18

According to UN Watch:

"UN committees, annual UN resolutions, an entire UN bureaucratic division, permanent UN exhibits in New York and Geneva headquarters -- all dedicated to a relentless and virulent propaganda war against the Jewish state. Together, they have made the UN into Ground Zero for today's new anti-Semitism, which is the irrational scapegoating of Israel with the true intended target being Jews. Not only do these anti-Israel measures incite hatred against Israelis and Jews everywhere, but they have done not a thing to help the Palestinian situation. On the contrary: they give strength and succor to extremists.

Paradoxically, one of the greatest violators of the UN Charter's equality guarantee has been the UN body charged with establishing and enforcing international human rights, the Human Rights Council."

There's one widespread image in pro-Israel sites depicting bias in UN though I couldn't find link to Sun News video where this image was taken from:

UN bias against Israel

And speaking about bias at mainstream media there's an article in Wikipedia about Media coverage of the Arab–Israeli conflict but it's contradictory because it consists claims of bias from both pro-Palestinian and Pro-Israel watchdog groups.

  • 3
    The UN is known to be anti-Israel or pro-Palestinians. In fact, it refuses to call Israel 'Israel'. And where exactly do you see any pro-Israel groups? – Shahar May 30 '14 at 11:41
  • 3
    That infographics is missing: (1) China - add in you own details about occupation of Tibet; (2) Russia - see Ossetia, Chechnya, Krimea; (3) Turkey - in Kurdistan. – user4012 May 30 '14 at 14:33
  • 3
    The number of resolutions does not prove existence of any bias. Acceptable evidences are needed. If you are really seeking truth you should consider the possibility of correctness of these resolutions and have enough evidences for them being biased. – Battle of Karbala May 31 '14 at 12:27
  • 2
    @BattleofKarbala - I addressed that in my answer. The same or WORSE actions by other countries get NO resolutions. Whether resolutions are true is irrelevant – user4012 Jun 3 '14 at 18:17
  • 2
    The ties of Israel to western countries are strong compared at least to the countries given in that graphic - especially cultural & political ties. So not only do 'we' expect more of Israel, we are also more outraged when they do something wrong - and thus are more likely to call them out on it using resolutions; A resolution against Syria or Iran affects exactly nobody because there already trade barriers, travel warnings, etc. etc.. Which probably explains some of the actions of the UN human rights council and the media bias. – user45891 Oct 8 '14 at 16:30
17
  • If the question is "is there bias", the answer is crystal clear.

    As you can see on that infographics, there is a steady stream of resolutions condemning Israel... for things that many other countries are doing that are either 100% same or MUCH worse, but who aren't condemned much or at all.

    • Yes, Israel occupied a territory as a result of winning a war. So have Russia/USSR (Kunisberg, some Japanese islands in 20th century; Chechen land in previous centuries. Or Crimea and DNR in 21rst century for that matter - zero UN resolutions on that). So have China (Tibet in 20th century. Uighur areas in previous). So have many other countries.

    • Yes, Israel uses somewhat harsh measures to deal with terrorism from Palestinians. No, it's nowhere near as harsh as Chinese use in Uighur areas or in Tibet. Or Russians in Chechnya. Or British used in Ireland. Or India in Ceylon. Neither of these ever got condemned in the UN. EVER. (Wikipedia articles on the topics are fully comprehensive, I won't bother copy/pasting the lists of atrocities, deaths, etc... here).

    • Yes, in the course of the conflict some (very few) Palestinians got killed. Again, the problem isn't condemning Israel for it. It's the fact that Russians don't get condemned for killing significantly more Chechens, or Turks or Iraqis condemned for killing of Kurds.

    • Yes, as a result of the conflict some civilians also die. Again, the problem where bias shows isn't condemning Israel. It's that NO OTHER country gets condemned for killing civilians (theirs or others') - again, China, Russia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen.

      And this is in light of the fact that Israel's count of civilians killed is 10s per year whereas other countries is between hundreds and tens of thousands. Examples:

      Another sign of the bias - NONE of the condemnations pay ANY attention to the fact that the main fault for civilian casualties by Israel is that the militant parties (aka terrorists) deliberately fort themselves up in living areas, use children as human shields, build military objects IN schools etc... - in direct violation of Geneva convention.

    • Yes, there is some MINOR discrimination of Arabs in Israel. And I mean MINOR. There are Arab parties represented in parliament. Arab ministers in government. You know what never gets condemned? That Jews aren't even allowed to enter Saudi Arabia or many other Arab countries.


  • The bias against Israel in UN can be explained by 6 factors:

    1. UN is strongly dominated by Arab and non-Arab-Muslim countries.

      There are 20+ Arab countries (source: Wikipedia and about.com).

      There are 50 Muslim-majority countries (source).

      They are not a majority, but they are one of the biggest blocks.

      Those countries range from "We actively want to destroy Israel" - up to and including launching war against the country - to "Our population hates Israel so we must play up that sentiment in public setting" (Saudi Arabia has a fairly productive relationship with Israel behind the scenes for a long time. Publicly they are pretty tough on Israel)

    2. UN also has a strong block of countries that dislike USA to varying degree (what used to be called 3rd world block).

      Israel, as US's main point country in Middle East, easily gets singled out for the dislike by them (especially since those countries ALSO fall in the category #3).

    3. There is likely a majority of left-wing countries in the world, depending on how you define left wing.

      Modern left-wing is strongly anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian, on general principle that anyone who's "oppressed" (and/or weaker) is a good guy. This is the same philosophical principle by which left wing is more sympathetic to convicted murderers than the victims killed by said murderers; or to urban gangsters who beat up people (I don't have a link now but there was an official statement from NYC politician that when a gang of African Americans severely beat up a Jewish kid in Brooklyn, it was justified because they felt threatened by Jews' prosperity).

    4. To top that off, large chunks of the world are very antisemitic historically. Christian countries in Europe; majority of Spanish-influenced countries in Latin America.

    5. Even the countries that don't have a reason to be anti-Israel, can be pushed to be, because of realpolitik.

      • Arab world controls a large supply of oil. This was effectively demonstrated to the world during 1970s oil embargo; but the story goes back to British deciding to throw their support to Arabs at the expense of Jews.

      • Muslims are 23.4% of the world population and as noted at least 25% of UN membership. It's a lot more prudent to support their interests and point of view (or at least not to oppose them) than Israel, which generally has only 3 reliable votes (Israel, USA and Canada) and 0.2% of the population.

    6. It's a lot more dangerous to support Israel than Palestinians. If you come out against Israel, you won't have people organizing terrorist acts against your country and citizens.

  • 2
    Very detailed response. +1 As an aside, reading this made me ask myself - how many countries are there that are truly pro-Israel (considering all those anti-Israel blocks you mentioned)? – Avestron May 30 '14 at 15:19
  • 7
    This doesn't answer the question. This answer assumes that there is bias and try to explain why. But it hasn't established that there is bias in the first place, and that is exactly what the question asked. Same thing happens with Ryathal answer, really. – Pablo May 30 '14 at 16:14
  • 2
    @Pablo - seriously? Establishing that Arab countries are biased against Israel needs proof? What's next I need proof that 1+1=2? – user4012 May 30 '14 at 18:06
  • 8
    this is an unsourced, purely opinionated answer. it's clearly written to appease a particular viewpoint...is this what you guys really want from a politics SE? – worc May 30 '14 at 18:14
  • 6
    I thought the answer was excellent. I was unconvinced by the infographic, because my first impression was that Israel is a developed country and persuadable through diplomacy, thus it has a lot of resolutions made against it quite obviously. Making resolutions against a third world tin pot dictator doesn't do much good. But I found this answer convincing. Good job. – Razie Mah Jun 2 '14 at 14:56
7

Much of the anti-Israel sentiment is from the UN human rights council, which is probably one of the most hypocritical entities to ever exist. The UN is biased against Israel because there are a lot of countries that are members that have pledged or are OK with Israel being wiped off the map. Media bias for or against Israel tends to follow the political slant of that company.

  • 3
    Agree with that. UN human rights council is embarassment to organization that views itself as champion of human rights worldwide. – Democrat May 30 '14 at 15:44
5

It's hard to say if there's bias; the UN would most probably say there isn't, and Israel would most definitely claim there is. Their relationship has been rather difficult in the past, including an event in which Israel blew up a UN observation post killing four unarmed peacekeepers - possibly by mistake, possibly not.

I've seen a documentary (that I unfortunately can't now find so I could link to it) where they said that children in Israel are taught in schools that everyone in the whole world hates them, and they grow up believing that. The same thing seems to be happening (allegedly) in Russia nowadays, where everything that doesn't fit the state's official stance on things is deemed western propaganda. Then again, both of these claims might really be exactly that.

  • 7
    Bombing was clear an error of IDF. What's the point in attacking UN post? Escalation of violence is least thing they need. – Democrat May 30 '14 at 19:09
  • Also would be great to know the name of documentary. As far as I know it's only Palestinian schools that teach hate and violence to their kids youtube.com/watch?v=Bra53uzgPDk – Democrat May 30 '14 at 19:16
  • 2
    "It's hard to say if there's bias" - no it isn't. If you do a negative action against group A 20x more often than group B in identical circumstances, it's crystal clear there is bias. – user4012 May 30 '14 at 19:31
  • 1
    Also, much as it pains me to defend Russians, they (like Israelis) do have a very good reason to have that mindset. They were invaded all the time. You're not paranoid if you DO have enemies – user4012 May 30 '14 at 19:33
  • 1
    @C.B. - "Why" is answered in the second half. Mostly Arab/Muslim world (which isn't identical). And they started the hasslin' WAY WAY before any of the issues they started as an excuse. Hebron was a Jewish city before Palestinians started a pogrom in 1928 – user4012 May 31 '14 at 11:19
-2

That's a very good point.Roughly statistically speaking there is indeed a bias. Now to explain it isn't too easy. It could be that apart the U.S, Israel has in fact very few allies - in fact probably zero allies - and at the opposite most other countries are involved in alliances and geopolitical local dynamics that makes hard to find a consensus to condemn them.

eg: Israel is alone and isolated and so at the U.N everybody agree to condemn them.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.