Ex-Amnesty head writes anti-Israel Gaza report for UN
A UN report accusing Israel of intentionally attacking UN buildings in Gaza strongly reflects the biases and lack of credibility of the NGO network during the Gaza fighting. As demonstrated in NGO Monitor’s comprehensive study, The NGO Front in the Gaza War: The Durban Strategy Continues, NGO reports exhibited double standards, focused overwhelmingly on condemning Israel, and erased Israeli human rights and casualties.
Not surprisingly, the “investigation” was lead by Ian Martin, former secretary-general of Amnesty International. During and following the war, this organization was a leader of efforts to boycott Israel and initiate criminal proceedings against Israeli officials (“lawfare”). These aspects of the “Durban Strategy” of isolating Israel internationally have long been the focus of Amnesty lobbying and activism. Furthermore, Amnesty consistently dismisses IDF claims without considering the substance of the evidence.
Similarly, this UN report does not address Hamas violations of international humanitarian law (IHL), which invalidates its conclusions. Under IHL, if Hamas fighters were the intended targets, Israeli attacks were permissible. Hamas’ “reckless and cynical use of civilian installations” as a primary fighting tactic – including firing from populated areas, placing women and children on the roofs of targeted buildings, storing weapons in schools and mosques, and hiding in bunkers beneath hospitals – has been well established by UN and Red Cross officials. Yet, due to the myopic focus on delegitimizing Israeli military responses to Palestinian terror, this goes unmentioned.
Additionally, according to statements from Israeli Foreign Ministry representatives, the UN officials responsible for the report ignored relevant evidence provided by the IDF in full cooperation with the investigation.
The disproportionate nature of this report also indicates that UN investigations are incapable of objective and non-partisan analysis. This implication may further compromise Richard Goldstone’s mission to the region, which has been tainted by the anti-Israel bias of the UN Human Rights Council.
