What You Should Know But May Not Know… Or May Not Want to Know... Part 4: Wake Up! The United Nations is Deeply Biased, Antisemitic and Profoundly Broken… And It Is Not Alone - 3/7/25
Dear Friends,
This is the fourth monograph in my eight monogram Wake Up! series. The first three were:
· Part 1: Wake Up! – We are Already in a Wider Conflict. (Published on February 20, 2025)
· Part 2: Wake Up! – It’s Not About Dividing the Land. (Published on February 25, 2025)
· Part 3: Wake Up! – The Path to Peace Lies Through Victory Not Ceasefires. (Published on February 28, 2025)
If you did not receive them, but are interested in reading these earlier monographs, they can be accessed at Substack.com by clicking on the following link that will take you to all of my earlier monographs, including those two: tonybrenner.substack.com.
Please note that unfortunately on Substack.com, the footnotes – which I think add a great deal of background information and depth – can only be found at the end of the monograph. On the PDF version, the footnotes are shown on the page upon which they first appear, making them easier to access and integrate while reading the monograph. Please also note I have attached a PDF version at the end for those of you who prefer to print it out and read it in that format.
Let me now turn to the topic of my fourth monograph: Part 4: The United Nations is Deeply Biased, Antisemitic and Profoundly Broken… And It is Not Alone
In an earlier monograph, Understanding Antisemitism – Part II (published on January 5, 2024),[1] I discussed the toxic role that the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) movement played in fostering antisemitism, even though it’s hard to find fault with the words, “diversity”, “equity”, and “inclusion”, in and of themselves. Unfortunately, the DEI movement has morphed into something very different from the sentiment expressed in those words. I think the same is true for the United Nations (UN). It was founded on truly noble principles but has deviated from those principles in a meaningful way, and nowhere is this more evident than in its treatment of Israel.
Let me begin by laying out the mission of the United Nations as outlined in its Charter.
• Maintaining International Peace and Security: The UN aims to prevent conflicts and promote peace globally.
• Developing Friendly Relations Among Nations: The UN seeks to foster cooperation and understanding among countries based on respect for equal rights and self-determination.
• Promoting Social Progress and Better Living Standards: The organization works to improve the welfare of people worldwide, addressing issues such as poverty, hunger, and education.
• Encouraging Respect for Human Rights: The UN promotes fundamental freedoms for all individuals without discrimination based on race, sex, language, or religion.
• Facilitating International Cooperation: The UN serves as a platform for international cooperation to tackle global challenges, including humanitarian aid, sustainable development, and the rule of law.
I think we might all agree that these are noble objectives. So, how and where has the United Nations gone so very wrong? The best way to answer that question is to look at the United Nations treatment of Israel at multiple levels of the organization, and not just one.
Let’s start at the highest level, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). The UNGA is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations, serving as its main deliberative, policy-making, and representative body. Comprising all 193 member states, each with equal voting rights, the UNGA discusses a broad range of international issues including peace and security, development, human rights, and international laws.
Although UNGA resolutions are not legally binding, they carry significant moral authority, which makes any breach of the UNGA’s moral duties even more distressing. The body is expected to act in a fair and objective manner. If only it were so!
In 2024, the UNGA adopted 17 resolutions condemning Israel. There was a total of 6 resolutions targeting all other countries in the world. Absorb this – Israel alone had nearly 3x’s the number of resolutions condemning it than the rest of the world combined. Even more damning, no other country had more than one resolution denouncing it.[2] Said another way, Israel had 17x’s the number of UNGA resolutions condemning it than any other country in the world received.
Some might argue that this was due to Israel waging war on Hamas and Hezbollah, even though in both cases Israel was responding to being attacked – in the case of Hamas, on October 7, 2023 when Hamas launched an invasion of southern Israel, massacring Israelis… often in their own homes; and in the case of Hezbollah, beginning the following day, October 8, 2023, when they started firing barrage after barrage of rockets and missiles on Israeli civilian population centers that has continued day after day and week after week. If this is your argument for the disproportionate condemnation of Israel, I hate to inform you… you are wrong!
Before explaining why this argument does not stand up to scrutiny, I’d like to share an important observation made over the past decade plus. In the eyes of the United Nations, the firing of rockets or missiles and the launching of drones at Israel is permissible and not worthy of condemnation… and I mean this literally, not figuratively! For what other nation in the world would this be true?
For the five-year period from 2020 to 2024, the UNGA passed 81 resolutions condemning Israel as compared to 32 resolutions against all other countries. Again, Israel experienced nearly 3x’s the number of resolutions condemning it than the rest of the world combined. Here are the five most condemned countries other than Israel over this five-year period: Russia (9), North Korea (5), Iran (5) and Myanmar (4).
So, let’s get this straight – Russia invades the Ukraine on February 24, 2022. Over the ensuing three years, Russia purposely destroys civilian infrastructures (electricity, water, gas), explicitly targets hospitals, schools and community centers, tortures and executes prisoners of war, and seeks to assassinate field medics.[3] In response to Russian war crimes and the myriad atrocities committed by its soldiers (recall the massacre at Bucha early in the war as just one example), the UNGA passed all of nine resolutions condemning Russia. This pales in comparison to the 81 resolutions condemning Israel over this same time period, even though Israel has been fighting a defensive war after being attacked and seeing its citizens massacred, raped, burnt alive, beheaded, and taken hostage. How can it possibly make sense that Israel has received 9x’s the resolutions condemning it as compared to those condemning Russia?
Maybe this five-year period was an anomaly? Sadly, no! Over the past 20 years, the UNGA has passed 315 resolutions condemning Israel, as compared to 140 resolutions condemning all other countries in the world combined.
Yet, Israel is a democracy, not an autocratic regime, with a series of checks and balances, and an independent judiciary. Of Israel’s total population of approximately 9.5 million people, 1.7 million (18.1%) are Muslims and another 500,000+ people (5.5%) are other religions (mainly Christians and Druze). All citizens in Israel have equal rights under the law, including the right to vote, the right to serve in the Knesset (the Israeli parliament), and equal access to education, healthcare and employment.[4],[5] Yet, Israel remains the focus of the UNGA’s outrage. So, why does Israel receive so many condemnations from the United Nations General Assembly? There is only one possible answer to this question – rampant antisemitism.
So how else does this antisemitism at the United Nations manifest itself? Is it limited to the United Nations General Assembly, admittedly one of the United Nations principal bodies, or is it pervasive through the organization? It’s hard to know where to even begin … there are so many choices!! A good place to start, however, is with the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).
To join the UNHRC, a country must meet specific criteria and follow a defined election process, as outlined in UN General Assembly Resolution 60/21, which established the council. The criteria for membership on the UNHRC is as follows:
• Commitment to Human Rights: Countries must demonstrate their commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights.
• Adherence to the Highest Standards: Members are expected to uphold the highest standards of human rights both domestically and internationally during their term.
• Voluntary Pledges: Candidate countries are encouraged to submit voluntary pledges outlining their human rights commitments and plans for approval.
• Geographic Representation: Membership is to be divided equitably across five regional groups.
It seems like excellent criteria for membership on the United Nations Human Relations Council, doesn’t it? Yet, over the last 10 years, the following repressive regimes rife with human rights abuses have served on the UNHRC: China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Cuba, Sudan, Egypt, and Iraq to name just some of the human rights stalwarts on the council! To add insult to injury, Iran currently chairs the Asia Pacific Group within the UNHRC. Does anyone in their right mind believe that these countries meet the criteria for UNHRC membership set out above???
The presence of these repressive regimes on the UNHRC, all of whom are major abusers of human rights, speaks to how profoundly broken the United Nations is as an organization, how badly the UN has veered from its founding principles, and how far its integrity has fallen. Making matters worse, these countries didn’t attain membership by simply volunteering to be on the UNHRC. They were all elected to serve by a majority vote (gaining at least 97 out of 193 votes) of the UNGA via a secret ballot. Are you surprised to learn that Israel has never been elected to serve on the UNHRC?
You should also know that there is only one, single permanent item on the agenda of the UNHRC: Agenda Item 7, titled: “Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories.” It mandates that the UNHRC discusses alleged human rights violations by Israel in the Palestinian territories at every session. In looking at these alleged Israeli violations, the UNHRC never considers the context or the precipitating events that may have caused Israel’s actions, let alone assess the actions themselves in a fair and objective manner.[6]
Again, the number of resolutions condemning Israel at the United Nations Human Rights Council tells a similar story to the United Nations General Assembly. Over the past ten years (2015-2024), the UNHRC passed 108 resolutions condemning Israel, as compared to 56 condemning all other countries in the world, combined. Syria was in second place with 34 resolutions uniquely condemning its behavior, followed by Iran (15), North Korea (8), Myanmar (7) and Russia (6).[7]
In looking at these numbers, keep in mind the actions taken by the Assad regime in Syria during this ten-year period against their own citizens:
• Use of Chemical Weapons: There were over 300 instances of using chemical weapons against civilians.
• Mass Killings and Torture: There was systematic torture, mass hangings, extermination of detainees in facilities like Saydnaya prison with mass graves.
• Indiscriminate Bombings: There were bombings of civilian areas, hospitals and schools with barrel Bombs, incendiary weapons, and cluster munitions.
• Forced Disappearances and Extrajudicial Killings: There were arbitrary arrests, torture and executions on a massive scale.
• Starvation Tactics: Civilians in opposition-held areas were denied food, water and medical care.
• Displaced People: Over 6.7 million Syrians fled the country, and more than 7.4 million people were displaced within Syria.
Yet, Israel had 108 UNHRC resolutions condemning it, while Syria had 45… try to get your head around this fact, for it is truly mind-blowing.
On March 1, 2025, UN Watch, an organization dedicated to holding the United Nations to account for its anti-Israeli / antisemitic bias and actions, invited Yemeni journalist, Luai Ahmed, to address the UNHRC. Here is a link to a brief clip from his comments, calling out the UNHRC for their double-standards and hypocrisy. Watching the faces of the UN High Commissioners as Ahmed spoke is worth the price of admission: Ahmed Remarks to UNHRC.
But the anti-Israel, antisemitic policies at the United Nations don’t stop there. The United Nations in 1968 established yet another UN body that focuses exclusively on Israel – the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestine People. Its mandate is to investigate Israeli policies and actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. It has been accused of promoting a political agenda rather than impartial investigations. Surprise, surprise…
Well, there must be UN entities where Israel is not the focus that are fair and objective, and don’t demonstrate an anti-Israel or antisemitic bias… think again! Let me briefly address just three other UN entities that one would think has little nexus with Israel, yet each finds a way to demonstrate its underlying animosity toward the state:
1. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, but more commonly known as the UN Women’s Rights Committee),
2. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and
3. The World Health Organization (WHO).
As with the UNGA and the UNHRC, let me begin by providing the mandate for each of these UN entities.
· UN Women’s Rights Committee: To eliminate discrimination in all forms and ensure women’s full development and advancement on a basis of equality with men. It recognizes sexual assault and subjugation as critical violations of women’s rights and has broadly condemned mass rapes as tools of subjugation and humiliation.[8]
· UNESCO: To promote peace, security and sustainable development through international cooperation in education, science, culture, communication, and information. UNESCO is best known for its work protecting cultural and natural heritage through its World Heritage Program that is designed to identify, protect and preserve cultural and natural heritage sites of universal value to humanity.
· World Health Organization (WHO): To promote the highest possible level of health for all people, via: 1) acting as the directing and coordinating authority on international health; 2) providing technical assistance to countries to strengthen health services and respond to emergencies; 3) setting international health standards and monitoring their implementation; 4) advancing research and policy by shaping the global health agenda and disseminating evidence-based guidance; 5) promoting universal health coverage; and 6) coordinating responses to global health emergencies, including disease outbreaks, natural disasters, and humanitarian crises.
For many of you, you must be thinking, “How could these three UN organizations possibly be antisemitic or anti-Israeli?” Unfortunately, there appears to be is no limit to the creativity and depravity of UN organizations in singling out and/or condemning Israel and Jews.
Let’s start with the UN Women’s Rights Committee, which did not issue a specific statement condemning Hamas for its actions on October 7, 2023, despite indisputable evidence of atrocities, including mass rapes and gender-based violence against Israeli women. Instead, they only issued a general statement weeks later, condemning “the escalating violence in the Middle East” and vaguely referencing the “gendered dimensions” of the conflict, without explicitly addressing Hamas’ crimes. As if anyone knows, what the hell “gendered dimensions” actually means.
This is in stark contrast to the UN Women’s Right Committee’s explicit condemnations in other instances of mass rapes, such as in Bosnia and the DRC, as well those perpetrated by non-state actors, such as ISIS and Boko Haram. Sadly, the message is clear – mass rape is condemned in all instances except when it is perpetrated against Israeli or Jewish women, in which case apparently one has to consider the context, if not ignore the matter entirely.
For those of you who have not seen it, I urge you to watch Cheryl Sandberg’s documentary, Screams before Silence, that focuses on the sexual violence committed by Hamas on October 7, 2023 and provides first-hand accounts from survivors, freed hostages, first responders and experts, highlighting the premeditated and brutal nature of the crimes. Here is the link: www.screamsbeforesilence.com. Note that there are no graphic images in the documentary, only people’s words describing what they experienced or saw.
Let me now turn to UNESCO. How can an organization with UNESCO’s mandate possibly be anti-Israeli and antisemitic? Yet, UNESCO has found a way! UNESCO has passed multiple resolutions ignoring Jewish historical ties to the land of Israel, in an effort to negate the legitimacy of the world’s only Jewish state, Israel.
For those of you who want “proof points”, here are three specific instances of UNESCO acting to deny Jewish historical ties to the land of Israel:
· 2016 Resolutions on theTemple Mount: UNESCO passed resolutions referring to the Temple Mount[9] (the holiest site in Judaism) exclusively by its Islamic name, “Al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram Al-Sharif,” while omitting any Jewish connection. In addition, these very same resolutions went out of their way to criticize Israeli actions in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, which one would think has no relevance to UNESCO’s mandate and would therefore be outside of UNESCO’s purview.
· 2017 Resolution on Jerusalem: On Israel’s Independence Day, UNESCO adopted another resolution denying any Jewish ties to Jerusalem, prompting Prime Minister Netanyahu to condemn the resolution as a denial of Jewish history and heritage.
· 2017 Hebron’s Designation: UNESCO designated Hebron’s Old City and the Tomb of the Patriarchs as Palestinian World Heritage Sites, sparking outrage from Israel because it ignored Hebron’s deep Jewish historical significance.[10]
These actions led Israel and the United States to withdraw from UNESCO in protest, citing anti-Israel bias and historical revisionism.
And finally, there is the World Health Organization, another paragon of virtue at the United Nations. How can an organization whose mandate is to promote world health possibly be antisemitic or anti-Israeli?
Let me provide a summary of just some of the ways that WHO has done so. Taken together, they reveal a recurring pattern of antisemitic actions and/or resolutions:
· Annual Resolutions Singling Out Israel: Since 1968, the WHO has consistently passed an annual resolution criticizing Israel for health conditions in Palestinian territories and the Golan Heights. Making these resolutions even more outrageous, Palestinians are regularly treated in Israeli hospitals.[11] Here too, no other country is subjected to such a standing agenda item at the World Health Organization.
· Focus on Israel Amid Broader Healthcare Crises: Even during global emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO held country-specific debates targeting Israel, alleging violations of Palestinians’ health rights while ignoring what was happening in other global conflicts zones. The targeting of Israel was particularly striking during the spread of Covid. One would have thought that the WHO would have had more pressing matters to deal with than condemning Israel for the spread of Covid in Palestinian territories. Making the condemnation even more absurd, it was Hamas who was governing Gaza at the time… and not Israel.
· Failure to Condemn Hamas: After the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, which included Hamas atrocities, the WHO was silent. Nor has the WHO ever issued a statement condemning Hamas for using hospitals for military purposes, an explicit war crime under the Geneva Convention. Yet, the WHO has had no problem passing multiple resolutions blaming Israel for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, without even once mentioning that Hamas uses Gazan civilians as human shields, locates their command centers and other key military installations in, or under, schools, mosques and hospitals, and uses those same sites as locations from which to launch rockets at Israel.
· Politicized Language: Like UNESCO, the WHO has adopted language in its resolutions that delegitimizes Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem and other areas in Israel, even though one might reasonably conclude that the issue of Israeli sovereignty is not within the WHO’s mandate.
As shameful, unjust and biased as these three UN organizations are, they pale in comparison to the abject failure of the two key United Nation’s organizations with “boots on the ground” in the region: United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and the United Nations Relief and Work Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA).
Let me begin with a discussion of UNIFIL, as I have written extensively about UNRWA in the past. Following the 2006 Lebanon war between Hezbollah and Israel, UNIFIL’s mandate in Lebanon was expanded under UN Security Council Resolution 1701 to include:
· Monitoring the cessation of hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel.
· Supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in deploying to southern Lebanon and maintaining a buffer zone free of unauthorized armed personnel and weapons between the Blue Line[12] and the Litani River.
· Assisting humanitarian access and the safe return of displaced people.
· Protecting civilians under imminent threat and ensuring UN personnel’s safety and freedom of movement.
In a nutshell, UNIFIL’s mission was to make sure that Hezbollah personnel and weapons were not allowed to have a presence in southern Lebanon, with the Litani River (which runs about 15 miles north of the Lebanese-Israeli border) marking the demarcation line.
UNIFIL has failed completely in this mission. In areas under UNIFIL’s mandate, Hezbollah amassed over 150,000 rockets and missiles as well as put in place vast stores of handheld weapons that were staged there in preparation for a massive ground invasion of northern Israel.[13] Just think about this for a moment – 150,000 rockets… not 150 or 1,500, but 150,000.
Making matters worse, under UNIFIL’s watch (now that’s an oxymoron), Hezbollah was allowed to build extensive military infrastructure and construct vast tunnel complexes in southern Lebanon along its entire border with Israel. Somehow, all of the materials that were excavated from underground to build the tunnels just magically disappeared without leaving a trace of their removal. It must have been a truly powerful act of wizardry at work.
To argue that UNIFIL was not aware of what was happening as these underground complexes and tunnels were being built would strain any rational person’s credulity given that tunnel complexes and rocket launch sites were located in direct proximity to UNIFIL locations. The IDF only realized the full extent of these complexes and their immediate proximity to UNIFIL bases after the IDF entered into southern Lebanon on the night of September 30, 2024, and began their ground offensive against Hezbollah.
During their maneuvers to drive Hezbollah out of southern Lebanon, the IDF located significant underground complexes and camouflaged rocket launchers within 50 to 100 yards of UNIFIL-manned locations. Making the situation even more appalling, Hezbollah’s tunnel complexes in Southern Lebanon required the use of heavy construction equipment as well as significant time to excavate due to the terrain in southern Lebanon, which consists mainly of solid rock formations unlike the sandy soils in Gaza.
There is only question as it relates to UNIFIL that is worthy of debate, as it is impossible to argue that UNIFIL fulfilled its mission under UN Security Resolution 1701, nor that it was unaware of what was transpiring in southern Lebanon under its watch. Was UNIFIL actively complicit in supporting Hezbollah’s actions or did it turn a blind eye to them? I will allow you to ponder that one on your own.
In the case of UNRWA, I wrote an in-depth, two-part monograph on UNRWA entitled, UNRWA – One of the Biggest Obstacles to Peace in the Middle East that was published on March 5, 2024 (Part 1) and March 12, 2024 (Part 2), respectively. For those of you who want a deeper understanding of UNRWA and its creation, unique mandate, and role in undermining any potential peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis, I urge you to read this monograph in its entirety. As with all my prior monographs, both Part 1 and Part 2 are posted on Substack.com and can be accessed using the following link: tonybrenner.substack.com.
Rather than educate you from the bottom up on UNRWA as I would normally do, in the interest of brevity (or at least some semblance of brevity), let me simply present some of the key conclusions from my research. Please note that I have provided the substantiation for each of these statements in my earlier monograph on UNRWA.
· UNRWA was set up to deal with only one set of refugees, Palestinians. The practices and policies that are applied to all other refugees do not apply to Palestinian refugees.
· UNRWA has created a unique definition for Palestinian refugees that is different from the definition applied to all other refugees in the world, and is destined to perpetuate and expand the number of Palestinian refugees.
· UNRWA provides the ideological framework for perpetuating the refugee crisis and in doing so undermines any prospect for a two-state solution.
· UNRWA indoctrinates generation after generation of Palestinians in this narrative and fosters the belief that Palestinians are refugees even while living in their own territory and that Israel is their eternal enemy, preventing Palestinians from focusing on the future and pursuing a better life for them and their families.
· UNRWA fosters the belief that the Palestinian refugee situation somehow is unique and different from that of all other refugees and must be dealt with differently.
· UNRWA has trapped Palestinians in a narrative where they are forever refugees and provides the rationale that there is only one just and lasting solution to their plight that precludes the existence of a Jewish state.
· UNRWA provides international legitimacy to this narrative and fosters the belief that Israel does not have the right to exist and will someday miraculously just disappear.
· UNRWA serves at the pleasure of Hamas and functions as its extension. Its employees are virtually all Palestinians, many of whom are Hamas members or have immediate family members who are Hamas members.
· UNRWA enables Hamas to function as purely a terrorist organization and obviates their need to provide any civil services to its people, breaking the link between the government and the people that exists in all other societies.
· UNRWA facilities serve to camouflage and protect Hamas military installations and infrastructure and shelter its leadership and members from reprisal.
· A material portion of UNRWA funds and materials meant to help the Palestinian people are used to support Hamas as a terrorist organization, allowing Hamas to build its vast network of tunnels, pay its members, and procure its weapons.
As a result of its mandate and actions, it’s hard to dispute that UNRWA is one of the biggest obstacles to peace in the region… although many will try.
Let me wrap up this monograph, by shifting to the individual level and looking at the behavior of two key executives at the United Nations, Francesca Albanese (the UN Special Rapporteur on Palestinian Human Rights) and Antonio Guterres (the UN Secretary General)[14].
Francesa Albanese was appointed as Special Rapporteur on May 1, 2022, by none other than the UNHRC, that unbiased and august UN entity known for its objectivity and lack of anti-Israel bias (I hope that these comments are dripping with the sarcasm with which they are meant).
Albanese is a blatant antisemite. Due to her UN position and title, she has toured the world speaking at conferences, universities, and to government officials around the world, including here in the United States. In her many speeches and interviews, Albanese has:
· Compared Israel to Nazi Germany (Holocaust inversion) and said that “Israeli leaders act like Adolph Hitler”.
· Claimed that the US government policy is controlled by a “Jewish Lobby”.
· Spread Hamas propaganda and denied the atrocities Hamas, together with other Palestinian citizens that crossed the border into Israel that day, committed on October 7 against Israeli men, women, children and infants.
· Accused Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza, saying that Israel has created purposeful “kill zones” in Gaza to target Gazan civilians.
· Called for arms embargoes against Israel without ever calling out Iran’s role in arming Hamas or Hezbollah.
And this is but the tip of the iceberg of Albanese’s false, defamatory and blatantly antisemitic statements. If you think this is a one-sided opinion on Albanese, let me share with you the opinion of the U.S. government, which has been highly critical of Albanese.
U.S. Officials, including U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield, have labeled Albanese “unfit for her role,” citing her antisemitism and bias against Israel. The Biden administration has condemned Albanese’s comments, such as describing the U.S. as “subjugated by the Jewish lobby” and comparing Israeli actions to genocide, as unfounded, inflammatory and blatantly antisemitic. In addition, Albanese’s reports and statements have repeatedly been dismissed by U.S. officials as lacking objectivity.
I’d like to conclude my comments on Albanese with links to two videos. The first is Albanese’s eight-minute evasive answer to the question, “Are you antisemitic?” UN Watch: Are you an antisemite? In a desire to bring some levity to what is undoubtedly a very depressing situation, the second is the link to someone imitating Albanese: Imitation of Albanese Answer to "Are you an antisemite". I think the person totally nails it!
Let me wrap up this section on the United Nations, by looking at the remarks of Antonio Guterres, the UN Secretary General. Guterres has consistently expressed a double standard when it comes to Israel and has repeatedly condemned Israel’s behavior since October 7, 2024, without equivalent scrutiny of Palestinian actions.
Unlike Albanese, however, who makes little effort to hide her antisemitism and hatred for Israel, Guterres prefers to hide behind a false aura of “evenhandedness”. Guterres is unable to denounce Hamas in any way, without also condemning Israel. And if you measure the two by either the emotional intensity of Guterres’ remarks or by the percentage of time spent denouncing either party, there is no question where Guterres’ sympathies and bias lies.
Let me provide a series of examples to substantiate this statement:
· After Hamas’ October 7, 2023 massacre, Guterres condemned the violence, but stated that these attacks did not occur “in a vacuum”, justifying Hamas’ terrorism by linking it to Israeli policies in the Gaza and the West Bank as though there could possibly be a justification for rape, the murder of babies and the elderly, the killing of children in front of parents and parents in front of children, and the desecration of people’s bodies after they were murdered by Hamas.
· When senior Hamas officials have said, not once but many times in multiple venues, that they would “repeat October 7 over and over again”, there was not a single word of condemnation of Hamas emanating from Guterres.
· Yet, Guterres repeatedly had no problem rushing to judgement and blaming Israel falsely for events taking place in Gaza. As just one example amongst many, Guterres immediately placed the blame on Israel for the explosion at al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza on October 18, 2023. Even when subsequent investigations by multiple nations indicated that the cause of the explosion was a failed rocket launched by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Guterres never corrected or retracted his statement.
· Guterres has no problem expressing “deep concern” over Israel’s military action in Gaza, describing them as causing “alarming” levels of destruction and civilian deaths, but he has yet to condemn Hezbollah or Hamas for launching rocket and missile attacks against Israeli cities and communities.
· Guterres in his remarks constantly creates a moral equivalence between Israel, a sovereign state, and Hamas, a terrorist organization. Unfortunately, this false moral equivalence is not overly surprising in light of the fact that Guterres refuses to label Hamas as a terrorist organization.
· In his many calls for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire”, urging all parties to respect international law and protect civilians, Guterres conveniently often forgets to even mention the fate of the Israeli hostages.
· Similarly, Guterres has consistently condemned Israel for Palestinian civilian deaths, but rarely, if ever, holds Hamas accountable for using Palestinians as human shields and locating their command centers in schools, mosques and hospitals.
Sadly, I could go on and on about Guterres’ underlying antipathy toward Israel and his disregard for Israeli/Jewish lives, but I think the examples I have provided offer enough evidence to substantiate my earlier statements.
In the interest of brevity, I haven’t even broached the staggering anti-Israel bias of the International Criminal Court (ICC)[15], and the unjustified and outrageous arrests warrants they have issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant, alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Unfortunately, this anti-Israel bias and antipathy is not limited to just the United Nations, but is shared by a wide number of NGO’s around the world. Perhaps, that is the only positive thing that I can say in the UN’s favor…
To name but two examples of what is a wide-spread phenomenon, Amnesty International has repeatedly denied Jewish historical ties to Israel, promoted antisemitic tropes in internal forums, and disproportionately targeted Israel for criticism while ignoring far more severe human rights violations elsewhere in the world. Similarly, the Human Rights Watch (HRW) has consistently demonstrated a strong ideologic bias against Israel, falsely labeling it as an apartheid state.
Nor for that matter has the International Committee for the Red Cross (ICRC) cloaked itself in glory in terms of its efforts. The ICRC has failed to visit a single hostage held by Hamas over the past six months and made, at best, a minimal effort to monitor the hostages’ well-being or deliver food and medication to them. Nor has the ICRC hesitated to participate in Hamas propaganda, with ICRC officials shaking hands with Hamas terrorists on stage as emaciated Israeli hostages were being paraded across the stage.
Let me conclude by saying that writing these words about the United Nations is personally painful for me. I grew up believing that the UN was an essential institution in fostering global peace and greater harmony among nations. It was a devastating blow to realize the scope of the UN’s animosity toward both Israel and Jews and realize how far it has descended from its lofty principles.
*****************************
I hope that you have found this monograph informative and of value. The next monograph in the Wake Up! series is: Part 5: Wake Up! –Islamofacism is a Threat to the West and Not Just to Israel. Please look for it in your inbox on March 14, 2025.
As always, please feel free to distribute this email as broadly as you would like. My goal in writing these emails is to educate as many people as I can.
If you received this email from a friend and would like to be added to the distribution going forward as well as read past monographs, they are all posted on Substack.com and can be accessed using the following link: tonybrenner.substack.com. Conversely, should you no longer wish to receive these emails, please let me know and I will stop sending them to you.
Finally, should you wish to email me directly, I can be reached at tony@pivotpointcap.com.
Take care,
Tony
[1] As with all my monographs, this one can be accessed on Substack.com using the following link: tonybrenner.substack.com.
[2] There was a single UNGA resolution condemning the behavior of six other countries: North Korea, Iran, Syria, Myanmar, Russia (for the Ukraine conflict), and the United States (for the Cuba embargo). Sudan, where a true genocide is occurring, didn’t have a single resolution condemning it. Nor did Venezuela despite the human rights abuses in that country under the Madero government. Nor for that matter did China, Cuba, Egypt or any number of other countries, where human rights abuses are rampant.
[3] Russia has a strategy called “Double Tap”, where they fire a rocket or missile at a target, wait for about 10 minutes until rescue workers arrive on site, and then fire a second rocket or missile at the very same location to kill the rescue workers and medics.
[4] Arab political parties have historically held, on average, about 15 of the 120 seats in the Knesset. Currently, Arab parties currently hold only 10 seats due to a combination of low Arab voter turnout and the splitting of votes between Arab parties, some of which did not reach the 3.25% threshold required for holding a seat.
[5] This is not to say, that there is not discrimination in Israel, for surely there is. However, I doubt there is a country in the world that can say, “There is no discrimination in our country”.
[6] Let me give you an example of what I mean by context. If a terrorist killed Israelis and the IDF pursued the terrorist, arrests him, and then destroys his family’s home to deter future terrorist attacks, the UNHRC would ignore all preceding events and condemn the destruction of the family home as a human rights violation. In a similar vein, the UNHRC would condemn Israel for killing a Palestinian woman, conveniently ignoring that she was a terrorist in the process of detonating a bomb. Context matters!
[7] Note that some UNHRC resolutions condemned multiple countries. As a result, if you sum the total number of condemnations of the countries listed, it exceeds the 56 total resolutions condemning all nations other than Israel because sometimes condemnations are thematic in nature and/or reflect multiple country condemnations.
[8] As an example, in the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Bosnia, the UN Women’s Rights Committee condemned mass rapes that were used to terrorize, humiliate, and impose domination over communities.
[9] In addition to being the site of the First Temple and the Second Temple, the Temple Mount is said to be the site where Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his son, Issac, demonstrating his ultimate faith in God. Since the destruction of the Second Temple, Jews worldwide direct their prayers toward the Temple Mount, underscoring its enduring sanctity. It is also considered by many Jews as a portal through which prayers ascend to heaven.
[10] According to the Bible, Abraham selected the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron as a burial site for his wife, Sarah. The cave is traditionally regarded as the burial place of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca and Leah, making Hebron central to Jewish heritage. In addition, Hebron was King David’s first capital, where he ruled for seven years, before establishing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
[11] Note further that Israeli hospitals treat all patients based on the urgency of their situation, not their nationality. As a result, a gravely wounded Palestinian terrorist is treated before less severely wounded Israeli citizens or soldiers.
[12]The blue line is the border between Lebanon and Israel.
[13] Given the weapons and manpower available to Hezbollah, the consequences of any such invasion would have been many times more severe, with far more loss of Israeli lives than what Hamas perpetrated on October 7, 2023.
[14] The UN Secretary General is the most senior position in the UN and, as such, is expected to speak on behalf the United Nations and articulate the organization’s views.
[15] Note that the ICC was established under the Rome Statute, a multilateral treaty that neither the United States nor Israel signed, rather than by a UN resolution. Nevertheless, it cooperates closely with the UN under a formal signed agreement.
