At the precise moment that Ahmadinejad mentioned Israel, many of the Western diplomats took it as a cue to walk out. Said the UK’s ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Peter Gooderham: “As soon as President Ahmadinejad started talking about Israel, that was the cue for us to walk out. We agreed in advance that if there was any such rhetoric there would be no tolerance for it.” He concluded by adding that Ahmadinejad was guilty of anti-Semitism.
The fact is the boycotting delegates never heard his speech throughout. What the Iranian leader stated in his speech is there for all to see: “How can we expect the realization of justice and peace when discrimination is legalized and the origin of the law is dominated by coercion and force rather than by justice and the rights?
“The victorious powers called themselves the conquerors of the world while ignoring or treading upon rights of other nations by the imposition of oppressive laws and international arrangements.”
And referring to the continuous appeasement of Israel’s genocides by the UN Security Council, he added, “…they resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering and they sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in occupied Palestine. And, in fact, in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive racist regime in Palestine.”
“The Security Council helped stabilize the occupying regime and supported it in the past 60 years giving them a free hand to commit all sorts of atrocities. It is all the more regrettable that a number of Western governments and the United States have committed themselves to defending those racist perpetrators of genocide while the awakened-conscience and free-minded people of the world condemn aggression, brutalities and the bombardment of civilians in Gaza. The supporters of Israel have always been either supportive or silent against the crimes.”
He went on to question the immoral war against the Iraqi people. “Why, indeed, almost a million people were killed and injured and a few more millions were displaced? Why, indeed, the Iraqi people have suffered enormous losses amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars? And why was billions of dollars imposed on the American people as the result of these military actions? Was not the military action against Iraq planned by the Zionists and their allies in the then US administration in complicity with the arms manufacturing countries and the possessors of wealth?”
Were these words fueled by anti-Semitism or simply a statement of the cold realities that have engulfed the Middle East since this pariah state was imposed on the region, a state whose morals are predicated by the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians? There is nothing in his speech that could be construed as racist.
Were not the boycotting diplomats aware of the holocausts being perpetuated against the lawful residents of the land for the past 60 years? Were they not aware of what happened in Lebanon and more recently in Gaza?
Just what prompts a diplomat to shy away from truth? Perhaps they are following US foreign policy mandate that no one should criticize Israel, whatever its actions or policies. And there is documented evidence to prove that war crimes had been committed against the innocent civilians in Gaza in the recent war.
Or were the seasoned diplomats who walked out intimidated by the fear they would be dubbed anti-Semite had they chosen to remain seated? Does this collective fear of hearing the truth reside deep in their subconscious, or is it a reflection of the unspoken guilt that perhaps persists within them, a guilt borne of their inability to prevent the first Holocaust during World War II. Or was it simply because they did not have the courage to hear and speak the truth? Any way you look at it, it smacks of hypocrisy.
Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store stated it best during a news conference. “If we start walking out every time we feel uncomfortable dealing with our ideological rivals, the world would be the one to lose,” he said.