By: Ariel Kahana
The United Nations has always been an extremely challenging arena for Israeli representatives. During the six months of Israel’s war with Hamas, with pro-Hamas protesters flooding the streets outside and supporters of the terrorists aiding them inside the building, the difficulties have become immense. Yet, it seems that the past 10 days have been particularly intense.
It began last Thursday with an attempt to gain recognition for a Palestinian state at the Security Council. At the start of this week, as we celebrated the Passover Seder, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres once again downplayed the horrific sexual crimes committed by Hamas on Oct. 7, and which it continues to commit against the abductees. On the same day, an “independent commission of inquiry” into the United Nations Relief and Works Agency’s (UNRWA) involvement with Hamas essentially whitewashed the organization.
As if that weren’t enough, the situation in the United States, particularly in New York City—the host city of the United Nations—is far from promising regarding Israel. On one hand, the administration and Congress approved a massive aid package to Israel and repeatedly vetoed anti-Israel measures in the Security Council. On the other hand, pro-Hamas vandalism on campuses is reaching new heights, and the same Democratic administration echoes the allegations of “starvation in Gaza” and considers imposing sanctions on Israeli soldiers.
Amid all this and more, between Security Council meetings and U.N. debates, with the holiday in the middle, I spoke with Israeli Ambassador Gilad Erdan. We spoke twice, with midnight on his end and early morning on ours.
Erdan, a former Israeli Diplomatic-Security Cabinet member and for four years an ambassador in the toughest arena for Israeli representatives, is considered a serious public figure who goes into detail. At the beginning of his tenure, he simultaneously served as ambassador to the United States and the United Nations, and since then, he has been Israel’s most prominent figure in the American media. Today, by virtue of his U.N. role, he is in daily contact with the American U.N. ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, but much of what transpires between them and their delegations will be revealed only when the archives are opened.
These days, Erdan is writing a book about the lessons he learned from four tumultuous years of battles at an organization meant to bring peace to the world. His main conclusion is that after the war, Israel will need to redefine the rules of engagement with the UN, and do so using all the tools at its disposal, including potentially closing its offices and revoking permits for its personnel.
The diplomatic role has removed him from the political arena, where he has been active for decades. One can assume that if he does not return to the position of ambassador to Washington, he will resume his activities in the Likud, and there is every reason to believe that with the background and experience he has accumulated, he will eventually run for the leadership of the party and the premiership in the post-Netanyahu era. The rules, of course, currently prohibit him from discussing his future. What is certain, for now, is that there are far more pressing matters at hand.
Right at the start of his tenure in 2020, Erdan had to contend with Secretary-General Guterres (“Call me Antonio,” he told Erdan in their first conversation) evading any praise for the Abraham Accords. Instead of expressing joy at the outbreak of peace, the secretary-general voiced concern about the potential harm to the Palestinians as a result of the agreements. This was their first quarrel. There have been many more since.
At the start of the Gaza war in 2023, against the backdrop of Guterres’s support for Hamas and disregard for the crimes it committed against humanity, Erdan called for his dismissal. Even though he is a combative ambassador, the situation at the United Nations has hardly improved since, from Israel’s perspective.
Q: Why doesn’t Israel withdraw from the United Nations? After all, this organization causes us far more harm than benefit. As long as we’re members, we must abide by its rules and are bound by its decisions.
A: This is a valid question. I too ask it in moments of great frustration and anger, over the hypocrisy and double standards. But ultimately, I don’t think leaving the United Nations will cause countries to say, “Oh, Israel left, so let’s fix what needs to be fixed because it’s not here.” On the contrary, leaving would play into the hands of our enemies, and the arena would remain hostile. At the moment, leaving the United Nations is like boycotting the international media because it is against us. In the meantime, we have a platform to voice our opinions and try to persuade our allies, and we are using it. I agree with you that there needs to be a reform in the United Nations’ relations with Israel, regarding all its operations in the Middle East. But it needs to happen after the war. Only if we fail in it and all alternatives are exhausted will there be a need to consider that.
Q: The U.N.’s commission of inquiry into UNRWA’s involvement in terrorism, chaired by former French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna, has published its findings. They claim that Israel did not prove UNRWA and its employees’ involvement in terrorism.
A: As soon as we saw who the secretary-general appointed, we knew it would be a whitewash. The U.N. Watch organization, led by Hillel Neuer, has already exposed the conflicts of interest of the commission’s members. It was clear that the secretary-general was orchestrating the whitewashing of UNRWA’s crimes through a commission whose findings were predetermined.
There is a problem of deep rot at the United Nations, and it is not only due to its political structure, where there are almost a third of Islamic states and an automatic majority against Israel. The distortion is also in the U.N.’s supposedly non-political mechanism, and there is no shortage of evidence for this.
For example, Martin Griffiths, who is the under secretary-general in charge of OCHA [the U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs], said that Hamas is not a terrorist group. Why? Because only the Security Council has the right to declare terrorist organizations. Hamas and Hezbollah have not been declared terrorist organizations because Russia or China have not allowed it to happen. This is one of the insane distortions.
Here is another example. At one point, while attending the Security Council meeting, I showed a stone that had been thrown at an Israeli in the West Bank and injured him. I did this because the U.N. reports refuse to count stone-throwing and Molotov cocktails as acts of terrorism. They report on every graffiti and olive tree that is cut down [by Jewish settlers], but not on stone throwing. That’s how the Security Council gets a completely distorted picture of what is happening.
Israel can prevent this and simply not allow U.N. personnel to enter the country, revoke the permit of UNRWA and other U.N. institutions in Israel until things change. “You won’t report the truth? You won’t be allowed into the country.” This is how we should act on the day after the war. We must not blink.
(JNS.org)
Originally published by Israel Hayom, this interview has been edited for length.