by Mitchell Bard
Starting in the mid-1970s, an Arab-Soviet-Third World bloc joined to form what amounted to a
pro-PLO lobby at the United Nations. This was particularly true in the General Assembly where these
countriesnearly all dictatorships or autocraciesfrequently voted together to pass resolutions
attacking Israel and supporting the PLO.
In 1974, for example, the General Assembly invited Yasir Arafat to address it. Arafat did so, a holster
attached to his hip. In his speech, Arafat spoke of carrying a gun and an olive branch (he left his gun
outside before entering the hall). In 1975, the Assembly awarded permanent representative status to the
PLO, which opened an office in midtown Manhattan. Later that year, at the instigation of the Arab
states and the Soviet Bloc, the Assembly approved Resolution 3379, which slandered Zionism by
branding it a form of racism.
U.S. Ambassador Daniel Moynihan called the resolution an obscene act. Israeli Ambassador Chaim Herzog told his fellow delegates the resolution was based on hatred, falsehood and arrogance. Hitler,
he declared, would have felt at home listening to the UN debate on the measure.1
On December 16, 1991, the General Assembly voted 111-25 (with 13 abstentions and 17 delegations
absent or not voting) to repeal Resolution 3379. The repeal vote was marred by the fact that 13 of the
19 Arab countriesincluding those engaged in negotiations with IsraelSyria, Lebanon and
Jordanvoted to retain the resolution, as did Saudi Arabia. Six, including Egyptwhich lobbied
against repealwere absent. No Arab country voted for repeal. The PLO denounced the vote and the
The Arabs voted once again to impugn the very birthright of the Jewish State, the New York Times
noted. That even now most Arab states cling to a demeaning and vicious doctrine mars an otherwise belated triumph for sense and conscience.2
Less than a week before repealing the measure, the General Assembly approved four new one-sided
resolutions on the Middle East. On December 11, 1991, it voted 104-2 for a resolution calling for a
UN-sponsored peace conference that would include the PLO. Also that day, it voted 142-2 to condemn
Israeli behavior toward Palestinians in the territories. On December 16the very day it repealed the
Zionism measurethe UN voted 152-1, with the U.S. abstaining, to call on Israel to rescind a Knesset
resolution declaring Jerusalem its capital. Another resolution demanded Israel's withdrawal from
occupied territories, including Jerusalem, and the right of return for Palestinians. It also denounced
Israeli administration of the Golan Heights.
As Herzog noted, the organization developed an Alice-In-Wonderland perspective on Israel. In the UN
building...she would only have to wear a Star of David in order to hear the imperious Off with her
head at every turn. Herzog noted that the PLO had cited a 1974 UN resolution condemning Israel as
justification for setting off a bomb in Jerusalem.3
Bloc voting also made possible the establishment of the pro-PLO Committee on the Inalienable Rights
of the Palestinian People in 1975. The panel became, in effect, part of the PLO propaganda apparatus,
issuing stamps, organizing meetings, preparing films and draft resolutions in support of Palestinian
In 1976, the committee recommended full implementation of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian
people, including their return to the Israeli part of Palestine. It also recommended that November
29the day the UN voted to partition Palestine in 1947be declared an International Day of
Solidarity with the Palestinian People. Since then, it has been observed at the UN with anti-Israel
speeches, films, and exhibits. Over the objections of the United States, a special unit on Palestine was
established as part of the UN Secretariat.
The U.S. has reacted forcefully to efforts to politicize the UN. In 1977, the U.S. withdrew from the
International Labor Organization for two years because of its anti-Israel stance. In 1984, the U.S. left
UNESCO, in part because of its bias against the Jewish State. From 1982-89, the Arab states sought to
deny Israel a seat in the General Assembly or put special conditions on Israel's participation. Only a
determined U.S. lobbying campaign prevented them from succeeding.
The U.S. has continued to oppose PLO attempts to upgrade its status in the General Assembly and
UN-affiliated bodies. This was particularly true in 1989, when Arafat tried to have the PLO admitted as
the State of Palestine and otherwise elevate its status in the World Health Organization, the World
Tourist Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Because of the determined opposition of Congress and the Administration, the PLO was defeated
everywhere but the FAO. Given that organizations decision to provide agricultural aid through the
PLO, the U.S. withdrew.
Anti-Semitism at the UN
The UN's continuing anti-Israel bias was exemplified by its sponsorship of the eighth North American
NGO [Non-governmental organization] Symposium on the Question of Palestine in 1991. The
ensuing parade of luminaries repeated, ad nauseam, virtually every anti-Israel canard imaginable,
wrote an observer who attended the conference.4
Since the early 1970s, the UN has become permeated with anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist sentiment.
The following comments illustrate how ugly the atmosphere has become:
Is it not the Jews who are exploiting the American people and trying to debase them?Libyan UN
Representative Ali Treiki.5
The Talmud says that if a Jew does not drink every year the blood of a non-Jewish man, he will be
damned for eternity. Saudi Arabian delegate Marouf al-Dawalibi before the 1984 UN Human Rights
Commission conference on religious tolerance.6 A similar remark was made by the Syrian Ambassador
at a 1991 meeting, who insisted Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to make matzos.7
On March 11, 1997, the Palestinian representative to the UN Human Rights Commission claimed the
Israeli government had injected 300 Palestinian children with the HIV virus. Despite the efforts of
Israel, the United States and others, this blood libel remains on the UN record.8
The Security Council
Because the Security Council established the diplomatic parameters for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict, UN
Resolutions 242 and 338, many people outside the UN still believe it can play a useful role in bringing peace to Middle East. A careful analysis of the Security Councils actions on the Middle East, however, shows it has been little better than the General Assembly in its treatment of Israel.
Candidates for the Security Council are proposed by regional blocs. In the Middle East, this means the
Arab League and its allies are usually included. Israel, which joined the UN in 1949, has never been
elected to the Security Council whereas at least 15 Arab League members have.9
Every UN member state belongs to one of the five regional groups. Geographically, Israel should be
part of the Asian bloc, but Arab states such as Iraq and Saudi Arabia have successfully prevented
Israel's inclusion. As a temporary measure, Israel has sought acceptance in the West European and
Others Group (WEOG), which includes not only the democracies of Western Europe but also Australia,
Canada, New Zealand, Turkey and the United States. Despite the efforts of the United States and
others, Israel has not been admitted to this group either.
Israel therefore cannot be elected to the Security Council nor can it join other key agencies, such as
UNICEF, the World Court, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and the Commission on
A Hostile Bloc
The Arab League contingent on the Council has been reinforced by members of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference and nonaligned governments that do not recognize Israel. Since the end of 1991,
leading nonaligned nations such as India and China have established diplomatic ties with Israel; the
Soviet Union, which broke off relations with the Jewish State after the Six-Day War, was replaced on
the panel by Russia, which has full diplomatic relations with Israel. It remains to be seen whether these
changes will result in a more balanced handling of the Arab-Israeli conflict by the Security Council.
Debates on Israel abound, and the Council has repeatedly condemned the Jewish State. But not once
has it adopted a resolution critical of the PLO or of Arab attacks on Israel. What takes place in the
Security Council more closely resembles a mugging than either a political debate or an effort at
problem-solving, declared former UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick.10
The American Veto
Many people believe the United States can always be relied upon to support Israel with its veto in the
UN Security Council. The historical record, however, shows that the U.S. has often opposed Israel in
In 1990, for example, Washington voted for a Security Council resolution condemning Israel's
handling of the Temple Mount riot earlier that month. While singling out the acts of violence
committed by Israeli security forces, the resolution omitted mention of the Arab violence that
In December 1990, the U.S. went along with condemning Israel for expelling four leaders of Hamas, an
Islamic terrorist group. The deportations came in response to numerous crimes committed by Hamas
against Arabs and Jews, the most recent of which had been the murders of three Israeli civilians in a
Jaffa factory several days earlier. The resolution did not say a word about Hamas and its crimes. It
described Jerusalem as occupied territory, declared that Palestinians needed to be protected from
Israel and called on contracting parties of the Geneva Convention to ensure Israel's compliance. It was
the first time the Security Council invoked the Convention against a member country.
In January 1992, the U.S. supported a one-sided resolution condemning Israel for expelling 12
Palestinians, members of terrorist groups that were responsible for perpetrating violence against Arab
and Jew alike. The resolution, which described Jerusalem as occupied territory, made no mention of
the events that triggered the expulsionsthe murders of four Jewish civilians by Palestinian radicals
From 1967-1991, 82 resolutions and drafts dealing with Israel were voted on in the Council. Sixty-nine
were critical of Israel. The U.S. supported these resolutions 28 times. By abstaining on 26 more votes,
the U.S. effectively joined in the Councils condemnations. Hence, the U.S. opposed Israel on 78
percent of the critical votes.11 In that time, the U.S. used its veto 15 times.
America's Most Reliable UN Ally
While Israel cannot always rely on the U.S. at the UN, Americans can count on Israeli support more
often than any other nation. For years, Israel has been America's top UN ally. In 1996, Israel voted with
the U.S. 95 percent of the time. By contrast, the United Kingdom and France voted with America 79
and 78 percent of the time, respectively. Meanwhile, figures compiled by the State Department show
that only a few points separated the voting scores of moderate and radical Arab governments.
Egypt, at $2.3 billion a year the second largest recipient of American aid, opposed the U.S. on more
than 60 percent of the votes. The figures for Jordan and Saudi Arabia were similar. On average, Arab
states voted with the U.S. 37 percent of the time.
1Chaim Herzog, Who Stands Accused? (NY: Random House, 1978), pp. 4-5.
2New York Times, (December 17, 1991).
3Herzog, p. 130.
4Near East Report, (July 22, 1991).
5Speech before the UN, December 8, 1983, quoted in Harris Schoenberg, Mandate For Terror, (NY:
Shapolsky, 1989), p. 296.
6Speech to UN seminar on religious tolerance and freedom, delivered December 5, 1984, quoted in
Anti-Defamation League, News, (February 7, 1985).
7Morris Abram, "Israel Under Attack: Anti-Semitism in the United Nations, The Earth Times, (Dec. 16-31, 1997).
9Near East Report, (November 26, 1990).
10New York Times, (March 31, 1983).
11Calculations made by the authors based on UN Security Council votes.