The Goldstone Report

The Goldstone Report, the result of the United Nations Human Rights Council Fact-Finding Mission on Israel's Operation Cast Lead -- which alleges that Israel "committed actions amounting to war crimes, possibly crimes against humanity" -- was published on September 15, 2009. See the 575-page document. The report has been endorsed by the U.N. Human Rights Council, and is pending debate in the U.N. General Assembly.

On November 3, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution condemning the report. Learn how your representative voted (344 to 36, with 22 voting present).

The Mandate of the Mission:

• The one-sided mandate of the Gaza Fact-Finding Mission, and the resolution that established it, gave serious reasons for concern both to Israel and to the many states on the Council which refused to support it - including the member states of the European Union, Switzerland, Canada, Korea and Japan.
• It also troubled many distinguished individuals, including former High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, who refused invitations to head the Mission and admitted that it was "guided not by human rights but by politics."

The Conduct of the Mission:

• These concerns were exacerbated by the conduct of the Mission itself, including reports in the Palestinian media that, throughout its visits to Gaza, it was continuously accompanied by Hamas officials, and its refusal to recuse members of the mission with clear political views on the issues under investigation. One mission member signed a letter to the Sunday Times saying that Israel's actions against Hamas attacks were acts of “aggression not self-defense,” prejudging the investigation before it had even begun.
• The unprecedented holding of telecast hearings also gave cause for concern. The fact that all the witnesses were prescreened and selected, and none were asked questions relating to any Palestinian terrorist activity or the location of weaponry and terrorists in civilian areas only supports concerns that they were part of an orchestrated political campaign.
  

A “non-judicial” document

• Justice Goldstone as Head of the Mission repeatedly insisted that the Mission was not a judicial inquiry and so "could not reach judicial conclusions." On this basis he justified the inclusion of partisan mission members, admitting that their involvement “would not be appropriate for a judicial inquiry.” The Report, however, is highly judicial in nature, reaching conclusive judicial determinations of guilt, and including 'detailed legal findings' even in the absence of the sensitive intelligence information which Israel did not feel able to provide. These determinations are made notwithstanding the Report's admission that it does not “pretend to reach the standard of proof applicable in criminal trials.”
  

Elements ignored by the Report:

• The Report all but ignores the deliberate terrorist strategy of operating in the heart of densely populated civilian areas which dictated the arena of battle. Even when the Hamas terrorists mixed among civilians, the Report rejects the notion that there was an intention to put the civilian population at risk.
• Astonishingly, despite the many widely reported instances in the international press of the abuse of civilian facilities by terrorist groups, and the statements of Hamas own leaders praising women and children who acted as human shields, the Report repeatedly stated that it could find no evidence of such activities. This, despite its admission that those interviewed were "reluctant to speak about the presence or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups".
• The Report also ignores Israel's extensive efforts, even in the midst of fighting, to maintain humanitarian standards. While it does, reluctantly, acknowledge Israel's “significant efforts” to issue warnings before attacks, it does not find any of these efforts to be effective
• While the Report passes judgment against Israel in respect of almost any allegation, it seeks to absolve Hamas of almost any wrongdoing. The word “terrorist” is almost entirely absent. Soldier Gilad Shalit, now held incommunicado in captivity for over three years, was “captured during an enemy incursion” and the Hamas members that the Mission met with in Gaza are thanked as the “Gaza authorities” for extending their full cooperation and support to the Mission.
• Even the thousands of rocket attacks against Israelis which necessitated the Gaza Operation are given the most cursory treatment and, indeed, the Report indirectly blames Israel even for these by terming them "reprisals".
  

Rejection of democratic values:

• In a Report which relies so heavily on Israeli human rights organizations and which also petitions on sensitive security issues to Israel's Supreme Court, the Report devotes considerable attention to “repression of dissent in Israel.” It bases this assertion in large part on the widespread support for the military operation in the Israeli public, assuming that Israel has “created a political climate in which dissent is not tolerated.” The notion that the majority of Israelis genuinely supported action to bring years of continuous rocket and missile attacks against Israeli civilians to an end does not appear to have occurred to the members of the Mission.
• The Report is also critical of Israeli internal investigations, even though these compare favorably to investigations of allegations in military matters in most western countries, and have regularly resulted in criminal investigations and convictions.
  

Recommendations:

• The Report's recommendations are as one-sided as its findings. It seeks to harness the Human Rights Council, the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court and the international community as part of its hostile political campaign.
• Despite token recommendations in respect of the Palestinian side, international pressure is directed solely against Israel.
• The true test of such a Report can only be whether in future conflicts it will have the effect of increasing or decreasing respect for the rule of law. Regrettably a one-sided report of this nature, claiming to represent international law, can only weaken the standing of law in future conflicts. At the same time, it will broadcast a deeply troubling message to terrorist groups wherever they are that the cynical tactics of seeking to exploit civilian suffering for political ends actually pays dividends.
  

Talking points:

• Israel's military operation in Gaza took place after thousands of rockets had rained down on population centers for many years resulting in many deaths and injuries and making life for almost one million people a constant nightmare. It should also be remembered that Israel had completely withdrawn from the Gaza Strip and dismantled every settlement there in the hope that this step would create conditions conducive to peace.
  
• After unsuccessful efforts to prevent the rocket attacks through non-violent means, Israel, exercising its right of self-defense, launched a military operation against the terrorists in Gaza. Hamas combatants, not wearing military uniforms and against international legal norms and basic morality, embedded themselves in heavily populated civilian areas, using apartment complexes, schools, mosques and hospitals as bases of operation.
• Israel, as it has always done under these extremely difficult circumstances, made serious efforts to target combatants in ways that would limit noncombatant casualties. Unfortunately, in times of war, especially this kind of asymmetric warfare, mistakes will be made, and tragically, innocent lives will be lost. That certainly was the case in Gaza, as it has been in the wars being fought by American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both Israel and the U.S. are learning about the challenges and dilemmas posed by conflict with an adversary that glorifies the "martyrdom" of women and children.
• Unlike the terrorists and authoritarian regimes, Israel, as a democracy with self-correcting mechanisms, acknowledges its mistakes and conducts serious, credible, and ongoing examinations of its military conduct, not because a biased UN body calls for it, but because the IDF seeks to reflect the values of the Jewish people, including the sanctity of life. Those who are found to have violated the IDF's code of conduct are prosecuted and punished.
• The UN Human Rights Council habitually demonizes and singles-out Israel for criticism, and ignores gross human rights abuses occurring in countries like Iran, Sudan and China. Its activities undermine respect for human rights and the rule of law. We hope that renewed U.S. participation in the Council will result in major reforms.
• Ultimately, the solution to this tragic violence is a successful peace process that will lead to two states for two peoples. The Goldstone Report, unfortunately, will not contribute to that result. It will encourage extremists on the Palestinian side to believe that the UN can be used as a tool in the campaign to delegitmize Israel.
  

This Report evoked outrage throughout Israel, including from President Shimon Peres who declared that it "makes a mockery of history and fails to distinguish between aggressor and those acting in self-defense." Read the Israeli Foreign Ministry's response and see an FAQ.

In July 2009, Israel reported on its own investigation into Operation Cast Lead, "The Operation in Gaza, Factual and Legal Aspects."

The State Department is continuing to review the Report. Assistant Secretary Philip Crowley said, "there was a one-sided unacceptable mandate for this fact-finding investigation and that mandate was set forth before the United States joined the Human Rights Council. We should be cautious at this point that the Report should not be used as a mechanism to add impediments to getting back to the peace process."

Ambassador Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, stated, "The United States is reviewing very carefully what is a very lengthy document. We have long expressed our very serious concern with the mandate that was given by the Human Rights Council prior to our joining the Council, which we viewed as unbalanced, one sided and basically unacceptable. We have very serious concerns about many of the recommendations in the report. We will expect and believe that the appropriate venue for this report to be considered is the Human Rights Council and that is our strong view. And most importantly our view is that we need to be focused on the future. This is a time to work to cement progress towards the resumptions of negotiations and their early and successful conclusion and our efforts, and we hope the efforts of others, will be directed to that end."

On November 3, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelming (344-36) in favor of a resolution to condemn the report. Speaking in support of the resolution, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, "The report not only paints a distorted picture of Israel's legitimate efforts of self-defense, in my opinion, but it epitomizes the practice of singling Israel out from all other nations for condemnation. The Human Rights Council mandate for the report specifically targeted Israeli actions, ignoring the deliberate Hamas attacks on civilians that provoked Israel's self-defense in Cast Lead." Learn how your representative voted. (344 to 36, with 22 voting present).

Similarly, Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, called the report a "pompous, tendentious, one-sided political diatribe." Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), ranking Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and one of the key sponsors of the resolution, said the UN is "continuing its relentless anti-Israel bias" and that Congress must enact "pending legislation that would leverage our contributions to the UN to produce sweeping, meaningful reform of that body." Read some of their comments from JTA. Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, called the report a "pompous, tendentious, one-sided political diatribe." Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), ranking Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the UN is "continuing its relentless anti-Israel bias" and that Congress must enact "pending legislation that would leverage our contributions to the UN to produce sweeping, meaningful reform of that body." Read their comments from JTA.

A number of JCPA national agencies have also responded. See the Anti-Defamation League's response and the American Jewish Committee's response.

We hope that in the days ahead the administration will more clearly and sharply repudiate the Report, and more members of Congress and prominent members of the community, especially lawyers and jurists, will speak out as well.

More resources about the findings of the Goldstone Report:
Media coverage from the New York Times, Washington Post, Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, and JTA.

Op-Eds and Articles:
Alan Dershowitz, UN Investigation of Israel Discredits Itself and Undercuts Human Rights
NGO Monitor, Goldstone Report: 575 pages of NGO "cut and paste"
Melanie Phillips, The Moral Inversion of Richard Goldstone
Gerald Steinberg, U.N. Smears Israeli Self-Defense As “War Crimes”