More UN moral malnourishment in the Middle East

Is there a more hypocritical, ineffective, biased and corrupt major institution in the world than the United Nations?

If you're spending time thinking about the question then let me save you the trouble as it's completely rhetorical.

From the UK's worst newspaper, the socialist rag The Guardian, comes this piece in which the authors discuss a supposedly secret document written by the UN's top man in Israel.

Of course, it dumps on the US, which makes it 100% likely that it will be leaked and reported. If it took aim at the UN itself or Middle Eastern troublemakers then it would still be safely locked away in a file at Turtle Bay, Manhattan.

The highest ranking UN official in Israel has warned that American pressure has "pummelled into submission" the UN's role as an impartial Middle East negotiator in a damning confidential report.

Since when has the UN been an impartial Middle East negotiator? Since the new Human Rights Commission was reconstituted the only country they've issued resolutions against is Israel in spite of the shocking activities of a seemingly increasing number of member nations. The UN's complicity in providing Israeli defence force locations to Hezbollah in last summer's conflict demonstrates exactly how impartial they really are.

The 53-page "End of Mission Report" by Alvaro de Soto, the UN's Middle East envoy, obtained by the Guardian, presents a devastating account of failed diplomacy and condemns the sweeping boycott of the Palestinian government. It is dated May 5 this year, just before Mr de Soto stepped down.

The revelations from inside the UN come after another day of escalating violence in Gaza, when at least 26 Palestinians were killed after Hamas fighters launched a major assault. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, head of the rival Fatah group, warned he was facing an attempted coup.

And as it turned out - he's right. Hamas is taking over.

Mr de Soto condemns Israel for setting unachievable preconditions for talks and the Palestinians for their violence. Western-led peace negotiations have become largely irrelevant, he says.

Israel's precondition for talks rests solely on Hamas, Fatah and others formally recognising Israel's right to exist as well as stopping rocket attacks and the kidnapping of soldiers. For the UN's top official in Israel to deem that to be an 'unachievable precondition' seems somewhat telling.

Mr de Soto is a Peruvian diplomat who worked for the UN for 25 years in El Salvador, Cyprus and Western Sahara. He says:

The international boycott of the Palestinians, introduced after Hamas won elections last year, was "at best extremely short-sighted" and had "devastating consequences" for the Palestinian people

What neither Mr de Soto or The Guardian are telling you is that money is pouring into Gaza at an even greater rate than before the 'boycott'. In fact, the reason Hamas can carry on its campaign of internecine violence is because it has so much money to run the government that it's not under any pressure to spend time actually governing.

Israel has adopted an "essentially rejectionist" stance towards the Palestinians

The whole Arab world rejects Israel's right to exist but it's the Israelis who are "essentially rejectionist"? This man's moral compass is seriously out of whack.

The Quartet of Middle East negotiators - the US, the EU, Russia and the UN - has become a "side-show"

I suppose it would. The main event, Hamas v Fatah, brought live to you every day by CNN is much more interesting.

The Palestinian record of stopping violence against Israel is "patchy at best, reprehensible at worst"

At least he acknowledges that the Palestinians are doing nothing to prevent violence. If Israel had not have built a dirty great wall in the West Bank then who knows what carnage they'd be suffering now?

Mr de Soto acknowledges in the report that he is its sole author. It was meant only for senior UN officials, and its wording is far more critical than the public pronouncements of UN diplomats. Last night, Mr de Soto, who is in New York, told the Guardian: "It is a confidential document and not intended for publication."

In January last year, the Quartet called on the newly elected Hamas government to commit to non-violence, recognise Israel and accept previous agreements. When Hamas refused to sign up to the principles, the international community halted direct funding to the Palestinian government and Israel started to freeze the monthly tax revenues that it had agreed to pass to the Palestinians. Several hundred million dollars remain frozen.

As I said, they have more money than they need in order to provide government services so they're building up their armaments at a great rate in order to defeat Fatah.

Mr de Soto, who had opposed the boycott, said this position "effectively transformed the Quartet from a negotiation-promoting foursome guided by a common document [the road map for peace] into a body that was all-but imposing sanctions on a freely elected government of a people under occupation as well as setting unattainable preconditions for dialogue".

What people are under occupation? Israel moved out of Gaza a couple of years ago leaving the Palestinians clear to look after themselves. The fact that they chose to elect a terrorist organisation doesn't make Hamas any more morally legitimate than were the Nazis.

The EU said yesterday that there was an imminent risk of civil war if fighting went on, and UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon urged support for Mr Abbas's efforts "to restore law and order".

Earth to the EU. Two legitimately recognised sides fighting for political control of a territory that they are both native to is called a civil war.

The article then finishes up by reporting about the ongoing hostilities. When Sharon decided to pull out of Gaza it was viewed by Hamas, Fatah, Hezbollah and other terrorist organisations as proof that their violent tactics had worked. This view was widely supported by left wing elites around the world that highlighted the success the so-called freedom fighters had achieved in driving Israel out. The fact is that Sharon was far cannier than his opponents and understood that by leaving Gaza the violent reality of Hamas and Fatah would be exposed for all the world to see.

And now the world can see it. The result? Blame America!

There are few starker examples that the United Nations is the enemy of freedom than this one.