The Guardian is running a series to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the creation of the United Nations asking “What’s the best bit of the UN?”
Astonishingly at #5 is UNRWA, the UN agency tasked with the welfare of so-called Palestinian refugees. So-called because unlike every other refugee population in history, UNRWA counts any Palestinian who is a direct descendant of Palestinians who were displaced in 1948 or 1967 as a refugee.
UNRWA has by its own definition perpetuated the Palestinian refugee problem. How can this be a “best bit of the UN?”
And what about the recent exposure of anti-Semitic cartoons and texts posted on Facebook by UNRWA employees, mainly teachers? Is this one of the “best bits of the UN?”
This is also the same UNRWA whose teachers in Jordan declared their opposition to teaching Holocaust studies to Palestinian pupils:
Teaching UNRWA students about the so-called ‘Holocaust’ as part of human rights harms the Palestinian cause . . . and changes the students’ views regarding their main enemy, namely the Israeli occupation.
UNRWA, the organization that has for years found no problem with having Hamas members on its payroll.
The same organization that the Washington Times pointed out was an obstacle to peace several years ago because:
- It inherently makes the Palestinians feel the world owes them repatriation.
- It inhibits integration into host countries and any possibility of third-country citizenship, which runs against UN policies with other refugee groups.
- Its 60 years of welfare has created a culture of dependency that works against Palestinian nation-building.
How can such an organization be one of The Guardian’s “best bits of the UN?”
Unless, of course, The Guardian appreciates UNRWA’s role in perpetuating a situation that can be used as yet another stick with which to beat Israel on a regular basis, which is what The Guardian does in the profile article, which includes this:
Its [UNRWA’s] facilities in Gaza have been the target of Israeli military strikes, most recently during last summer’s conflict when UNRWA schools being used as shelters were struck, causing numerous fatalities.
Is The Guardian’s Peter Beaumont really suggesting that Israel deliberately targeted UNRWA facilities, including schools by virtue of the fact that they belonged to UNRWA?
That UNRWA facilities became involved in the conflict was a direct result of Hamas terrorists firing rockets from the immediate vicinity of UNRWA and Palestinian civilian structures. In addition, UNRWA itself discovered rockets hidden in their own schools.
The Guardian’s feting of UNRWA is akin to a sad joke. It’s inference that Israel maliciously targets UNRWA facilities is plainly wrong and deserves to be challenged.
[sc:graybox ]Send your complaints to The Guardian and demand that this libelous suggestion is corrected by emailing The Guardian’s readers’ editor – [email protected]. You can find more on how to complain to The Guardian here.
