Monday, July 24th | 1 Av 5777


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

February 2, 2016 10:52 am

Ban Ki-Moon’s Outrageous Op-Ed

avatar by Ruthie Blum

Email a copy of "Ban Ki-Moon’s Outrageous Op-Ed" to a friend
Ban Ki Moon, the Secretary General of the United Nations. He published an op-ed in The New York Times on Sunday. Photo: Wiki Commons.

Ban Ki Moon, the Secretary General of the United Nations, published an op-ed in The New York Times on Sunday. Photo: Wiki Commons.

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.‎

Related coverage

July 24, 2017 2:44 pm

The Washington Post Passes on Palestinian Incitement

On a near-daily basis, Palestinians encourage and praise violence against Israelis. And just as frequently, many major US news outlets -- the...

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 (‎ This article was originally published by Israel Hayom.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner