Asking the Scapegoat To Take One for the Team by Benny Avni November 20, 2006 http://www.nysun.com/article/43784 Born of the ashes of Hitler's World War II, the United Nations has now returned to scapegoating the Jewish state. Beyond Turtle Bay, Europeans and some Americans buy into the argument that Islam's schism with the Western infidels could be solved if only Israel took one for the team. There was a telling scene on Friday at the U.N. General Assembly. The speaker, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Dan Gillerman, was talking about his country's attempts to deal with the ongoing rocket attacks from Gaza, which resulted in a horrific error that killed 19 innocent Palestinian Arabs in Beit Hanoun. "If France was shelled from across the border, what would the French do?" Mr. Gillerman asked. "Would the French government send flowers to their attackers?" As Mr. Gillerman was speaking, a U.N. cameraman with a keen sense of irony aimed the house camera at the Palestinian Arab seat, where the French ambassador, Jean-Marc de la Sabliere was seen talking intently to the Palestinian U.N. observer, Riad Mansour. Mr. de la Sabliere's back was turned to the camera and to the dais, where Mr. Gillerman was standing. "As I know that in this chamber our words fall on mostly deaf ears," Mr. Gillerman said in conclusion, "my mission shall leave after this statement to hold a press conference at which, hopefully, they will be met with more responsive attention." The General Assembly emergency session, a holdover from the Cold War era, was revived in 1997 by a Palestinian Arab envoy to the United Nations, Nasser al-Kidwa, and has been used ever since to bash Israel and bypass American vetoes of one-sided Security Council resolutions. No similar instrument exists to bypass the inevitable Chinese or Russian vetoes on council resolutions dealing with Burma, North Korea, Chechnya, or Sudan. Although the assembly last week considered a separate resolution to avoid addressing human rights violations in specific countries, it made an exception for Israel. Meanwhile, in Geneva, the newly created U.N. Human Rights Council has passed no resolutions on any country other than Israel. When it comes to human rights, the world body knows only one violator. Israel is guilty of genocide of the Palestinian Arabs, the Sudanese ambassador to the United Nations, Abdulmahmoud Abduhaleem, told me recently. Trying to escape irrelevance at the height of the Cold War in the 1970s, the United Nations found solace in anti-Zionism. It never completely cured itself of that disease, and now, instead of dealing with the corruption scandals and other maladies that once again threaten its existence, it is back to making Israel its scapegoat. More subtly, Europeans and some American politicians are acting as if appearing to pressure Israel will appease the Islamist zeal directed at the West. Last week, leaders in France, Italy, and Spain unveiled a plan to address the situation in Gaza by introducing an international force to protect civilians. As with the European-led U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, however, Israel should not expect its civilians to be protected. If one is to believe a U.N. report presented to the Security Council on Friday, UNIFIL was so obsessed with the Israeli reconnaissance flights above that it totally missed 720 Islamist fighters below who came from Somalia to join Hezbollah in its holy war. European leaders assume that they can address the challenge they face from holy warriors by leaning on Israel. If, say, Israel ends its occupation of Gaza, one less bomb will explode in Madrid, Paris, or Rome. The fact that Israel has already withdrawn from Gaza and the holy war has not subsided in Europe - and has only intensified in Israel - does not seem to change their equation. That sentiment exists in America, too. Senator-elect Webb, a Democrat of Virginia, laid out his foreign policy plan yesterday for NBC's Tim Russert. "One is the Israeli-Arab situation, second is terrorism, and only third is Iraq," he said. Asking a baseball player to take one for the team always smacks of desperation. And if a team lacks good hitting and running, there is no guarantee that even after a bad bruising to one weak player, the team will score a run, let alone win the game. If Israel could be guaranteed that by giving away its security assets, it will see less animosity from its neighbors, let alone an end to the Islamist war against the West, it might consider it. But the Jewish state has a slim margin of error, and it - and the West -would be better off honing its anti-terror combat skills.