Have you ever wondered how the Zionist entity, which ethnically cleansed 78% of Palestine in 1948, managed to gain admission as a member in the United Nations?
John Quigley's new book, The International Diplomacy of Israel's Founders: Deception at the United Nations in the Quest for Palestine (2016) reminds us, yet again, that in their drive for exclusive control over Palestine, no lie is too big for Israel's rulers, and that, where Israel is concerned, US myopia and delusion know no bounds.
On the subject of UN General Assembly Resolution 273 (Admission of Israel to membership in the UN) of May 11, 1949, Quigley writes as follows:
"Warren Austin, the US delegate [to the UN], announced as he had in the Ad Hoc Political Committee (AHPC), that the US would vote for Israel's admission. Austen referred to the discussions of Israel's application in the AHPC... 'The long discussion of Israel's application,' Austen said, 'was evidence of the general deep-rooted desire for a just solution of questions relating to Palestine, and especially those of Jerusalem and the Arab refugees'.
"So the US was solid for Israel, even though what Austen was saying about Israel's desire for solutions was directly contrary to what Mark Ethridge [US representative on the Conciliation Commission for Palestine] was reporting to President Truman. The discussion in the General Assembly went well for Israel... While the resolution did what [Abba] Eban [representing Israel's Jewish Agency] asked, by finding Israel to be peace-loving and on that basis admitting it to membership, it also recited Israel's commitments that formed the basis for the General Assembly's decision to admit Israel, as well as the General Assembly's prior resolutions that imposed obligations on Israel. Resolution 273 read:
'Having received the report of the Security Council on the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,
'Noting that, in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter, [...]
'Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it 'unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them... ,
'Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948 and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions,
'The General Assembly... 1. Decides that Israel is a peace loving State which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations; 2. Decides to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.'
"The General Assembly thus was explaining that its decision to admit Israel was premised on the commitments Eban had made to the AHPC in regard to repatriation and to Jerusalem. The reference to the resolution of '29 November 1947', the partition resolution, was pointed, because that resolution specified that a Jewish state, were it to be formed, must accord equality without reference to ethnicity. The reference to the resolution of '11 December 1948' similarly meant obligations for Israel, in particular the obligation to repatriate the displaced Arabs.
"Resolution 273 was unusual in UN practice. General Assembly resolutions admitting a new member typically recite only that the Security Council has has received membership. They make no mention of dialogue with the applicant state preceding admission, and no mention of commitments the state may have made in order to secure admission. By its reference to commitments made by Israel, the General Assembly was indicating that it would not have decided to admit absent those commitments." (pp 133-35)
Of course, as we've known for decades, Israel was never serious about honouring either commitment. With this in mind, and given its record in violating countless UN resolutions, and general contempt for international law, Israel's continued membership in the UN should be up for review. As it stands, it not only serves to discredit that body in the eyes of the world, but also does irreparable damage to the reputation of the United States, given its self-imposed role as Israel's principal UN fig leaf.