Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, called on the international community to cease funding the UN after Friday’s UN general assembly vote, which did not condemn Hamas.
“Every honest country should defund the UN. Until the bias stops and the antisemitism stops, we can no longer continue business as usual,” he told Fox News. Erdan said the recent resolution was “unfathomable”, saying it showed the UN had “completely lost its legitimacy and relevance”.
The UN and its bodies suffer from Schrödinger’s legitimacy.
In that its legitimacy depends on whether the country in question that talks about it got its way or not.
If the country in question managed to veto (or get the veto holders to veto) a resolution then the UN will be touted as legitimate.
If not, or a resolution they wanted to get adopted fails, then it’s illegitimate, biased and flawed.
Same for its bodies like the ICC, if it goes after a country’s enemy then the ICC is to be respected and it’s legitimate, if the ICC however goes after the country in question then it’s illegitimate.
“Country in question” in this is any given country that happens to be making statements about the UN.
Surprisingly it’s almost never brought up that the UN is made up of individual countries and is, aside from the veto process and fixed seats in some of its bodies, an institution that’s utilizes a democratic process in its decision making.
deleted by creator
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Gilad Erdan, called on the international community to cease funding the UN after Friday’s UN general assembly vote, which did not condemn Hamas.
The UN secretary-general, António Guterres, said on Sunday he regretted that “instead of a critically needed humanitarian pause, supported by the international community, Israel has intensified its military operations”.
More than 2 million people, with nowhere safe to go, are being denied the essentials for life – food, water, shelter and medical care – while being subjected to relentless bombardment.
The two men “agreeed on efforts to get crucial food, fuel, water and medicine to those who need it, and to get foreign nationals out”, according to a Downing Street spokesperson.
According to a readout by Macron’s office, the leaders also reaffirmed Israel’s right to defend itself within the limits of international law and the importance of finding a way to release the hostages held by Hamas.
In a sign of the tensions being created in some of the debates at the UN, Thailand reproached Erdan, Israel’s UN ambassador, for showing a video to the UN general assembly depicting a Hamas terrorist attempting to behead a Thai national during the 7 October attack.
The original article contains 866 words, the summary contains 201 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Same UAE that’s a major gun supplier in Africa? Some of these critical nations are weirdly hypocritical. There are plenty of children in the Horn of Africa and Yemen that want their lives back.
Is this whatabautism?
Hypocrisy.
Sounds like whataboutism to me
The test is usually whether someone is defending the indefensible, or going to absurdity in misdirection.
Like defending some small irrelevant claim that has no bearing on the discussion.
- The Difference Between “Whataboutism” and Calling Out Hypocrisy
- Whataboutism Is A Nonsense Word That Defends Hypocrisy
I’m fairly sure I’m calling them hypocrites without defending atrocities. The UAE were kinda already on this shit list and don’t readily admit it, AFAIK. That Israel is on the list is a no brainer too.
Sick sources dude.
/s