Egypt Daily News / RT
Israel is engaged in a conflict with many international organizations on several fronts, under the pretext that they are biased in favor of the Palestinians, and this conflict has become evident since the outbreak of the war in the Gaza Strip.
Israel’s conflict with international organizations stems from a variety of reasons that encompass political, legal, and human rights aspects.
Israel’s perspective on international laws and rulings related to the occupied Palestinian territories and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict differs, and it also believes that these organizations adopt positions that favor the Palestinians or criticize its policies unfairly.
Here are the main features of the conflict between Israel and international organizations:
The conflict with the United Nations:
Israel harshly criticizes the United Nations, as it sees the decisions issued by the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council as biased against it. Israel also opposes the appointment of special investigative committees regarding its actions in the Palestinian territories, considering these investigations biased and unjust.
Israel accuses the United Nations of ignoring incitement to violence by Palestinian factions, considering that the organization excessively focuses on its military actions and security measures.
The conflict with the Human Rights Council:
Israel faces repeated criticism from the United Nations Human Rights Council, which regularly issues resolutions condemning its policies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Israel refuses to cooperate with some of the investigative committees issued by the council, considering that the council adopts double standards and criticizes it in an unbalanced manner.
In 2012, Israel decided to sever ties with the Human Rights Council after an investigative committee was established regarding settlements, and although cooperation has resumed to a limited extent, relations remain tense.
The conflict with the International Criminal Court (ICC):
Israel opposes the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in investigating potential war crimes in the Palestinian territories.
It considers that the court is interfering in its internal affairs and that it does not have the legal jurisdiction to investigate cases related to Israel, especially since Israel is not a member of the court, having not ratified the Rome Statute, which established the court in 2002.
Thus, Israel refuses to recognize the court’s jurisdiction over Israeli citizens or activities taking place in Palestinian territories.
Israel avoids cooperating with the court and criticizes its decisions, considering that the court politicizes issues and takes biased positions.
Regarding the court’s decisions on war crimes, the court has not yet issued final rulings against Israel, but it has opened investigation files related to war crimes in the context of Israeli military operations in Gaza and settlement activities in the West Bank. But Israel rejects these investigations and considers them illegitimate and based on illegal grounds.
Conflict with the World Health Organization (WHO):
In the context of the pandemic and criticism of its handling of the Palestinian territories, Israel faces some criticism from the World Health Organization regarding the access of vaccines to Palestinians. Israel considers the criticism exaggerated and claims that it is making efforts to coordinate with the Palestinian Authority.
The conflict with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA):
Israel adopts a critical stance towards the agency and considers that it perpetuates the Palestinian cause and increases tensions in the region, instead of helping to resolve them.
Israel accuses UNRWA of perpetuating the refugee issue instead of resolving it by expanding its definition of refugees to include successive generations. It also accuses UNRWA of being lenient towards the presence of Hamas and other armed groups within its facilities, especially in the Gaza Strip.
Israel also claims that some UNRWA facilities are used to store weapons or facilitate Hamas activities, which UNRWA denies, affirming its commitment to neutrality.
Israel also calls on some countries to reassess their financial support for UNRWA and has sometimes suggested abolishing the agency and transferring the responsibility for Palestinian refugees to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which deals with refugees in the rest of the world.
The conflict with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in southern Lebanon:
Israel takes a complex stance towards the forces, officially treating them as a neutral entity aimed at ensuring stability along the border with Lebanon, while simultaneously expressing its concerns and reservations about the role and effectiveness of these forces.
While Israel supports the presence of UNIFIL forces as part of Security Council Resolution 1701, it criticizes UNIFIL for what it considers shortcomings in carrying out its tasks, especially in monitoring and preventing Hezbollah from strengthening its military presence in southern Lebanon.
Israel claims that UNIFIL forces are unable to prevent arms smuggling or counter Hezbollah’s increasing activities in areas near the border.
The conflict with international human rights organizations:
Israel strongly criticizes human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as both organizations have issued reports accusing Israel of practicing apartheid policies against Palestinians.
Israel sees these reports as biased and inaccurate, and believes they ignore its right to defend its security against attacks.
As for Israel’s stance on UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Tel Aviv announced on October 2 that he is a “persona non grata,” and reaffirmed on October 12 that it would not revoke this decision despite 105 UN member states condemning it.
Guterres has faced severe criticism from Israel due to his statements about the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, especially after the Israeli military operations there.
It considers that the stance calling for an end to the Israeli occupation according to international resolutions focuses heavily on the suffering of the Palestinians and ignores what it considers its security concerns.
And she considers his call for international investigations into incidents of violence between Palestinians and Israelis to be biased against her and tools to tarnish her image on the international stage.
Tensions have significantly increased between Israel and Guterres during the recent conflicts, as Guterres expressed his concern over Israeli actions in Jerusalem and Gaza, and also showed solidarity with the Palestinian people, prompting Israel to issue sharp criticisms against him and describe him as biased.
As for the United Nations resolutions that Israel has refused to implement, we highlight the most notable ones:
Resolution 194 (1948) – Right of Return: This resolution calls for the return of Palestinian refugees to their homes and compensation for those who do not wish to return, a sensitive issue that remains unimplemented.
Resolution 242 (1967) – Withdrawal from occupied territories: Issued after the 1967 war, it calls on Israel to withdraw from the territories it occupied during the war (the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Golan Heights).
Israel did not commit to withdrawing from all the occupied territories except for Sinai, which was returned to Egypt under the Camp David Accords.
Resolution 338 (1973) – Ceasefire: Issued during the October War, it calls for a ceasefire and the commencement of negotiations to achieve a lasting peace based on Resolution 242. Israel partially adhered to the ceasefire terms, but the negotiations did not lead to a comprehensive solution.
Resolution 446 (1979) – Illegality of Settlements: The resolution states the illegality of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories and calls for a halt to settlement activities. Israel did not comply with this resolution and continued to expand the settlements.
Resolution 478 (1980) – Jerusalem: This resolution condemns Israel’s decision to annex East Jerusalem and consider it its capital, and calls on member states not to transfer their embassies to Jerusalem. Israel rejected the resolution and continued to consider Jerusalem its unified capital.
Resolution 497 (1981) – Golan Heights: Issued after Israel’s announcement of the annexation of the Golan Heights, the resolution calls for non-recognition of this annexation. Israel did not comply and considers the Golan Heights part of its territory.
Resolutions 1397, 1515, and 2334 – Two-State Solution and Settlements: These resolutions affirm support for the two-state solution and condemn settlement activity as an obstacle to peace. Israel has not committed to halting the construction of settlements.
UN Security Council Resolution 2728 – which called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of hostages, and the unhindered entry of humanitarian aid.
Resolution 2735 was adopted to support a ceasefire agreement with Hamas, but Israel did not publicly agree to it, citing internal political complexities that hinder acceptance of such agreements.
