Israel versus Human Rights

by Mark Pickles

The ‘Human Rights’ movement is the most specious and insidious ideology of our times. It is a false god for Western nations, and it is used by the Islamic and Communist nations to dupe the West. My friend, the historian Professor Richard Landes, has written an excellent essay on this phenomenon, titled Demopaths and Dupes.

Richard explains how the non-Western nations invoke the West’s faith in Human Rights against the West, in order to achieve political aims. And yet Islamic and Communist nations adhere to none of the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The ‘Human Rights’ movement, then, is counterproductive. It undermines the West and shields the Islamic and Communist nations because at every international forum of Human Rights, every nation picks on a single scapegoat to deflect attention away from its own abuses of people. The scapegoat is, of course, the single Jewish nation. Western, Islamic and Communist nations can all agree that condemnations of Human Rights should be directed uniquely at Israel, which ironically, is, with Cyprus, the only nation in the Middle East that adheres to any sensible and moral definition of Human Rights.

The UN General Assembly (UNGA, founded in 1945) and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC, founded in 2006), in their histories, have issued more nation-specific condemnations against Israel than against all the other nations of the world combined (catalogued by UN Watch). In the first decade of the UNHCR, the organisation issued 62 condemnations of Israel, and 55 condemnations for the rest of the world combined.

Similarly, all Human Rights NGOs I can think of are obsessed with Israel, such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Quakers, the Red Cross, the World Council of Churches and, of course, the Muslim NGOs, such as in the West, the Muslim Council of Britain, founded in 1997, the Muslim Association of Britain, founded in 1997, the Council of Islamic-American Relations (CAIR), founded in 1994, and Collectif contre l’islamophobie founded in France in 2003. The Muslim organisations are Western fronts of the Muslim Brotherhood, that appeal to Western human rights – including ‘diversity and inclusion’ – hiding behind the shield of ‘Islamophobia’, and at the same time imposing so much fear on Western societies that, here in the UK for instance, we now have de facto Sharia law. In England, blasphemy laws were abolished in 2008, but if anyone is perceived by the Muslim communities, and the Muslim charities, to have blasphemed against Islam, he or she is at risk of death by Muslim lynch mobs, as explained here by writer/broadcaster Emma Webb, concerning the English town of Batley. UK Parliament refuses to properly tackle or even discuss this evil, for fear of causing ‘Islamophobia’ in the UK, and for fear of losing their democratic mandate in Muslim-populated areas. Similarly, UK Parliament all but ignores Islamic antisemitism. In this episode – a convoy of cars with loudspeakers in a Jewish area of London promising to rape the mothers and daughters of Jews – the protagonists were arrested, only two of whom were charged, but with no consequences.  

For more details on the threat of Islamism to Israel and the West, see the 10,000 word joint essay I wrote with Professor Richard Landes in November 2020. And see the website of the organisation NGO Monitor, for cataloguing and research of the NGOs I’ve mentioned, and many other NGOs.

Of course, historically, Jews in every nation (especially Christian nations) were blamed for the nation’s ills. Today, the Jewish nation is blamed for the world’s ills.

As we know, Jew hatred is the world’s oldest hatred. It is also the world’s most lethal hatred: lethal for everyone, not least the hater.

And as we know, Jew hatred starts with the Jews but never ends with the Jews. Within the last century we have the historical lessons of the Dreyfus Affair, and World War II, and, following the murder or expulsion of all Jews of the Middle East, we have the extant genocide of Christians in Islamic nations of the Middle East and Africa. The West diligently ignores this extant genocide of Christians. If Christians like me criticise triumphalist Muslims, the same Muslims invoke human rights, on the grounds that I am ‘Islamophobic’ and therefore abuser of their human rights. At the same time, leaders of the Islamic nations seem not really to care about the ‘Human Rights’ of anyone, including Muslims. Most Islamic nations today are in violent conflict with themselves or with the nations on their borders. And the Islamic nations ignore the persecution of Muslims in China, just as the leaders of Christian nations ignore the persecution of Christians in China (as exposed here by the Christian charity Open Doors UK).

At the time of writing, the UNHRC has nominated the Islamic Republic of Iran to chair its next forum this November. It makes sense actually, what better nation to chair the antisemitic UNHRC than the very nation that is overtly unequivocal in its ambition to eradicate Israel? What better nation to chair the UNHRC than the nations whose ‘Quds Force’ exists to take Jerusalem and rename it Al-Quds, in anticipation of the twelfth imam, who will fight with the Muslim prophet Jesus (‘Isa son of Maryam’) to effect the Islamic Apocalypse?

The fact that Iran violates every single one of the UNGA 30 articles of Human Rights is trumped by Iran’s anti-Israelism. No nation in the world is better qualified than Iran to pursue the goals of the UN’s Human Rights Council.

How and why did Human Rights become the scandal it is today?

In 1948 in Paris, leaders and influencers in culture, law and politics from 58 nations gathered at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to proclaim ‘The Universal Declaration of Human Rights’.

The structure of the document – and to some extent the content of the document – was based on the Napoleonic Code: the first modern pan-national system of legal coding, adopted throughout Europe, Latin America, and much of the French Empire (or if not fully adopted, the Napoleonic Code nevertheless deeply influenced the systems put in place by nations aiming to modernise).

I think that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, derived from the Napoleonic Code, is about as good a document we can have in our times, apart from one huge omission, an omission that, in hindsight, has resulted in the absolute and extant failure of the whole UN project, and especially the Human Rights project.

Unlike Napoleon himself, whose vision and Code emancipated the Jews of Europe from the Church-enforced ghettos, the main drafter of the UN Declaration – René Cassin – failed to write into the Declaration that special measures are necessary to counter antisemitism. Antisemitism is a special and chronic problem that, when it flares up anywhere in the world, destroys everything, as if by divine law.

I suggest that Cassin’s oversight was inexcusable, because he was a Jew – albeit a left-wing secularist Jew – who was old enough to remember the Dreyfus Affair, as Cassin himself told the world in his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1968.

Cassin’s declaration obviously did not deliver peace: Shalom. Cassin did not understand Shalom. I suggest that anyone, even a schoolchild, could write a humanist declaration of human rights. Cassin failed to see that the preservation of human dignity and sanctity depends not on any humanist charter we can concoct, but on the ancient moral and legal code of Israel: the Ten Commandments. Five of the Ten Commandments concern our obligations to God Almighty. Ignore our obligations to God Almighty, God of Israel, and it is impossible to defend the sanctity of human being, and we all become vulnerable to those who would lead us to lesser ‘gods’, including Human Rights.

Not until 2016 did the world attempt a ‘working definition of antisemitism’. Perhaps it is helping, but it is ‘a non-legally binding statement’ that is easily ignored, or worked around. It does not prevent all the baying nations of the UN from continuing to condemn Israel according to the putative Human Rights decided by the UNHCR, and the associated International Criminal Court, which in recent years has also become obsessed with Israel.

The main purpose of UNGA’s Declaration on Human Rights in 1945 was to say ‘Never Again’ to the Holocaust. In December 1948 UNGA published its first ‘human rights treaty’: the Genocide Convention. But neither of these documents mentions that antisemitism is a special case.

I suggest that antisemitism and anti-Israelism cannot be meaningfully understood in secular forums. Antisemitism is largely a religious problem, rooted in Christian and Islamic supersessionism or ‘replacement’ theology.

Although political leaders and Church leaders in the Christian nations of the West can no longer allow themselves to be overtly antisemitic, they can, and do, now outsource their antisemitism to genocidal jihadists whose published charters (such as of Hamas, Palestinian Authority/Fatah, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad) are no different in their overt genocidal aims to Nazism. Germany in particular outsources its antisemitism through huge funding of overtly antisemitic – and often jihadist –NGOs in Palestine, as I wrote here in Blogs Times of Israel.

Germany often pushes, in cahoots with the Islamic nations, anti-Israel condemnations through the UN. The screenshot below is from a tweet of Hillel Neuer, Chief Executive of UN Watch:

Some analysts of antisemitism have suggested that Germany’s obsession with demonising Israel and Jews might be because some Germans today – whether they realise it or not – are trying in part to justify the actions of their Nazi parents, grandparents and great-grandparents.

The UN’s overt antisemitism, led from the Islamic world, can be precisely dated to 1975. It was in this year that the UNGA received President Idi Amin, in his capacity as Chairman of the Organization of African Unity. By this time, Amin had already perpetrated extensive massacres of his own people. And he had proven and peerless antisemitic credentials. Amin approved of the Holocaust, and, in a telegram to the Secretary General of the UN in 1972, advocated the genocide of all Jews. He named a park in Kampala after Hitler, and proposed that a statue of Hitler be erected for want of one in Germany.

The nations of the 1975 UNGA session were not to be disappointed. Amin gave a speech on ‘the Zionist-American conspiracy’ now threatening the world, and which called for the ‘extinction’ of Israel. Tellingly, he received a standing ovation both before and after his speech. The following day, the UN Secretary General and the UNGA President received Amin at a public dinner in his honour. Two weeks later, with renewed confidence following its coming out party, the UNGA voted to pass a motion condemning the very establishment of the State of Israel as ‘racism’, and has continued to do so ever since.

Much of the West’s anti-Israelism is imported from contemporary Islam. Our universities are funded by the wealthy Gulf States, led by Qatar, today the political and intellectual base of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose core ideology is genocidal antisemitism, resembling the Nazism from which it sprung in Cairo in the 1930s.

Since the turn of the millennium (and the Second Intifada), Hitler and the Muslim Brotherhood have regained worldwide popularity. Mein Kampf has variously been a bestseller in Islamic nations such as TurkeyBangladeshPA TerritoriesJordanPakistan, etc.

I suggest that we cannot tackle the problem of antisemitism/anti-Israelism through international forums such as the UN, Human Rights Watch, the ICC, the World Council of Churches, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, Amnesty International, the Red Cross, etc.

The lesson of history is that every international forum inevitably gravitates to antisemitism/anti-Israelism, unless that forum sets out to tackle antisemitism/anti-Israelism as a unique problem.

The root of the problem, or the curse, is theological and metaphysical. It is obvious, in any case, that the most vigorous and violent enemies of Israel today are Islamists, whose logic is derived from their perverted theology. Those of us in the West who believe in God of Israel (most of us are Christians of course) and understand the metaphysical evil of antisemitism, must promote a theological, not secular, understanding of Israel, through which, ultimately, God will bless all nations.

(Originally published on

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More