly abusable this is, or how it runs afoul of other International Law about ethnic cleansing?

    “Furthermore, it is a violation of international law.”

    And when international law repeatedly refuses to hold one side to account
    and furthermore is now distorted to delegitimize centuries old
    communities, what can be done with it?

    “It is a matter of violating Article 8 of the Rome Statues of the
    International Criminal Court and, in particular, paragraph 2 (b) (viii),
    which directly calls the transfer of one’s own population to occupied
    territories a war crime.”

    EXCEPT THIS RESOLUTION DOES NOT LIMIT ITSELF TO THAT, NOW DOES IT?!?!?

    No. According to this- which criminalizes any Israeli development in
    Eastern Jerusalem and elsewhere- a 90 year old Holocaust survivor
    renovating their house in Allon? Becomes an international criminal.

    A child born in Kiryat Arba (the largest settlement)? Also an international criminal.

    And the many illegal settler groups that move East of the Green Line and
    establish settlements in DEFIANCE of the Israeli government suddenly
    become the Israeli government’s fault.

    Does anybody see how this is wrong?

    This Resolution amounts to the Security Council BREAKING the Rome Statutes
    while claiming to Uphold the Rome Statutes. Thus making all of this
    difficult to enforce anyway at best, and a miscarriage of law at worst.

    ““I think that no one in Ukraine would like for Russia to begin
    construction in Crimea or Donbas, isn’t that right?””

    Yeah, I’m real sure that Ukrainians will riot in the streets over a 100 year old sailor in Sevastopol building a second floor.

    Because after all, we all know how much Putin cares about international law and
    heeding its’ dictates! (That’s what got us into this issue in the first
    place). And how it is just to haul private citizens in before a near
    almighty international court for organically developing their
    communities, which in several cases they have lived in continuously.

    ““From the perspective of the Rome Statute, Israel’s actions in the
    occupied territories and the Kremlin’s actions in Crimea are war crimes.”

    Again, hogwash. As detailed above.

    Especially since there has been no declared war involving this since 1967, and
    Israel’s only violent opposition in Eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank
    is a terrorist organization that has rejected multiple attempts to come
    to terms like what happened successfully with the IRA (THE FREAKING
    IRA!!!!) and Egypt at the Good Friday agreement and Camp David.

    I will continue this in a part 2.

    • Turtler

      Part II

      “It is quite another thing that a similar resolution regarding Crimea
      cannot be passed in the Security Council because Moscow immediately
      vetoes it.”

      Uhuh, yeah, sure. And will it be quite another thing if Putin starts
      twisting this precedent to justify the expulsion of Tatars or other
      Ukrainian citizens from Crimea? Or an indefinite war in the Donbas using
      his proxies to reject peace agreements?

      “This is the weakness of the Security Council,” he says.”

      Remind me again, how many resolutions has the Security Council passed against Assad versus those against Israel?

      “For Ihor Semyvolos, the director of the Center of Middle Eastern
      Studies, “there is a difference between abstaining generally and
      abstaining in this case. ?“If we had abstained, that would have meant
      ‘against.’ It would not have saved the Israelis, but we would have
      appeared inconsistent and biased, ” he explains.”

      Hardly. As we now know from the PLO itself, Samantha Powers’ and the US’s
      abstention meant “For”, they just could not publicly do so. So this
      claim falls apart absolutely.

      Secondly: as I detailed above, the UNESCO vote was under no such pressure and was even more historically and legally repugnant, but Ukraine abstained from that too in spite of the far greater chance. So this is clearly an after the fact
      justification.

      “The Israeli side and its supporters are putting forth an old argument
      in this case — namely, that the situation regarding the annexation of
      Crimea and the settlements on the territories of East Jerusalem cannot
      be compared. They say that these lands were not occupied, that this is
      (Jewish) historical land, that Jordan voluntarily gave it up, and so on
      and so forth.”

      As a prelude, let me state absolutely that they can be compared, and
      encourage people to compare away They are not even vaguely *close*, but
      please.

      Secondly: note the strawman. That the person is
      addressing the idea that this was occupied Israel and Jewish land under
      Jordanian control, and then will refute that. While conveniently
      ignoring the far more pressing and universal reason, which also applies
      to Golan (which is not so historically connected).

      That the occupation has been artificially lengthened by the utter refusal of the
      opposing party to negotiate with Israel or conclude peace, motivated by a
      genocidal agenda towards the Jewish State. After all, this is the case
      both with the PLO (which steadily refuses to declare its’ dedication to
      coexist to its’ own population) and Baathist Syria (which is at least a
      proper nation-state).

      As usual, the UN- and backseat critics- condemn, but fail to actually come up with any idea to RESOLVE the issue.

      “One can offer a counterargument,”

      I’m not even going to waste my time copying this entire paragraph down,
      because it is just a response to the dishonest, shabbily constructed
      strawman and an appeal to obscurity/tedium.

      The fact is that the Israelis and Assad’s Syrian government also have very entrenched opinions on the Golan Heights. I suppose this means that the occupation should be ended ASAP and the territory and its’ population be turned
      over to Assad to do what he pleases with them?

      “However, it is a fact that, along with Ukraine, all the members of
      the Security Council supported the resolution except for the US, whose
      “abstention” was an actual vote “for.””

      A: Wait a moment. Didn’t you say before that an absention was a vote “for” before? And in fact I used this fact to skewer you?

      ““If we had abstained, that would have meant ‘against.’”

      Yes, Yes you did! So, what changed in the few sentences between the two? Why
      were you unwilling or unable to justify the vote on the basis of a
      single standard?

      and

      B: This entire thing is a bandwagon fallacy. “Look at how everybody else supported it! So it must be right!”

      To rebuke this morally and logically repugnant claim, I simply have to
      point out that one of those that did it was Russia, who as we
      established is not supportive of international law and whose actions in
      fact supposedly caused this stance. So you honestly want to claim some
      kind of legitimacy from a body that was divided almost half Free Nations
      and half Thugocracies and which has never allowed Israel to sit?

      And secondly: There was NO SUCH PRESSURE WHATSOEVER IN THE UNESCO VOTE. Several nations voted No. So there was no such reason for Ukraine to
      avoid doing so.

      “And when we speak of the insult to Ukraine and the cancellation of Groysman’s visit,”

      Oh, so you’re offended. Your fewwings were hurt.

      Boo Freaking Hoo.

      Hurt feelings are a two way street. Ever bother asking the Israeli government or people what they thought of this?

      Or even Ukrainian Jews?

      You designated your UN representatives to partake in two colossal,
      exceedingly harmful pieces of legislation targeting Israelis. One by
      voting “For”, one by “Abstaining.” And unlike the Israelis, it was not a
      result of an unrelated case of your diplomats going off the reservation
      and ignoring orders.

      The least that can be asked of you is that
      you is to not try and turn this into some after-the-fact rationalization
      for your decisions. The fact that you have not is pitiful.

      “Netanyahu’s violent reaction”

      If this section passes without a single mention of Netanyahu committing
      violence against someone or at least planning to (like a declaration of
      war or at least a declaration to his supporters ala Obama about getting
      up close) I am going to roast you over a spike for lying and writing a
      bogus header in bad taste. Especially since this region has seen plenty
      of ACTUAL violence, including the Intifadas.

      “The media also reported that Netanyahu has forbidden his ministers to
      meet with colleagues from these countries and to visit them.”

      Which is not violent at all, well within his rights as Foreign Minister, and not violent at all.

      “The Ynet news website confirms that the ban extends to Russia,
      Ukraine, Great Britain, Spain, and Japan. The ban will be in effect for
      three weeks.

      Actually, except for Russia, this is not bad company.”

      While ignoring the fact that it also includes the PRC (the most bloody regime
      in ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY), Venezuela (under a collapsing
      petro-dictatorship, Castro Protege, and ally of Putin), Angola (a
      post-Communist dictatorship AND ALLY OF PUTIN), and Malaysia (a
      government that routinely violates human rights such as freedom of
      conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of travel through Sharia
      law and is ALSO chummy with Putin).

      “Netanyahu has also urged Israeli citizens to limit travel to these countries.”

      You mean like you mugs advocated limiting travel to Israel after some
      Israeli businesses looked around occupied Crimea under Putin’s watchful
      eye?

      “Additionally, Netanyahu has stopped funding five UN organizations he
      considers “especially hostile to Israel” and has warned there would be
      additional steps.”

      Oooh, such graphic violence! Will nobody feel for the slain budgets?

      Seriously,
      this is both not violent and- if you know the UN’s track record
      regarding Israel compared to other nations- not very unreasonable.

      “The Israeli government accuses the US of coordinating the vote. ”

      And so does the PLO. And the White House’s own website regarding Kerry’s schedule.

      “It is already clear that Trump is returning to the format of
      relations with Israel that existed before Obama’s change of direction.

      ….This is why the Ukrainian side tried to postpone the vote to have it take place under the Trump administration when there would definitely be a veto. However,
      the US categorically refused to postpone the date.”

      Ok, I will give credit for that.

      However, I will also note that Trump does not have power over the UNSC (and for
      good reason). He cannot just take back the damage this was done (which
      was unquestionably why Obama decided to ram it through). Which just
      raises the question more.

      ““According to my source, Jerusalem had asked Washington to veto this
      resolution, but the most Samantha Power could do was to abstain, since
      the vote ‘against’ would negate the Rome Statute,””

      ….by upholding different parts of the Rome Statute, as I detailed above.

      But hey, who cares about those little details!

      “Obama’s administration also acted in unison with Israel.”

      By what definition?

      ““The US line of conduct changed precisely because of Crimea.
      Because it was a precedent,” he said.”

      Are you $hitting me? No, it did not. We know this because Obama’s turn
      against Netanyahu was not timed with the Crimean annexation ,it was
      timed as a result of the falling out between the two men and Obama’s
      personal grudge against him, which was nursed in 2009 and 2010. Hence
      Hillary’s calling him “Chicken$hit.”

      And this ends the section, and the number of violent reactions are Zero. So this was a BS title anyway.

      “When it comes to the consequences of the vote in the UN Security
      Council, it is important to keep in mind that Israel has not been an
      ally of Ukraine. ”

      In large part because Ukraine is constitutionally neutral and thus is forbidden from having formal allies, to its’ detriment.

      ““For Netanyahu, relations with Russia are much more important, and he
      will not quarrel with Russia because of us,” Ihor Semyvolos pointed
      out.”

      And you wonder why? You did not quarrel with Putin or OPEC for them before.

      “Yes, Ukrainian soldiers are being treated in Israel. There are
      certain plans for military cooperation and the training of Ukrainian
      physicians is taking place. ”

      And arms are being bought readily, and the Foreign Ministry gave a
      statement of support for the approved Crimea Resolution from the UN,
      and…

      Just *This.*

      http://iportal.rada.gov.ua/en/news/top_news/133478.html

      Does that go down the memory hole too?

      “But we should not forget about the Israeli drones that are being used by
      the terrorists of DNR (“Donetsk People’s Republic”) and LNR (“Luhansk
      People’s Republic”) ”

      A fair point, though those were largely bought by the Russian military prior.

      “and about the scandalous speech by the Israeli president from the rostrum of the
      Verkhovna Rada where he called Ukrainians and the OUN accomplices of the
      mass killings of some 1.5 million Jews.”

      Seriously?

      Ok, tried to find the transcript and haven’t found it. So citation needed
      that he called ALL Ukrainians or the Ukrainian people as a whole that?

      Because SERIOUSLY? OUN was an accomplice in the Holocaust and to some degree an independent actor. This isn’t even controversial or it shouldn’t be. I
      have gone to the floor repeatedly to defend OUN and Bandera from the
      usual parade of Putin apologists and Neo-Communists. But there’s a line
      between that and between being a flat out HOLOCAUST DENIER.

      And the fact is that the OUN- especially OUN-B- did use its’ armed
      formations in the UPA to commit wholesale killings of Jews and Poles.
      OUN and UPA agents infiltrated Hitler’s ethnic auxiliaries and took part
      in killings related to the Holocaust during those assignments. We have
      NSDAP intelligence transcripts of their meeting in which they declare:

      Long live Ukraine without Jews, Poles and Germans; Poles behind the river San, Germans to Berlin, and Jews to the gallows”

      Bibi’s a student of history and WWII. So he probably *knows* that like I do.
      So trying to complain about this is utterly dishonest.

      “Three time Israel failed to vote for Ukrainian resolutions in the UN
      (we have already mentioned one of them). ”

      And how many times has Ukraine failed to vote for Israeli resolutions or it
      in there? Including ones that should be crystal clear like the UNESCO
      one?

      “Yes, it supported the UN resolution of December 19, which
      recognized Crimea as occupied territory and the Russian Federation as
      the occupying country. However, it is
      unlikely this was a gift to Ukraine. It was more like a warning to
      Moscow regarding the settlement resolution.”

      So, even when the Israelis DO act on Ukraine’s behalf, they don’t deserve credit?

      “Similarly, it is useless to regret that Israel does not recognize the
      Holodomor as genocide.”

      Hardly, especially given the sweep of it.

      “According to Ihor Semyvolos, this question was removed from voting in the Knesset still in November.”

      And guess what? Israel’s a democratic republic. Pressure can happen.

      So what I’m seeing is excuses. Excuses to not do the right thing because
      “oh there are times THEY Didn’t do the right thing too!”

      This is a legitimate argument in the realm of realpolitik, but not in the realm
      of ethics. And considering your supposed journalistic expert stated that
      only security council matters should be considered (ok, he didn’t, I
      had to correct it, but moving on)…

      “”There is a similar situation regarding an agreement about a free trade zone. This issue has been discussed for years along with the question on visas.”

      See above.

      “There is a problem with the Ukrainian misunderstanding of Israeli
      reality. ”

      And vice versa.

      “Some idolize this country excessively and compare the Palestinian terrorists with the action of the LNR and DNR fighters.”

      Which is if anything less appropriate because while Putin’s psychos in
      Eastern Ukraine have not been able to institute the wholesale genocide
      of ethnic Georgians and Moldavians they have elsewhere, they also
      haven’t launched massive suicide bombing and stabbing campaigns against
      civilians in Ukraine’s capitol city.

      “But like any analogy it suffers from a number of inaccuracies.”

      See above.

      ““We have this image of Israel as a heroic country that we want to
      resemble, “Semyvolos says. “This is attractive image, and I like it.
      But it is very different from the real Israel and furthermore from the
      policies pursued by this Middle Eastern country,” he concludes.”

      Not nearly as much as you want us to believe. And that’s the thing. This
      has been one lengthy attempt to mislead us. Implicitly, explicitly, by
      omission, by admission, and by flat out falsehood.

      And above all, by double standards if not worse.

      “Netanyahu is not all of Israel.”

      I’m not even going to respond to this last section in detail because I
      value my time at least minimally. But I will say that no, Netanyahu is
      not all of Israel. He is a democratically elected head of state. And no
      single man or woman can fully represent all a people, even undemocratic
      despots who claim to do so (O Hai Putin, O Hai Charles I).

      But in this case in particular he *DOES* Represent the overwhelming
      majority of Israelis. For Cripe’s Sake, Allon and Silwad – two places
      this inane resolution condemns- are *LIKUD* strongholds, one of
      Netanyahu’s opposing parties. Do you REALLY THINK these people or their
      party bosses LIKE the international community denying their right to
      exist? This is a big reason why Livi is probably going to get punished
      heavily in the polls and might get thrown out of the public eye
      entirely. But even on the off chance that the exact opposite thing happening and her getting in, the majority of her party and her government will STILL be opposed to this resolution.

      And do you know why? Because it was not a personal humiliation for Bibi, it was a NATIONAL Censure that affects every democratically elected Israeli government from here until it is revoked, which may well be eternity. And if you think the Israeli right, left, OR center is happy with this you are deluded. THAT is why this will not be regarded well. THAT is why most of Israel supports him on this. THAT Is why this article is a dishonest piece of codswallop.

      Whoever wrote this and the people they interviewed should be fired, in my opinion. Not merely because they espouse opinions I find not only disagreeable but legally and ethically bankrupt. Sometimes that is diplomacy. But because they try to do so in such an utterly incompetent, two faced, and ultimately hypocritical way. And immorality PLUS incompetence is something I cannot abide.

      But go on, while we’re all hoping Putin doesn’t try and use this as a lever against the Tatars and Ukraine as a whole, while we all hope he doesn’t get buoyed to instruct his sock puppets to act accordingly and accept no compromise… tell us how this is supposed to be a good thing.

      I do not know why I typed all of that out, but if even one person is
      helped by it it will have been all worth it. On the whole this is a
      sick, repugnant little joke and a waste of space for Euromaidan.