Ynet is reporting that Richard Goldstone will be headed to Israel in July to tour Sderot and other Israeli towns effected by missile fire from Gaza. Mind you, Goldstone had wanted to visit these towns all along as part of the fact-finding mission into Operation Cast Lead and Israel refused to allow him to enter the country. Now, after his infamous Washington Post op-ed, Israel is waiting for him with open arms.
It’s not clear whether Goldstone will actually actively participate in Israeli hasbara efforts around the report, but it is worrisome that he seems open to possibily undermining it within the UN. Ynet reports:
[Israel’s former ambassador to the UN, Dan Gillerman] urged Goldstone to take additional measures to make sure that the UN Human Rights Council and other human rights organization take heed of his statement.
Goldstone suggested in response to first let the dust settle, but said that he would look into what goes on in the UN council.
This is obviously an ambiguous statement (and most likely based on Gillerman’s interpretation of the conversation), but any intervention Goldstone would make to discredit the report within the UN would be incredibly damaging.
The invitation to Goldstone has been extended by Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai, who also wrote Goldstone a letter following the recent Jerusalem bus bombing and Itamar attack to excoriate him for not speaking out. Yishai wrote in part:
This report that you publicized is what gives legitimacy to terror organizations to continue the cruel and indiscriminate shooting toward civilian settlements in the areas of the state. This report is what calms murderers without a conscience when they come to slaughter innocent children, knowing that they can always be assumed to be sacrifices afterwards.
Where is your voice now, Mr. Goldstone? Where is your voice when Hadas, a baby girl 3 months old, Elad, 4 years old, and Yoav, 11 years old, were slaughtered in their sleep – not by accident – but in cold blood by a despicable murderer?
This might explain why Goldstone made the strange and passing mention to Itamar in the Washington Post op-ed (“So, too, the Human Rights Council should condemn the inexcusable and cold-blooded recent slaughter of a young Israeli couple and three of their small children in their beds.”). I say it was strange because there has still not been any conclusive answer to who committed the murders in Itamar. To raise it in the context of war crimes committed by Hamas was misleading and irresposible.
Interesting enough, the Goldstone report specificaly quotes Yishai to demonstrate how Israeli leaders were calling for war crimes to be committed in Gaza during Cast Lead. The following is from Chapter 16 of the report which looks at the “objectives and strategy of Israel’s military operations in Gaza“:
The issue that is of special concern to the Mission is the conceptualization of the “supporting infrastructure.” The notion is indicated quite clearly in General Eisenkot’s statements in 2006 and reinforced by the reflections cited by non-serving but well-informed military thinkers.
On 6 January 2009, during the military operations in Gaza, Deputy Prime Minister Eli Yishai stated: “It [should be] possible to destroy Gaza, so they will understand not to mess with us.” He added that “it is a great opportunity to demolish thousands of houses of all the terrorists, so they will think twice before they launch rockets.” “I hope the operation will come to an end with great achievements and with the complete destruction of terrorism and Hamas. In my opinion, they should be razed to the ground, so thousands of houses, tunnels and industries will be demolished.” He added that “residents of the South are strengthening us, so the operation will continue until a total destruction of Hamas [is achieved].”
On 2 February 2009, after the end of the military operations, Eli Yishai went on: “Even if the rockets fall in an open air or to the sea, we should hit their infrastructure, and destroy 100 homes for every rocket fired.”
The report concludes:
To the extent to which statements such as that of Mr. Yishai on 2 February 2009 indicate that the destruction of civilian objects, homes in that case, would be justified as a response to rocket attacks (“destroy 100 homes for every rocket fired”), the Mission is of the view that reprisals against civilians in armed hostilities are contrary to international humanitarian law. Even if such actions could be considered a lawful reprisal, they do not meet the stringent conditions imposed, in particular they are disproportionate, and violate fundamental human rights and obligations of a humanitarian character.
Of course, Goldstone could use this trip to question Yishai on this call to collective punishment. The Ynet article would seem to indicate he has another agenda on his mind.
