Libya accuses Israel of piracy by blocking aid ship

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Libya accused Israel of piracy at a meeting of the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday for preventing a Libyan ship from delivering humanitarian supplies to the Gaza Strip.

The Libyan boat, Al-Marwa, turned back in the face of an Israeli naval blockade on Monday. Libyan and Palestinian officials said it was carrying 3,000 tonnes of food, medicine and other aid to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

Libyan U.N. Ambassador Giadallah Ettalhi told the 15-nation council that the Israeli action was "an act of piracy" as defined by the U.N. convention on law of the sea.

He asked the council "to take the necessary urgent actions to allow the ... ship to enter the port and unload its cargo." He added that Libya would allow the United Nations or other organizations to confirm that its cargo was purely humanitarian.

Ettalhi said he hoped the council would agree to issue a statement condemning the Israeli move, which would require the backing of all 15 council members. The council took no immediate action on the Libyan draft statement."

more

[Behind the Aegis]

1. Another anti-Israeli UNSC resolution?

Whatever.

[shira]

2. isn't the UN great?

didn't aid already get through from Saudi Arabia via Egypt (Rafah), thereby breaking the vaunted 'siege' rather easily?

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&langpair=ar%7Cen&u=http://www.paltoday.com/arabic/News-28180.html&tbb=1

by golly, YES!

holy shit...they probably only made a few phone calls to arrange it all! hmmm....a little long distance, probably cost less than $5 bucks.

meanwhile, Libya and Turkey are spending millions to send boats that will just be turned around? and the UN will jump all over this and waste time, and millions of more dollars condemning Israel.....when they could just be placing a few phone calls through to Egypt like Saudi Arabia did and arrange for their trucks to go through Rafah?

gee whiz.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. The UNSC has become a joke in regards to Israel.

Of course, it is not as big a joke as the UN Human Rights (:eyes:) Council. Nothing the Israeli government did could be construed as "an act of piracy," unless they are planning to redefine it (which wouldn't surprise me). Also, Israel is not a signatory to a few of those arrangements. Now that Libya has made this move in the UNSC, it is looking more and more like a set-up. Of course, Israel is the only nation, to my knowledge, forbidden to serve on the UNSC.

[azurnoir]

4. Israel has been expressly forbidden to serve on the UNSC?

could you provide a link to that "resolution"

my search of the UNSC web page indicates that other than the permanent members the other ten are elected and Israel along with 73 other countries including Switzerland, and Saudi Arabia have simply has never been elected to the UNSC

The first link is UNSC web page the second is the to the list of countries never electd to serve

http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp

http://www.un.org/sc/list_eng6.asp

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Understanding procedure.

In order to serve on the UNSC, a nation has to be a member of their regional group (Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, The Latin American and Caribbean States, and Western European and Others Group). Israel should be a member of the Asian regional group but has been repeatedly blocked. In 2000, Israel was conditionally admitted to the Western European and Others Group, but is limited to New York activities only. In 2004, it was extended, but Israel is not permitted to be nominated to the UNSC because it is a conditional member and not part of its original regional group. Therefore, Israel is not allowed to be a member of the UNSC and a number of other UN committees. It is the only such nation, which is a member of the UN, to be in such a situation.

[shira]

6. right

and for good reason....israel is obviously the most evil country in the world and this is why they deserve special status by the UN......um, or is it something else?

[Vegasaurus]

8. I'll answer that

It's because of latent anti-semitism.

It's because deep down, there is still a fear that "Jews want to control the world" (after all, they already control all the banking, film, media, etc, according to the radical right and radical left, the strange bedfellows of both David Duke and the supposed progressives of ANSWER and other anti-war groups)

[azurnoir]

9. Proof of your assertions?

Which is rarely provided, I gave my links and please there are 73 other countries but they don't count it's only about Israel because the UN is the one most antisemitic institutions on earth, guess that's why Luxembourg, Cambodia, Afghanistan, and Laos also have not served.

[Behind the Aegis]

11. You do understand the difference, don't you?

Your absurd strawmen aside ("there are 73 other countries but they don't count" and "the UN is the one most antisemitic institutions on earth"), there is a difference in "hasn't" served and "cannot" serve. I have no idea why those other countries have not served, but it isn't because they are not allowed.

Election of five non-permanent members of the Security Council
Background
In accordance with Article 23 of the Charter, as amended,
Five from African and Asian States;
One from Eastern European States;
Two from Latin American States;
Two from Western European and other States.
At its sixty-first session, the General Assembly elected five non-permanent members of the Security Council (decision 61/402) . At present, the Council is thus composed of the following 15 Member States.

As stipulated in rule 144 of the rules of procedure, a retiring member is not eligible for immediate re-election. In accordance with rule 92 of the rules of procedure, the election is held by secret ballot and there are no nominations. Under rule 83 of the rules of procedure, the non-permanent members of the Security Council are elected by a two-thirds majority. The names of the States that have served as non-permanent members of the Security Council are listed in annex IV.

UN Source

In 2000, Israel, though naturally a part of the Asian Group in geographical terms but with membership blocked by Arab countries, was admitted on a temporary basis (subject to renewal) to WEOG's New York activities, thereby enabling it to be a candidate for election to various UN bodies.<1> In 2004, Israel obtained a permanent renewal to its membership to the WEOG for New York activities. Without a regional membership, Israel had been unable to be elected to and voiceless in various UN activities and bodies. On June 14, 2005, Dan Gillerman was elected to the position of Vice-President of the 60th UN General Assembly. The last Israeli to hold this position was UN envoy Abba Eban in 1952. Israel's candidacy was put forward by the United Nations Western Europe and Others Group (WEOG). In this position, Gillerman played a central role during the initial negotiation stages of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict.

source

Israel and the Western European and Others Group

Israel requests Security Council seat

Ambassador to the U.N Dani Gillerman submits formal request to the U.N. Security Council for Israel to be included as a member, says, ‘This is a very important moment for Israel, until recently no one thought this would be possible’; even if request accepted, country will have to wait 13 years for Council seat

more...

[azurnoir]

12. So the actual truth comes out

Israel is not barred from UNSC it simply must wait its turn like any other country that is inducted into a regional group from your link

Even if Israel’s request to become a member of the Security Council is accepted, another 13 years have to pass until an Israeli representative can hold a seat in the Council, as all seats are reserved until 2018.

It also explains some but not all of the countries that have not served, in 10 years Israel will be eligible to serve on the UNSC. from Israel seems satisfied to wait so why all the caterwauling from American supporters of Israel?

[Behind the Aegis]

13. You missed the boat...again.

Israel has been barred from the UNSC because of its non-membership in the Asia group. The 2000 addition to the WEOG was conditional. It was extended indefinitely in 2005, but it is still conditional which is why:

"Even if Israel’s request to become a member of the Security Council is accepted,...."

Understand? "If". That is the "conditional" part. As it is, Israel still cannot serve on a number of committees, despite its membership in WEOG. Do you comprehend that fact? Do you understand, despite membership in WEOG, committees are still out of reach of Israel and NO OTHER COUNTRY? It may or may not include a continuous 'freeze out' from the UNSC.

[azurnoir]

15. What is left on shore

is your assertion about Israel being denied what every other country on earth has gotten to do, sounds kind of like a spoiled child and it is not Israel purporting this, it is its American "supporters" who "go on" about this stuff. Read carefully your own link the first time Israel submitted the request was in 2005 and because it did not instantly get a seat there are complaints and not even from Israel
from your link again

Israel's ambassador to the U.N., Dan Gillerman, has submitted a formal request to the U.N. Security Council for Israel to be included as a member.

This marks the first time Israel has submitted its candidacy for a seat in the Security Council, and U.N. sources said reactions to the move have been positive.

and yes I do understand "if" however when Googling "Israel requests seat on UNSC" this the most recent link to that so perhaps the jury is still out and it will be 10 years before a seat is open, Israel seems content to wait its turn.

BTW when it comes to "privilege" name another country that has rewarded for not signing a nuclear nonproliferation treaty? One that has unregulated nuclear weapons and then threatens another country for its supposed pursuit of them on the basis they signed th very treaty Israel refused to, that being said perhaps that is a part of the problem Israel has with the UN

[Behind the Aegis]

17. Are being disingenuous on purpose or do you really not understand?

Read the damn thread and, this time, comprehend the written words. Israel is member of a regional group...conditionally. Because Israel is a conditional member it cannot serve on committees outside of the New York office (you did read and understand that fact, didn't you?) This means there are committees on which Israel cannot sit. One of those committees is the UN Security Council. Yes, Israel has applied because it was added to a regional group, albeit conditionally. Because of the conditionality, Israel may or may not be allowed to sit on the UNSC; we won't know for several years. Yes, Israel is pleased it has been, finally, allowed to attempt at a seat on the UNSC. However, it doesn't change the fact the UN has allowed bias against Israel, and is is only marginally doing anything because of the members of the WEOG. Name one other nation who has been a member of the UN for 50 some years, yet has been "blacklisted" from committees? I am not at all surprised you are uninformed about the discrimination against Israel, nor is it surprising you mock it and pretend it isn't what it really is.

As for your "red herrings":

"BTW when it comes to "privilege" name another country that has rewarded for not signing a nuclear nonproliferation treaty? One that has unregulated nuclear weapons and then threatens another country for its supposed pursuit of them on the basis they signed th very treaty Israel refused to, that being said perhaps that is a part of the problem Israel has with the UN"

We we weren't discussing "privilege," but then again, that is what red herrings are all about, aren't they? Israel was "rewarded" for not signing the NPT? Care to prove that humdinger? It doesn't matter whether Israel has nukes or not, it doesn't change the status of Iran's signatory status. And yes, it is within Israeli's right to demand the treaty which Iran signed be adhered to, whether Israel has signed it or not.

[Shaktimaan]

7. BTA is correct in his assertion.

Israel is currently ineligible for a seat on the UNSC, as well as being barred from participating in many UN activities outside of the New York branch. (Which is why it couldn't participate in the formulation of the Rome Statute.) It just recently became eligible to nominate Israelis for open posts at UN councils and other bodies around three years ago. Here is more specific information about why it is the only state burdened with such restrictions.

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.13 In fact, Israel was the only one of the 185 member countries ineligible to serve on the Security Council.

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. A breakthrough in Israel’s fifty-year exclusion from UN bodies occurred on May 30, 2000, when Israel accepted an invitation to become a temporary member of the Western European and Others (WEOG) regional group. This historic step helped end at least some of the UN’s discriminatory actions against Israel and opened the door to the possibility of Israeli participation in the Security Council.

The WEOG is the only regional group which is not purely geographical, but rather geopolitical, namely a group of states that share a Western-Democratic common denominator. WEOG comprises 27 members: all the West European states; and the "others" — Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States.

Israel’s membership to the WEOG was initially limited. Israel was not allowed to present candidacies for open seats in any UN body for two years and was not permitted to compete for major UN bodies, such as the Economic and Social Council, for a longer period. Also, Israel agreed it would not seek membership on the UN Security Council through WEOG.

In 2003-2004, Israel was successful in presenting candidates for six UN posts. Israel as also twice assumed the rotating chairmanship of WEOG. Israel was originally asked to reapply for membership every four years, but, in 2004, the first time Israel reapplied, it was granted an indefinite extension.

Besides these restrictions, Israel is only allowed to participate in WEOG activities in the New York office of the UN. Israel is an observer, but not accorded the rights of a full member in WEOG discussions and consultations at the UN offices in Geneva, Nairobi, Rome and Vienna; therefore, Israel cannot participate in UN talks on human rights, racism and a number of other issues handled in these offices. Israel’s next goal is to gain access to the other UN offices around the world.

In the future, Israel still hopes to gain membership in the Asian group.In the meantime, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom announced in September 2005 that the country will, for the first time, seek a temporary seat on the Security Council.13a

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/israel_un.html

[azurnoir]

10. Glad you have BTA's back

now do you have a source from the UN? and what about the other 73 countries or do they not matter? What is interesting is the part about the Arab League being to a degree responsible for this, because Saudi Arabia has not been elected either, what is that to make it "look good" because the Arab League is concerned about appearing antisemitic? The list on the UN's web page is inclusive of the 2009-2010 session also.

[shira]

14. here's a source

http://www.rothman.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=84&Itemid=1

proof enough for you?

or were all progressives in congress misinformed about the UN's bias against Israel?

maybe you know something every progressive voting for this bill in 2005 didn't know.

final vote....

400-1

[azurnoir]

16. LOL all your link proves

is that Israel is chairing a UN committee thanks thats good to know kudos for Israel

[Behind the Aegis]

18. Just pathetic.

Israel has chaired UN committees before, but your pathetic response simply indicates discrimination against Israel is worthy of mockery.