Will Goldstone's Gaza report prove him just a naive idealist?
The Jewish jurist hoped to repeat his success in reforming South African courts from within by heading the UN Gaza probe. Many remain skeptical.
By The Forward and Claudia Braude Tags: Goldstone report Israel newsSOUTH AFRICA - Ask Richard Goldstone what possessed him, a Jew and self-described supporter of Israel, to accept the job of chief United Nations investigator of alleged war crimes in Gaza last winter, and the legendary South African judge invokes his past. His decision in 1980 to accept the racist South African government's offer of a judgeship was "the most difficult of my career," he has said. That government occasionally appointed liberal judges to "make good its boast of having an independent judiciary," he said. The danger of lending legitimacy to an immoral system by serving it was very real.
But ultimately, his hope that the legal system could be used to effect social change was vindicated when one of his rulings effectively ended South Africa's policy of racially-segregated neighborhoods.
On September 15, Goldstone submitted his team's report on human rights violations in the Gaza conflict to the UN Human Rights Council. The 574-page review accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity. It also said that despite its claims to have thoroughly investigated allegations against its military's conduct, Israel's government "had not carried out any credible investigations"; nor did Hamas. It therefore recommended that the Security Council require both parties to conduct such investigations and report back within six months on the results. If either party fails to do so, the Security Council should refer the matter to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, it added.
Israel and its supporters predictably lambasted the report, and especially its "dangerous and totally unwarranted equivalence between the Israel Defense Forces and the terrorists of Hamas," as the Anti-Defamation League put it.
Less predictable is what the Human Rights Council will do. Its repeated condemnations of Israel - 15 in less than two years, compared to zero for any other country - have led to accusations of anti-Israel bias. Will it now take up Goldstone's report in its entirety, or, as per its original resolution ordering the investigation, only address Israel's alleged crimes?
The answer to that question will determine whether Goldstone achieves his stated objective of expanding the UN's purview of human rights, as he did South Africa's, or whether, as his critics predict, he will be shown up as a naive idealist, one who enabled an implacably Israel-obsessed body to use the findings of a distinguished pro-Israel Jewish jurist to justify its actions.
Interviewed four days before the report's release, Goldstone was upbeat about the prospects and unapologetic about his decision to take up the job.
"I was driven particularly because I thought the outcome might, in a small way, assist the peace process," he told the Forward. "I really thought I was one person who could achieve an even-handed mission."
Goldstone is widely credited with having helped bring down apartheid through a government-commissioned investigation he led that exposed the existence of covert state-sponsored terror units deployed by South Africa against its own black citizenry. Nelson Mandela, the country's first post-apartheid president, later appointed Goldstone to the country's highest court. More recently, Goldstone has served as chief UN prosecutor of war crimes in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.
A proud Jew
Goldstone is proud of his Jewish identity and links it firmly to his human rights concerns. A president emeritus of World ORT, a Jewish organization that runs several vocational schools in Israel, he also serves on the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's board of governors.
Characterizing the struggle for human rights as "a secular religion of our time," Goldstone once described Israel's existence as its Jewish embodiment. "This struggle for human rights has been in the most profound existential sense very much the struggle for ourselves - for our own Jewish destiny. For the creation of the State of Israel," he said.
"I've been involved with Israel since I can remember," Goldstone told the Forward. "My mother was very active in the women's Zionist movement." Also, his daughter Nicole lived in Israel.
But he insisted his appointment was due solely to his background in international criminal justice. "I've no doubt the fact I'm a Jew wasn't the reason I was approached," he said.
On human rights, Goldstone told the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists in 1995, "We must not only insist that we be judged by those standards by our neighbors and by the international community. We should indeed object vehemently when any [one] seeks to judge us by any other standards."
In its original January 12 resolution, the Human Rights Council called for an investigation of Israel's alleged human rights violations - and only Israel's. Given this one-sided mandate, many were mystified when Goldstone agreed to head up the probe. Former UN high commissioner for human rights Mary Robinson had already declined the job, describing the council as "guided not by human rights, but by politics" and specifically citing the resolution's exclusive focus on Israel.
"Richard was uncertain, but people encouraged him to accept, saying because he's a Jew with a legal background, he'd give a fair assessment," an old family friend said.
But according to Goldstone, when council president Martin Uhomoibhi of Nigeria appointed him, he accepted only on condition that Uhomoibhi expand the mandate to look at both sides. Uhomoibhi agreed, he added.
Indeed, when Uhomoibhi officially invited individuals to submit evidence about alleged violations, he noted that "pursuant" to the council's resolution, the Goldstone task force would "investigate all violations of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law" connected to the fighting in Gaza from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009, whether committed "before, during or after."
This change in the mandate - and especially inclusion of the months before the war, when Hamas was launching rockets into Israel - allowed Goldstone to frame his mission as examining abuses by "both sides."
Not everyone agrees this really changed anything. Irwin Cotler, an international law expert and former Canadian justice minister, said, "As a Supreme Court judge, he knows that the mandate still stands unless it is either altered or in some way repealed and replaced by a new resolution of the council."
"I believe Goldstone himself wishes to engage in a fair-minded mission," Cotler added. "But this mission has been tainted from the beginning. I don't know why he has accepted such a flawed mandate, unless he believes he can alter the whole process single-handedly and redeem it."
Israel, citing the one-sided council resolution, refused to cooperate with Goldstone's probe; the council ultimately paid for Israeli witnesses to travel to Geneva to testify.
"The big question is what the UN does with the report," said Selma Browde, an anti-apartheid and Middle East peace activist. Her husband, Jules Browde, an eminent human rights lawyer and former counsel for Mandela who has long known Goldstone, added, "It would be tragic if the council misused it in a less than even-handed way."
Goldstone, his work now done, sounded resigned. "What they do with the report is out of our hands," he said. "I am not prepared to speculate on the consequences of an unevenhanded response."
By arrangement with the Forward
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Goldstone accepted an investigation although he knew that the conclusions were already produced. He accepted the testimony of Hamas-provided "eyewitnesses" as valid and chose to ignore the Hamas enforcers, and chose to treat IDF on the same level as Hamas. Worst of all, he put a "kosher" seal on a document which will be used to persecute and prosecute Israelis whose only crime was to defend Israel.
At theUN Benjamin Netanyahu came armed with maps and relentlessly provoked Holocaust memories, following the ever so predictable, albeit insensitive and deceptive pattern. "This charade was meant to distract from the nearly 600-page UN report, prepared by South African judge Richard Goldstone and others, dedicated mostly to Israeli war crimes in Gaza.�Confirming that Israel wantonly used weapons, including illegal weapons, against a defenceless civilian population in Gaza and going so far to say that Israel did not only commit war crimes, but indeed may have also committed crimes against humanity, the findings of the report were all set by the wayside. The report was utterly rebuked by Netanyahu and his ilk, arrogantly disregarded and shelved.�Concurrently, Israel's official statement regarding the IAEA's pressure on Israel to sign on to the Non-Proliferation Treaty was that Israel deplored such a notion.
As a South African Jew I can only apologise to Our Jewish Brothers and Sisters In Israel that we managed to produce such a person. I watched his interview on Jerusalem On Line tonight. For a man of this intellect to be stammering and stuttering when being interviewed just shows that he sold his "soul"
For over 8 years, rockets were fired incessantly at Israeli civilians and the UN would not say a word. Now Mr. Goldstone has described these acts as "war crimes" that are deserving of punishment, but only from the time frame he was assigned to assess.According to Mr. Goldstone,unprovoked war crimes were being committed for 8 years but these do not matter since they were prior to his assignment. In essence, he has unwittingly proven the inutility, hypocrisy and lack of credibility of the very organization he is supposed to represent. Whether the man himself is credible or not is not the issue.He may be naive; he may be self-serving but again that is not the issue. The HRC is flawed, tainted and misguided and confirming this is the only thing his work has accomplished.
i: "johnboy christine chinkin wrote a letter to the sunday times in january 2009 accusing israel of war crimes." You are insisting that an expert on int'l humanitarian and human rights law **NOT** hold an opinion. That is a preposterous notion. I: "that showed bias" No, that shows that SHE HELD AN OPINION. The issue then becomes wether she can put aside her opinion to dispassionately examine the facts that come before that inquiry. The report shows that she can. I: "and disqualified her from taking part in the commission." No, what would disqualify her would be A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Not the fact that as an expert she held an opinion on a matter within her area of expertise. By *your* criteria it would be almost impossible to appoint any judges to, say, the Israel High Court. The issue is NOT wether judges hold opinions, because you delude yourself if you think that they aren't all opinionated. They most certainly are.
Goldstone is a good man who was used by the apartheid regime in SA to gain legitimacy and now he is being used by Human Rights and the UN for the same purpose. Israel (as a country) did not commit war crimes. Israel is fighting a vicious, blood thirsty enemy who is not bound by the Geneva convention?s rules (according to Goldstone), who is not wearing uniforms, who is using its own people as human shields, who is using ambulances for transport, mosques as headquarters, hospitals as bunkers, children as soldiers, attacking Israeli civilian targets and refusing to face the IDF on the border. Israel must defend its citizens as this is the most basic obligation of any state in the world and as long as the UN and HR insist on condemning only Israel they?ll keep losing credibility in the world and cooperation from the state of Israel.
... that the Goldstone report hurts seriously the work to achieve peace between Palestinians and Israel.
in january 2009 accusing israel of war crimes.that showed bias and disqualified her from taking part in the commission.
From a comment concerning the current article in The Economist re Mr. Goldstone's report; "In fact most(over 1000) of these casualties were male between the ages of 17 and 30, not a mixed demographic group as one would expect if they were random killings. So let us explode this little myth of the Arab propaganda machine."
Sad to say but this fine and carefully conceived Goldstone report, smeared by israel and rejected by the US, will end up in the dustbin along with all the other condemnations of israeli war crimes. Israel will demonize Goldstone all it can but the world will remember the report's judgement, even if no action will ever be taken on it. Israel continues to seal its reputation as a rogue nation.
A more accurate picture is now coming in to focus.As a relatively unknown player to the arena and a jurist more than anything else,the man's bizarre and preposterous views of the conflict appear to be so out of touch with reality that "naive idealist" is a euphemism. It appears that another radical has been thrown into the mix who has succeeded in making a travesty of justice. Certainly, Mr.Goldstone has only set things back and likely has served his own personal interests more than anything else.
Those so-called friends of Israel who militantly support Israel no matter what, are more harmful to Israel and the Middle East than the Goldstone report can ever be. Goldstone is not naive, he is after all a judge. I just think he underestimated the enormous venom of the ( obviously pre-planned) attack on the report
This report was hatched with a bias inherent in its mandate. It is as a consequence a product that largely reflects that imbalance, notwithstanding the token effort to look at the other side to some extent, albeit a much lesser extent. It comes from a body whose track record and history is one of focusing unduly and excessively on one country, Israel, to the exclusion of credible sustained treatment of the world's most egregious instances of human rights abuses in places like Sudan or Zimbabwe or Burma. The bias is evident also in C/ner Chinkin publicly expressing conclusions of law about the very matters she was required to investigate even before the enquiry commenced; in the report's failure to address 5 of the 6 categories of war crimes allegations against Hamas; and in Goldstone playing up his Jewishness as "proof" that he is not biased against Israel. It doesn't matter what the UNHRC does with this report, because nothing can retrieve it. It wont reach the UNSC.
Some people can't get past it, some people can't see it, some people can't read it, some people will never get it. The man wrote a 500+ page report indicating what most of us saw with our own eyes on tv or read online or in the papers. But for some strange reason, some people have to point in all directions rather than looking at this report straight in the face and addressing it's contents. This game of finding and creating flaws in every aspect of the world in order to justify what Israel does to the Palestinians is tiresome and it's embarrassing for humanity and those of us who have objectivity and take it seriously.
All this talk about the mandate for the investigation and Goldstone's motives for taking on the job are of secondary importance to the report itself. Anyone who has read it (or even the executive summary) will know that its conclusions are based on solid evidence and sound reasoning. Goldstone is a very able jurist who wouldn't put his name to a biased or shoddy piece of work. Read the report and see for yourself.
he was tainted by upholding apartheid laws. He has a guilt complex and now compensates in a way that is unprofessional. He should have heeded the advice of Cotler, Bell, Dershowitz, Robinson and others. His ego (Nobel Prize?!)_ got in the way.
PSM: "Goldstone if he had any honor would of disqualified himself after expressing his prejudices in writing with known anti Israel activists.The rest of his team included another outspoken condemer of Israel." Yeah, sure. The UNHRC should have appointed you and Moshe Arens, correct? PETER, Goldstone's credentials are impeccible. The same is true of the other three members of that fact-finding team http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/Bios_Gaza_FMM.doc They are - all of them - very distinguished indeed, and you delude yourself when you claim otherwise.
The "friends"of Israel make the same stupid work:to deny the reality and to throw the responsibility again and again.All the world know and saw what happened in Gaza and the insolence of the refuse to collaborate with the Council and directly to accuse it of anti Israel standing is disgusting and cause disgust to everyone who see these humble tries to deform the reality and to silence people who are not blind and dumb.Correctly said our President Shimon Peres "is a mockery of history" but he the address was not correct.
yet i am not comfortable to see him reviled and abused.he is a good man who has made some seriously wrong decisions.
his plea that jews should not judge themselves by the conduct of others is well taken yet for all his altruism his analysis is deeply flawed. israel receives the vindictiveness of the world.we are harrassed and reviled.we do not need one of our own to justify the world's hatred.
Goldstone if he had any honor would of disqualified himself after expressing his prejudices in writing with known anti Israel activists.The rest of his team included another outspoken condemer of Israel. They refused to accept both eyewitness accounts and the Pals own statements.http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-la.1.mn_commentary.newart3-2009sep18,0,4123099.story?track=rss "The report also fails to mention that the Palestinian forces recruited children to conduct combat-support operations. A Jan. 9 report in an Arabic-language paper in Israel included an interview with Khaled, a child from Gaza. He said: "We the children ... are fulfilling missions of support for the [Hamas] resistance fighters, by transmitting messages about the movements of the enemy forces or by bringing them ammunition and food""Further, the report's accounts of some incidents are dubious. For example, in its investigation of the shelling of Al Quds Hospital in Gaza City, the commission astonishingly concluded that it was unlikely that there was any armed presence in any of the hospital buildings at the time. Yet the report itself cites a Newsweek article in which a Palestinian witness stated "resistance fighters were firing from positions all around the [Al Quds] hospital." An article in the Italian daily Corriere della Sera corroborates this, quoting a resident of the neighborhood saying, "The Hamas gunmen had taken refuge mainly in the building that houses the administrative offices of Al Quds" and that "nurses were forced to take off their uniforms ... so they [the gunmen] could blend better and escape the Israeli snipers." The mission also claims it found no evidence to suggest that Palestinian armed groups forced civilians to remain within the vicinity of the attacks. But in the Corriere della Sera article, Gaza residents explicitly stated that Hamas fighters forcibly prevented them from leaving their houses and shot at Israeli forces from the same locations, telling them that they should be happy to die together with the "holy warriors."
Cotler is adamant that a mandate is a mandate is a mandate is a mandate. Goldstone is adamant that that he only took up the job on the condition that he look at both sides, and that the council president agreed. Now, it is undeniably true that the REPORT ITSELF **does** look at the actions of both belligerent parties. So it is undeniably true that the REPORT ITSELF canvasses issues that go beyond its founding mandate. Braude point is therefore well-taken: 1) if the UNHRC accepts the report IN ITS ENTIRETY then Cotler's objection is moot. 2) if the UNHRC accepts only those portions of the report that DEALS WITH ISRAEL then Cotler is correct that the entire process is a farce. Good article, this one. "By arrangement with the Forward" Maybe Haaretz should make these arrangements more often; may I suggest you bump Moshe Arens to make the room?