Jewish Sightseeing HomePage Jewish Sightseeing
  2002-12-20: U.N.-Tal Becker
united nations 
 

The Travails of an 
Israeli UN Diplomat
San Diego Jewish Press-Heritage, Dec. 20, 2002
 
By Donald H. Harrison

Do you think your job is tough? Consider trading yours with Tal Becker. He works at a place where some of the people won't even talk to him, simply because of the country that he is from.

And while some other people at his place of employment are willing to have private discussions with him on occasion, and even say nice things, they routinely denounce everything he stands for on public occasions.

Why hasn't he quit long ago? Becker believes however hostile some other diplomats at the United Nations are to him as a member of Israel's delegation, the price is worth paying. Sure, there are short-term disappointments, but he is playing for long-term benefits.

Becker was in San Diego County for meetings with supporters of the Israel Center at the United Jewish Federation as well as with members of the editorial board of the San Diego Union-Tribune. He discussed his work with Heritage over breakfast on Wednesday, Dec. 13. 

Meanwhile, Israel was winning one of its rare diplomatic victories at the U.N. Security Council. A resolution was then being drafted, over the objections of Syria, condemning terrorist attacks on Israeli targets in Mombasa, Kenya.

The resolution was adopted on Friday by a vote of 14-1, with only Syria in the negative. Becker said the idea that there had to be a fight over even naming Israel in the resolution was "totally outrageous."

"The fact that Israelis were targeted, Israelis were killed, and yet you have to debate whether it is permissible or acceptable to have reference to Israel, I think is symptomatic of the entire U.N," he said.

The condemnation of terrorism was a clear-cut victory for Israel in a forum where the Jewish state usually measures its victories by its effectiveness in blocking anti-Israel resolutions, or as Becker put it, where "we measure our success by the degree of our failure."

When their resolutions fail, said Becker, Arabs and Palestinians are forced to consider the possibility that bilateral negotiations with Israel may be more productive than such international debates.

As an attorney for the Israeli delegation, Becker looks carefully at the wording of a variety of important proposals in international law treaties dealing with definitions of terrorism, the international criminal court and other multilateral issues.

Having made aliyah to Israel from Australia in 1994, the attorney is more comfortable than some other Israelis analyzing English-language documents. It is not uncommon for foes to suggest that Israel has violated the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of Palestinians. Asked how he responds to them, Becker said: "Israel is proud and wants to be held to the highest standards
of international law, and humanitarian law and human rights standards. The standards are not relative; they are universal. They do no depend on the situation. But if you are going to hold Israel to that standard, and you do not hold anyone else to that same standard, particularly our neighbors in the region, then you are really not interested in human rights and justice.
What you are really interested in is using human rights and justice as a weapon, and, in that case, the greatest victims are human rights and justice because you undermine them. If you apply justice selectively, then you are really denying justice its proper role."

Becker, who is working for a doctorate at Columbia University in addition to his diplomatic assignment, added that "the whole body of law which Israel is accused of violating, the international humanitarian law, is based on one fundamental distinction, between combatants and civilians, because we want to minimize the harm to civilians so combatants have to separate themselves from civilians.

"Terrorism is the antithesis of that very notion. Not only do they dress as civilians, not only do they target civilians, but they hide among them. How do you confront that?"

Furthermore, he said, by focusing condemnation "on the country which combats terrorism, rather than on the tactics of the terrorists, they end up encouraging terrorism. I canąt think of a better thing for a terrorist who hides and fires from a civilian populated area to achieve than to have a
condemnation of a country that comes to find them because there are, unfortunately, civilian casualties.

"I think it is a shame that when these things happen that the primary responsibility isn't put first on those who violate the rules of war and the Security Council resolutions by placing themselves among civilians."

Although arguments such as Becker's appear to fall upon deaf ears at the United Nations, where resolutions condemning Israel routinely roll up lopsided margins in the General Assembly, the lawyer-diplomat said defending against anti- Israel resolutions is only one aspect of his job.
He said he spends considerable time "just talking to diplomats, trying to develop relationships with people. These people will go back to their countries and have powerful positions in their governments, and I think it is useful for them to become familiar with Israel's positions."

Becker said that many countries that routinely vote against Israel in the United Nations nevertheless have good bilateral relations with the Jewish state. He said that, to a large degree, votes in the United Nations are cast according to what bloc a member nation identifies with— the so-called nonaligned bloc being just one — and that members of blocs often agree to
the unity rule.

Occasionally along the highways of America, one will see signs urging "Get US out of the UN and UN out of US." Does Becker ever feel so frustrated that he thinks Israel would be better off without being part of the U.N.?

"No I donąt," he quickly replied. "First of all, the U.N. is a reflection of the world as it is. We blame the U.N., but what we are really doing is looking at those states who make up the U.N. and saying this is the state of the world.

"Second of all, the U.N. does a lot of good things, particularly in the humanitarian and social fields in terms of fighting AIDS and development in Africa. All these different things are very positive. And the third thing, I think it would be a victory for our enemies if we were to withdraw from the United Nations, which would be basically a withdrawal from the world body,
and isolated ourselves."