Richard Goldstone defends his report – again

Posted: May 6, 2010 by Jonathan Boyko in Cast Lead, Gaza, Hamas, IDF, Israel, Palestinians, Terrorism

They want peace. Hamas' Qassam squad Following a meeting with South African Zionist Federation, formerly UN-appointed Judge Richard Goldstone – who headed UN’s investigative mission into IDF’s operation Cast Lead – defended his positions and views in a piece in Britain’s Guardian:

Without more, allow me to turn to the Gaza report that has caused so much anger in this and other Jewish communities. It is well known that initially I refused to become involved with what I considered to be a mandate that was unfair to Israel by concentrating only on war crimes alleged to have been committed by the Israel Defence Forces. When I was offered an even-handed mandate that included war crimes alleged to have been committed against Israel by Hamas and other militant groups in Gaza, my position changed.

I have spent much of my professional life in the cause of international criminal justice. It would have been hypocritical for me to continue to speak out against violations of international law and impunity for war crimes around the world but remain silent when it came to Israel simply because I am Jewish.

(The Guardian)

THE QUESTION IS, of course, not if Goldstone should have ignored Israel’s actions because he is Jewish, but rather if he was much harder on Israel because he is Jewish. Goldstone’s report indeed angered many Jews around the world, yet the Honorable Justice seem unable to comprehend the reason; I am willing to help.

Dear Sir, the reason for harsh criticism of you and your report is not your revelations regarding Israel’s actions, but rather your backpedalling in the face of Hamas propaganda, and your ignorance of the situation, its roots, its background and its consequences. Yes, your report noted that Hamas might also have violated human rights, yet, your mission investigated dozens of IDF operations, versus exactly zero (as in “0”) Hamas operations. How is it possible? Was your fact-finding mission so impotent as to have absolutely zero ability to investigate even a single armed push by Hamas gunmen? How about the video provided by the IDF, showing clear violations of human rights by Hamas terrorists? If your investigation was indeed as deep and objective as you claim it to be, how could Israelis come up with a 349-page-long report either pointing out gross inaccuracies in your findings or proving outright inability of your mission to unearth the truth?

Richard Goldstone’s disappointment is understandable. Yet, he should have seen it coming. One cannot investigate a conflict, basing conclusions solely on the local confrontation, with no background – as he did. One cannot uncover the truth without a full investigation and skeptical view of both sides, rather than just one.

The Israelis knew that, and thus refused cooperation with the team.

Goldstone did a poor job. Not because he is dishonest – he is not. Not because he is biased – he is, likely, not. Just because his work is unprofessional, lacking and outright poor. He should take notice.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s