Spelling out ambiguities to a complicit international community

The address given by the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories (OPT) to the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee provided a more comprehensive approach than the usual repetitious rhetoric associated with the international institution. While the few blatant truths uttered by Michael Lynk are unlikely to dent international support for Israel’s colonisation of Palestine, his speech laid bare the deception and manipulation sustained across many years, particularly with regard to the two-state compromise that has bludgeoned Palestine beyond recognition.

Quoted in the Jerusalem Post, Lynk stated: “It is impossible to separate the occupation from Israel’s settlement project, if there were no settlements there would be no need for the occupation.” By expressing a simple truth that is ignored routinely by the international community, Lynk has managed to articulate the missing element in the usually superficial condemnation of Israel. The prevailing trend is to dissociate Israel’s military occupation from its colonial expansion to the point of oblivion. This has resulted in severe repercussions for the Palestinians in every aspect of human rights violations, as well as for the international response to such violations. Facilitating Israel’s normalisation through the elimination of colonial expansion from the mainstream narrative has resulted in predetermined, ineffective attempts to address Palestinian concerns without an affirmation that such violations are a direct consequence of colonial violence.

Departing from such an assertion, a multitude of contradictions is eliminated. “The deepening of the occupation, the constriction of basic human rights and the utter absence of a political horizon leading to self-determination for the Palestinians have reinforced an atmosphere of despair and hopelessness,” explained Lynk.

It is worth noting that the statement is void of the usual ambiguous references to hope, which has become a staple in patronising UN hyperbole. Indeed, the reference to “absence” underlines an urgency which the international community is equally adamant in refusing to address, preferring instead to continue relying upon convenience and generalised aims with the intention of detracting attention from the ramifications of colonial violence and expansion.

In this regard, Lynk also mentioned the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which, he pointed out, cannot be implemented in Palestine due to Israel’s repression in every aspect of Palestinian development, including unemployment and food insecurity. Israel, according to Lynk, has committed a “deliberate fragmentation of the OPT” and restrictions regarding development have also contributed to the deterioration of human rights.

This coherent approach dissects the many facades of both Israel and the international community, revealing inadequacies in rhetoric to be a contemptuous disregard for Palestinians in order to safeguard complicity and the resultant impunity of the Zionist state. Furthermore, Lynk has revealed what international institutions and human rights organisations prefer to ignore; the enormity of Palestinian isolation juxtaposed against knowledge that Israel is in violation of international law and that the international community concurs with the dynamic. If previous attempts to alleviate the repercussions due to Israeli oppression had managed to create some effort to safeguard elusive human rights, the unsustainable situation due to colonial expansion has rendered the entire international community both ridiculous and dangerous; the latter is evidenced by the permanent fragmentation that is now synonymous with Palestine.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.