Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Noam Chomsky: Israel's Response to the United Nation's Resolution on
Palestine Is 'Hysterical'
________________________________________
Noam Chomsky: Israel's Response to the United Nation's Resolution on
Palestine Is 'Hysterical'
By Ken Klippenstein [1] / AlterNet [2]
December 28, 2016
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed a resolution [3] 14-0
condemning all Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as having "no legal
validity" and amounting to "a flagrant violation under international law."
The resolution goes on to note that Israeli settlements pose "a major
obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and
security."
This represents the first UNSC resolution in almost eight years [4]
concerning Israel and Palestine, and the first in over 35 years [5]
regarding the issue of Israeli settlements. Typically the U.S. would veto
resolutions critical of Israel, but in this case, the Obama administration
opted to abstain, in effect allowing the resolution to pass.
For comment, AlterNet contacted Noam Chomsky, famed linguist, dissident and
professor emeritus of MIT. Chomsky said of the resolution, "The UNSC
resolution is essentially the same as UNSC 446, March 1979, passed 12-0-3.
The main difference is that then two countries joined the U.S. in
abstaining. Now the U.S. stands against the world; and under Trump, in even
more splendid isolation, on much more crucial matters as well."
Following the UNSC resolution, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
quickly responded by announcing [6] a halt to his government's funding
contributions to numerous U.N. institutions. Netanyahu called [7] the
resolution "a disgraceful anti-Israel maneuver" and blamed it on an
"old-world bias against Israel." Furthermore, he vowed to exact a
"diplomatic and economic price" from the countries that supported it.
Shortly thereafter, Netanyahu made good on his threats by personally
refusing to meet with the foreign ministers of the 12 UNSC members that
voted for the resolution and ordering his Foreign Ministry to limit all
working ties with the embassies of those 12 nations. He also summoned the
ambassadors to the Foreign Ministry for a personal reprimand over the
vote-including, in a highly unusual move, the U.S. ambassador [8].
Asked about Netanyahu's response, Chomsky told AlterNet, "The hysterical
reaction in Israel and in Congress (bipartisan) reflects their sharp shift
to the right in the years since, and the whole incident illustrates quite
interesting shifts in world order."
Palestinian rights advocates have quipped that Israel's suspension of
relations with the UNSC member nations that voted for the
resolution-powerful countries including the U.K. and France-has effectively
realized a goal of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. AlterNet
contacted Omar Barghouti, one of the founders of the BDS movement, to see
what he thought of this assessment. Barghouti replied, "This unanimous
resolution, despite its many flaws in addressing basic Palestinian rights,
has dealt Israel's colonial designs a serious blow that will inadvertently,
yet significantly, enhance the impact of the BDS movement in isolating
Israel academically, culturally, economically and otherwise."
"Israel's delusional hubris and surreal threats to punish the U.N. and the
world indicate above everything else how deeply alarmed it is at fast
becoming an international pariah, as apartheid South Africa once was."
Ali Abunimah, the Palestinian-American founder of the Electronic Intifada,
told AlterNet that Israel's use of diplomatic sanctions against the UNSC
member states contradicted its vocal opposition to sanctions advocated by
the BDS movement. Abunimah said, "It's sort of amusing to Israel try to
impose sanctions and punish the whole world for this decision.Israel claims
that sanctions are illegitimate as a tool except of course when Israel is
the one wielding them, whether it's against Iran or whether against the
countries that displeased it."
Though Israel's heavy-handed response may concretely impact its diplomatic
standing internationally, the resolution itself is largely symbolic and, as
professor Chomsky pointed out, a reiteration of an earlier UNSC resolution.
However, experts like Richard Falk, professor emeritus of international law
at Princeton University and former U.N. Special Rapporteur on Palestinian
human rights from 2008-2014, don't think the resolution's symbolic nature
means it isn't important.
As Falk told AlterNet, "The SC resolution at this stage is symbolic. Israel
has already announced plans for thousand additional units, and the
government has indicated its refusal to comply with the resolution.
Nevertheless, it is of great psychological and potentially political support
for the Palestinian struggle to end the occupation and achieve a sustainable
and just peace. The fact that aside from the United States' notable
abstention, all 14 other members of the Security Council voted in favor of
the resolution, is indicative of the encouraging reality that the world is
not ready to forget the Palestinians, that Israel faces a renewed experience
of diplomatic isolation, and that the growing international solidarity
movement, including the BDS campaign, will be strengthened and encouraged."
Asked how the resolution could move from symbolic to something with more
concrete effects, Falk responded, "much depends on the future, and whether
the commitment in the resolution to have reports from the U.N. Secretary
General every three months on implementation will lead to any tangible
results beyond a reiteration of censure remains to be seen."
Though the Obama administration's unusual decision not to veto a U.N.
resolution critical of Israel might be start toward accountability, many
Palestinian rights advocates remain cynical about Obama. Abunimah told
AlterNet, "Obama has done more than any other president in history to assure
Israel's impunity."
"When Obama was president-elect, Israel was engaged in this massacre in Gaza
in 2008, 2009. When Obama came in he blocked any form of international
accountability, trashed the Goldstone report which was the independent U.N.
inquiry. The same in 2014 when Israel attacked Gaza, Obama actually rearmed
Israel while the bombs were falling on Gaza and then of course the same
story of blocking any form of international accountability. And .giving
Israel this unconditional boost in military aid-a minimum of $3.8 billion
[per year] over the next 10 years, up from $3.1 billion [per year]
currently."
Ken Klippenstein is an American journalist who can be reached on Twitter
@kenklippenstein [9] or via email: kenneth.klippenstein@xxxxxxxxx [10]
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [11]
[12]
Stay Ahead of the Rest
Sign Up for AlterNet's Daily Newsletter
EMAIL:
+ sign up for additional lists
[x]
Select additional lists by selecting the checkboxes below before clicking
Subscribe:
Rights & Liberties
Education
Drugs
Economy
Environment
Labor
Food
World
Politics
Investigation
Personal Health
Water
Media
________________________________________
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/world/chomsky-israels-response-unsc-hysterical
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/ken-klippenstein-0
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm
[4]
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/23/after-us-abstention-un-security-council-deman
ds-end-to-israel-settlement-building.html
[5] http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.761049
[6]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu
-united-nations.html?_r=0
[7]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu
-united-nations.html
[8]
http://www.wsj.com/articles/israel-summons-u-s-ambassador-in-protest-at-u-n-
resolution-1482687117
[9] https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein
[10] mailto:kenneth.klippenstein@xxxxxxxxx
[11] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Noam Chomsky: Israel's
Response to the United Nation's Resolution on Palestine Is
'Hysterical'
[12] http://www.alternet.org/
[13] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Noam Chomsky: Israel's Response to the United Nation's Resolution on
Palestine Is 'Hysterical'
Noam Chomsky: Israel's Response to the United Nation's Resolution on
Palestine Is 'Hysterical'
By Ken Klippenstein [1] / AlterNet [2]
December 28, 2016
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Google+Share to More5Share to
Email
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed a resolution [3] 14-0
condemning all Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as having "no legal
validity" and amounting to "a flagrant violation under international law."
The resolution goes on to note that Israeli settlements pose "a major
obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and
security."
This represents the first UNSC resolution in almost eight years [4]
concerning Israel and Palestine, and the first in over 35 years [5]
regarding the issue of Israeli settlements. Typically the U.S. would veto
resolutions critical of Israel, but in this case, the Obama administration
opted to abstain, in effect allowing the resolution to pass.
For comment, AlterNet contacted Noam Chomsky, famed linguist, dissident and
professor emeritus of MIT. Chomsky said of the resolution, "The UNSC
resolution is essentially the same as UNSC 446, March 1979, passed 12-0-3.
The main difference is that then two countries joined the U.S. in
abstaining. Now the U.S. stands against the world; and under Trump, in even
more splendid isolation, on much more crucial matters as well."
Following the UNSC resolution, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
quickly responded by announcing [6] a halt to his government's funding
contributions to numerous U.N. institutions. Netanyahu called [7] the
resolution "a disgraceful anti-Israel maneuver" and blamed it on an
"old-world bias against Israel." Furthermore, he vowed to exact a
"diplomatic and economic price" from the countries that supported it.
Shortly thereafter, Netanyahu made good on his threats by personally
refusing to meet with the foreign ministers of the 12 UNSC members that
voted for the resolution and ordering his Foreign Ministry to limit all
working ties with the embassies of those 12 nations. He also summoned the
ambassadors to the Foreign Ministry for a personal reprimand over the
vote-including, in a highly unusual move, the U.S. ambassador [8].
Asked about Netanyahu's response, Chomsky told AlterNet, "The hysterical
reaction in Israel and in Congress (bipartisan) reflects their sharp shift
to the right in the years since, and the whole incident illustrates quite
interesting shifts in world order."
Palestinian rights advocates have quipped that Israel's suspension of
relations with the UNSC member nations that voted for the
resolution-powerful countries including the U.K. and France-has effectively
realized a goal of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. AlterNet
contacted Omar Barghouti, one of the founders of the BDS movement, to see
what he thought of this assessment. Barghouti replied, "This unanimous
resolution, despite its many flaws in addressing basic Palestinian rights,
has dealt Israel's colonial designs a serious blow that will inadvertently,
yet significantly, enhance the impact of the BDS movement in isolating
Israel academically, culturally, economically and otherwise."
"Israel's delusional hubris and surreal threats to punish the U.N. and the
world indicate above everything else how deeply alarmed it is at fast
becoming an international pariah, as apartheid South Africa once was."
Ali Abunimah, the Palestinian-American founder of the Electronic Intifada,
told AlterNet that Israel's use of diplomatic sanctions against the UNSC
member states contradicted its vocal opposition to sanctions advocated by
the BDS movement. Abunimah said, "It's sort of amusing to Israel try to
impose sanctions and punish the whole world for this decision.Israel claims
that sanctions are illegitimate as a tool except of course when Israel is
the one wielding them, whether it's against Iran or whether against the
countries that displeased it."
Though Israel's heavy-handed response may concretely impact its diplomatic
standing internationally, the resolution itself is largely symbolic and, as
professor Chomsky pointed out, a reiteration of an earlier UNSC resolution.
However, experts like Richard Falk, professor emeritus of international law
at Princeton University and former U.N. Special Rapporteur on Palestinian
human rights from 2008-2014, don't think the resolution's symbolic nature
means it isn't important.
As Falk told AlterNet, "The SC resolution at this stage is symbolic. Israel
has already announced plans for thousand additional units, and the
government has indicated its refusal to comply with the resolution.
Nevertheless, it is of great psychological and potentially political support
for the Palestinian struggle to end the occupation and achieve a sustainable
and just peace. The fact that aside from the United States' notable
abstention, all 14 other members of the Security Council voted in favor of
the resolution, is indicative of the encouraging reality that the world is
not ready to forget the Palestinians, that Israel faces a renewed experience
of diplomatic isolation, and that the growing international solidarity
movement, including the BDS campaign, will be strengthened and encouraged."
Asked how the resolution could move from symbolic to something with more
concrete effects, Falk responded, "much depends on the future, and whether
the commitment in the resolution to have reports from the U.N. Secretary
General every three months on implementation will lead to any tangible
results beyond a reiteration of censure remains to be seen."
Though the Obama administration's unusual decision not to veto a U.N.
resolution critical of Israel might be start toward accountability, many
Palestinian rights advocates remain cynical about Obama. Abunimah told
AlterNet, "Obama has done more than any other president in history to assure
Israel's impunity."
"When Obama was president-elect, Israel was engaged in this massacre in Gaza
in 2008, 2009. When Obama came in he blocked any form of international
accountability, trashed the Goldstone report which was the independent U.N.
inquiry. The same in 2014 when Israel attacked Gaza, Obama actually rearmed
Israel while the bombs were falling on Gaza and then of course the same
story of blocking any form of international accountability. And .giving
Israel this unconditional boost in military aid-a minimum of $3.8 billion
[per year] over the next 10 years, up from $3.1 billion [per year]
currently."
Ken Klippenstein is an American journalist who can be reached on Twitter
@kenklippenstein [9] or via email: kenneth.klippenstein@xxxxxxxxx [10]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [11]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.[12]
Stay Ahead of the Rest
Sign Up for AlterNet's Daily Newsletter
EMAIL:
+ sign up for additional lists
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/world/chomsky-israels-response-unsc-hysterical ;
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/ken-klippenstein-0
[2] http://alternet.org
[3] https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm
[4]
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/23/after-us-abstention-un-security-council-deman
ds-end-to-israel-settlement-building.html
[5] http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.761049
[6]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu
-united-nations.html?_r=0
[7]
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu
-united-nations.html
[8]
http://www.wsj.com/articles/israel-summons-u-s-ambassador-in-protest-at-u-n-
resolution-1482687117
[9] https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein
[10] mailto:kenneth.klippenstein@xxxxxxxxx
[11] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Noam Chomsky: Israel's
Response to the United Nation's Resolution on Palestine Is
'Hysterical'
[12] http://www.alternet.org/
[13] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
a
