Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

reads.

Switzerland, the UN and the Club of despots

on Friday of last week in the UN headquarters in New York: Eight times the General Assembly on resolutions from right to Israel. Eight times Israel is condemned for his behavior. Switzerland – officially a neutral country to be agreed seven resolutions, in the case of a you contains.

The inputs to the Anti-Israel resolutions all came from countries such as North Korea, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia. It is a transparent game: By denouncing Israel, draw from their own, far their people engrave rights violations.

Switzerland does not seem to interfere with this. Also not that on that day Israel will be reprimanded. All the other States come out unscathed. If it runs similar as in the past, Israel will come to the end of the year on 20 of Rügen by the UN General Assembly (15 of which are supported by Switzerland), all other countries together on a total of six.

That the Federal Council must now fear Cassis to his re-election, is likely to have something to do with his Israel-friendly setting.

venue change. Geneva, in early March of this year in the UN human rights Council. For the first time in its 13-year history, the panel decides to condemn Saudi Arabia. So far, this state, which executes people publicly was activists, women's rights and critical journalists to jail has been prosecuted, never. In contrast to Israel, the dozens of Rügen, a little more than all the other countries of the world suffered–. Finally, keep an eye on Saudi Arabia, is thrown, is due to the brutal murder of Journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who has caused outrage. For even States as well as Liechtenstein, Iceland and Norway are the majority of the EU-the human rights are more important than the fear of possible counter-measures by the hard-to-rich Petro-state.

But a country that is strong, otherwise, especially as a guardian of human rights, denied the Resolution, the signature of the Switzerland. Obviously you do not want to jeopardise its economic relations with Riyadh. The vote in Switzerland, the behavior regarding Israel amazed, because with Ignazio Cassis is an Israel-friendly politicians, the Department of foreign Affairs (FDFA) protrudes. As parliamentarians, Cassis was a member of the group Switzerland - Israel, as the Federal Council, he criticised last year after Jordan's trip to the UN relief and works Agency for Palestine refugees (UNRWA) – a taboo in the earlier a rather Israel-critical EDA.

Cassis’ Statement made in left-hand circles for great indignation. The Ticino is more than any other Federal councillor met with hostility, that he must, unlike his party colleague Karin Keller-Sutter trepidation to his re-election, is likely to have something to do with his Israel-friendly setting.

Jositsch for transparency

which is Why Switzerland still mostly against Israel? After Cassis the pressure from the left? Corina Eichenberger-Walther, assignor FDP national councillor and President of the group Switzerland - Israel, believes: "The diplomats do not lead a life of their own, Cassis has to all Depths in the handle."

so Who ultimately decides how Switzerland votes for UN resolutions? The diplomats themselves? The Department of foreign Affairs is, in spite of repeated demand only the evasive answer: "The Swiss Vote to UN resolutions is defined by the FDFA in Bern. The position reference is made to consultation for the Matter to international-focused service of the Federal administration."

a Few days later it is called from the EDA of a sudden: "the recommendations regarding The voting behaviour of Switzerland were submitted to the Federal Council Cassis". The foreign Minister is not available for any comments.

The decision-making process, even for long-standing MP opaque. "I have no idea why Switzerland are voting on so and not otherwise", says the SP-councillor Daniel Jositsch, one of the few Left that support Israel tend to be. He will call for more transparency, he promises on the phone.

The Muslim countries and questionable States from other regions often form a Pact, a Club of despots.Kacem El Ghazzali, Moroccan-Swiss publicist

He wouldn't be the first politician to try this. In December 2017, SVP national councillor Alfred army submitted an Interpellation in which he asked, among other things, whether the entire Federal Council had regard to "the shameful vote of the Swiss Delegation behavior" in the UN . Here, too, the answer was ambiguous. The above-mentioned Anti-Israel resolutions would be supported "by a large majority of the UN General Assembly, including those in countries represented in the middle East conflict, the same or a similar position as Switzerland" it was said in the opinion of the Federal Council. In fact, Switzerland is usually the same as the majority of the EU countries.

addiction Who behave according to the reasons for the vote, you should know that diplomacy is always a barter. Who wants to bring their own concerns, must provide services in return. In the Muslim countries and the countries of the world's other worthy areas pass in the UN, nobody. "These often form a Pact, a Club of despots," says Kacem El Ghazzali, a Moroccan-Swiss publicist, which is working since 2012 in the human rights Council for freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

About Palestine every week

Controversial speaking, this is due to the fact that Switzerland is aiming for a seat in the powerful UN security Council. Without the votes of the "club of the despot" is this much. How such ambitions can affect the voting behavior shown in the example of Canada, which would also be in the security Council: Since the candidacy is known, the behaviour of the Israel-friendly country will be voting on middle East issues completely changed.

According to El Ghazzali tactical Considerations are only part of the problem. At least as important is the attitude of the majority of the Western diplomats was. "For many of them Israel is the epitome of Evil. There is a General consensus largely, it shows in every conversation."

How big is the influence of Israel's enemy States, especially the United Nations human rights Council in Geneva. A year after the Foundation was established for the meetings, a fixed agenda. Under agenda Item 7 since then, mandatory to be spoken every Time over the "human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories". There are no other conflict area, it is a comparable Item. Accordingly, Israel is often condemned.

"commitment would isolate in wide circles"

Last year, demanded FDP-Nationalrat Hans-Ulrich Bigler, in a Motion that Switzerland's commitment to the abolition of this unequal treatment. The Swiss Israelite community Federation (SIG), an umbrella Association of the Swiss Jews, supported the claim.

foreign Minister, Ignazio Cassis spoke out against "agenda Item 7 is part of a fragile compromise that keeps the human rights Council since the beginning of (...) together". He didn't understand the point of this deck but in the interest of Swiss foreign policy: "A commitment to the abolition of Item 7 would isolate in wide circles." The Council of States rejected the Motion finally with 106 to 77 votes, mainly thanks to the Ratslinken, which voted almost unanimously against. Thus the national Council was based on the 47 members of the comprehensive body called the "human rights Council", the currently countries such as Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Cuba, Eritrea, Qatar and China are members. In the new year a couple of illustrious countries, including Venezuela, Sudan, and Libya. The prominent UN critic Hillel Neuer of the UN Watch recently tweeted: "I wish I had invented this. But I didn't. Is this really true".


This Text is from the current issue. Now all of the articles in the E-Paper of the Sunday newspaper, read: App for iOS App for Android – Web-App

Created: 26.11.2019, 07:27 PM

Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.