Ban Ki-Moon’s Outrageous Op-Ed
On Sunday, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon published an op-ed in The New York Times to do what he does best: Pummel Israel while protesting against those who call him to task for it.
In the piece, Ban whined that the statements he made last week — first calling on both the Jewish state and the “occupied Palestinian territories” to stop the violence, and then doubling down on his assertion that Israeli “occupation” was the real culprit behind it — were unjustly ”twisted” to imply that he was justifying terrorism.
That the U.N. chief had said it was “human nature” for downtrodden people like the Palestinians to express their frustration through violence had something to do with Israel’s adverse reaction to his words, particularly since he hasn’t said such things about al-Qaida, Islamic State, Hezbollah or Boko Haram. You know, the group that on Saturday night burned 86 Nigerian villagers alive, among them many children.
But Ban nevertheless repeated his anti-Israel accusations.
To prove that he had been unfairly misquoted not once but twice, he clarified: “The stabbings, vehicle rammings and other attacks by Palestinians targeting Israeli civilians are reprehensible. So, too, are the incitement of violence and the glorification of killers. Nothing excuses terrorism. I condemn it categorically.”
Readers did not have time to heave the slightest sigh of relief, however, since Ban proceeded from there to explain why Israel is nevertheless responsible.
”It is inconceivable … that security measures alone will stop the violence,” he said. “As I warned the Security Council last week, Palestinian frustration and grievances are growing under the weight of nearly a half-century of occupation. Ignoring this won’t make it disappear. No one can deny that the everyday reality of occupation provokes anger and despair, which are major drivers of violence and extremism and Israeli settlements keep expanding. … Palestinians — especially young people — are losing hope over what seems a harsh, humiliating and endless occupation.”
Given the total falsehood of his depiction of the situation — for example, by omitting Israel’s withdrawal from more than 90% of the territory it obtained after the attempt of surrounding Arab armies to obliterate it in the Six-Day War — it is no wonder that his proposed solutions to the problem are so preposterous.
”We continue to work with Israel and the Palestinian Authority to rebuild Gaza and prevent another devastating conflict, and to press Palestinians for genuine national reconciliation,” he wrote, ignoring the fact that it has been impossible to “rebuild” Gaza, when Hamas has used all the American and European funds provided for this purpose to “rebuild” all of its terror tunnels through which to kidnap and kill Israelis. Oh, and to boast about this in near-daily video clips.
”Of course,” Ban continued, “a lasting agreement between Israel and Palestine will require difficult compromises by leaders and peoples on both sides.”
Indeed, Israel has made endless “difficult compromises,” for decades. This has led to repeated uprisings against the Israeli populace, such as the current spate of terrorism that surged in September, thanks in large measure to incitement emanating from official PA institutions and media outlets.
Ban’s prescription: “Palestinians must make political compromises to bring Gaza and the West Bank under a single, democratic governing authority according to principles laid down by their national umbrella organization, the Palestine Liberation Organization. This also means consistently and firmly denouncing terrorism and taking preventive action to end attacks on Israelis, including an immediate stop to Gaza tunnel construction.”
Obviously, if this were in the cards, it would have happened long ago. The trouble is that the only thing that Hamas and the PLO actually agree on is the imperative to eliminate the State of Israel.
Ban then reiterated his concern “that we are reaching a point of no return for the two-state solution. And I am disturbed by statements from senior members of Israel’s government that the aim should be abandoned altogether.”
One reason for his worry on this score, he wrote, is that the “stalemate” will lead to “a corrosion of the moral foundation of Israeli and Palestinian societies, ever more inured to the pain of the other.”
Yes, concluded Ban (after attacking Israel for “lashing out at every well-intentioned critic”): ”The status quo is untenable. Keeping another people under indefinite occupation undermines the security and the future of both Israelis and Palestinians.”
So basically Ban is angry at Israel for grasping the meaning of the words, not for “twisting” them.
More ridiculous than his protestations to the contrary, though, is the title of the piece, taken from his claim that Israel’s ire is a form of “shooting the messenger.” It is a metaphor he clearly does not know how to use properly, since he is a key source of the anti-Israel message — embraced by anti-Semites the world over — not some serf paid to deliver it.
Ruthie Blum is the web editor of The Algemeiner (algemeiner.com). This article was originally published by Israel Hayom.