Inclusion and exclusion at the United Nations

AS a fan of multilateralism, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd wants Australia to win a seat on the United Nations (UN) Security Council. But achieving that aspiration has for some time been regarded as a potential liability in terms of Canberra’s policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Australia has not held a Security Council seat in more than 20 years, and pundits say that supporting Israel while trying to scale the greasy pole to the UN’s executive chamber are contradictory aims – because some UN powerbrokers want Australia to be more “even-handed” or, better still, pro-Palestinian.

The Arab League this week placed Australia’s conundrum in stark relief, with Hashem Yousseff, visiting chief of cabinet for Arab League Secretary-General Amir Moussa, stating bluntly that Australia keeps “bad company” when it votes with the United States, Canada and small Pacific states in support of the Jewish State. He seemed to suggest that Canberra should be taking a leaf out of the playbooks of Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, and do the Arab world’s bidding more readily.

Yousseff stated grimly that Australia’s voting record will be taken into account by the Arab League when it considers whether to back our bid for a Security Council seat in 2013-14. Voting with the African Union and the Non-Aligned Movement, the Arab League packs some clout. So, after Yousseff’s comments, Canberra can consider itself warned.

Interestingly, the Coalition government abandoned past attempts to win a Security Council seat precisely because it did not want to expose Australia to Arab diplomatic blackmail.

Some UN watchers have attributed the Rudd Government’s voting pattern on several Israel-related resolutions as a shift from the gold standard of the John Howard years. If Canberra’s departure from the Howard and Alexander Downer benchmark can indeed be attributed to its campaign to appease those blocs that can make or break our Security Council bid, the Arab League’s ultimatum shows how absurd such a minor tilt is.

Nobody should be in doubt that the anti-Israel nabobs of the UN are an unsubtle lot. Eventually they will demand their full measure, a diplomatic 90-degree turn, if not a full U-turn, before considering a Security Council seat for Australia.

Israel is the Middle East’s only functioning democracy. If retaining a principled position on the Jewish State thwarts Canberra’s Security Council bid, then not being a member of that council will be a badge Australia’s foreign policymakers can wear with pride.

News of the prospect of Australia’s exclusion from the Security Council is in stark contrast to last week’s announcement of Israel’s admission into the UN subgroup of JUSCANZ, of which Australia is a part.

Ostensibly, we should be happy to hear that Israel is being granted a greater level of acceptance at the UN, and to an extent, we are.

However, looking at the two news items in context, they are actually two sides of the same coin. Israel’s acceptance into JUSCANZ was tailor-made to facilitate its participation in the Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva.

The HRC has historically been a lion’s den of rabid anti-Israel bias and, until now, has been the one part of the UN from which Israel has been all too happy to be excluded.

The United States has decided to try and rehabilitate the HRC from the inside, by becoming an active participant. Washington is eager that Jerusalem will get on its bandwagon and take a part in it as well.

The Arab bloc has decided not to put up a fuss openly over Israel’s impending inclusion in the HRC, and logically, why should it?

If Israel’s inclusion means lending more legitimacy to HRC shellackings of the country, why should the Arab bloc stand in the way?

Make no mistake – the same sentiment that is fuelling the Arab bloc’s objection to Australia in the Security Council is behind the lack of objection to Israel’s inclusion in the HRC, and that is something every friend of Israel must be wary of, even as we congratulate Israel for moving one step closer to achieving full-member status and privileges at the UN.

What is clear from both news items is that it calls attention to glaring flaws present in the UN’s governing structures, which allow groups of small countries to gang up on others – be it Australia or Israel – with impunity.

Until the UN is prepared to engage in serious self-reflection, those flaws will never be fixed. As is the case with so many things in life, the first step to a solution is admitting you have a problem.