Hagai El-Ad: Council stand a crystal-clear rejection of divisive policy

Opinion

Thank you, New Zealand. My country's ambassador to yours has just been recalled for "consultations", in swift retaliation by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against New Zealand for daring to co-sponsor what has become United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334.

The resolution reaffirms the international consensus that Israel's settlements in the West Bank have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of international law.

All members of the council supported the resolution except the US, which abstained. Not a single member voted against it.

It is a very, very long way from Wellington to Jerusalem - and just as long a way back, as the ambassador will no doubt find in due course.

I suspect that when he does return to "windy Welly", Israel will still be holding the Palestinians in the territories captured in 1967 under occupation. Diplomatic skirmishes tend to resolve themselves sooner than historical injustices.

But eventually, at some point in the future, the occupation will be over.

New Zealanders should be proud of the role their country played in getting the Security Council, after years of inaction, to speak out with clarity against the occupation and the settlements - and with such resounding global support.

Just over two months ago, I had the honour of presenting the work we do at B'Tselem, the Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, before an informal meeting of the Security Council.

By taking over Palestinian land, demolishing homes, and forcing displacement upon residents throughout the West Bank, Israel is steadily advancing what is mistakenly termed "the status quo", continuing to expand settlements at the expense of Palestinians.

All this is carried out in broad daylight, with the backing of Israel's legal system and of its planning authorities, military and government.

This year has been the worst on record in terms of home demolitions: in 2016, more than 1000 Palestinians lost their homes thanks to a cynical administrative mechanism that provides a guise of legality for this injustice.

Israel's government is trying to spin the Security Council resolution as "anti-Israeli" and even "anti-Semitic".

These are baseless claims that must be wholeheartedly rejected, on both factual and moral grounds.

Factually, Israel and its occupation regime are not one and the same, as the resolution states emphatically: the State of Israel is legitimate, while the occupation of the Palestinian territories is not.

Being anti-occupation does not mean being anti-Israel. Morally, equating criticism of certain government policies with anti-Semitism is simply bankrupt.

In fact, obscuring the distinction between genuine anti-Semitism and commonsense criticism is a dangerous manipulation that damages vital, ongoing work against all forms of racism.

While Resolution 2334 will not have any immediate operative consequences, it should not be taken lightly. The council's choice to take a firm stand against the settlements is resonating strongly in Israel and beyond, and carries profound symbolic weight.

Furthermore, the council is the only UN body authorised to impose concrete action in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. Membership comes with shouldering this responsibility.

New Zealand's term as a non-permanent member of the council will expire as 2016 draws to an end.

As far as peace, security, and the occupation of the Palestinian territories are involved - know that your country rose to the occasion and succeeded in attaining one of the most serious and significant international challenges to the occupation in many years.

• Hagai El-Ad is executive director for B'Tselem, an Israeli organisation for human rights in the occupied territories.