History

Israel and the UN: The Early Years
A Troubled Road to Acceptance
The Way Forward

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted its historic resolution 181 that endorsed the creation of a Jewish State in then-British Mandate Palestine. Shortly thereafter, on 14 May 1948 (5 Iyar 5708 in the Hebrew Calendar), the modern State of Israel proclaimed its independence. In its declaration of independence, the nascent Israel proudly stated, amongst other things, that Israel “will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”

Israel joined the United Nations on 11 May 1949 after the General Assembly accepted Israel’s application for admission to the United Nations by adopting resolution 273 (III). Since that time, the State of Israel has remained committed to the noble founding values of the United Nations to secure the peace, promote democracy, protect freedom and human rights, and encourage development.

However, some states –– particularly those in the Middle East –– rejecting Israel’s rightful place among the community of nations sought to use the United Nations as an extension of the battlefield against Israel. This unfortunate fact, along with the political dynamics promulgated by these states within the dynamics of the United Nations, slowly turned the weight of the UN against the Jewish State.

Beginning in the 1960’s, many Arab states –– supported by the Soviet Union and the “automatic majority” of the Third World –– began an organized and relentless campaign to demonize and delegitimize Israel. This campaign took on a variety of forms and appearances, yet at its core, it served to single out Israel as the “greatest threat to the world.” These systematic efforts developed over many years and today, a litany of one-sided and anti-Israel resolutions and institutions have become institutionalized within the bodies and organs of the United Nations. Rather than promoting dialogue and peace, these efforts seek to isolate and discriminate against Israel while denying it rights granted to all other states.

The most odious manifestation of this campaign of discrimination was General Assembly resolution 3379. The 1975 resolution stated that Zionism is “a form of racism and racial discrimination… [and] is a threat to world peace and security.”

Then-Israeli Ambassador Chaim Herzog offered Israel’s response to what many called a stain on the reputation of the United Nations. “For us, the Jewish people, this resolution [is] based on hatred, falsehood and arrogance,” stated Ambassador Herzog. He continued:

"I can point with pride to the Arab ministers who have served in my government; to the Arab deputy speaker of my Parliament; to Arab officers and men serving of their own volition in our border and police defense forces, frequently commanding Jewish troops; to the hundreds of thousands of Arabs from all over the Middle East crowding the cities of Israel every year; to the thousands of Arabs from all over the Middle East coming for medical treatment to Israel; to the peaceful coexistence which has developed; to the fact that Arabic is an official language in Israel on a par with Hebrew; to the fact that it is as natural for an Arab to serve in public office in Israel as it is incongruous to think of a Jew serving in any public office in an Arab country, indeed being admitted to many of them. Is that racism? It is not! That... is Zionism."

While resolution 3379 was rescinded in 1991 with the adoption of resolution 48/86, the "Zionism is racism" episode serves as an uneasy reminder of Israel’s complicated relationship with the United Nations.

Additionally, there is a growing realization within the Secretariat of the United Nations and among Member States that Israel cannot be discriminated against and singled out any longer. In his final address before the Security Council in December 2006, Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned the international community of the dangers of anti-Israel prejudice. He stated:

“Some may feel satisfaction at repeatedly passing General Assembly resolutions or holding conferences that condemn Israel’s behaviour. But one can also ask whether such steps bring any tangible relief or benefit to the Palestinians. There have been decades of resolutions. There has been a proliferation of special committees, sessions, Secretariat divisions and units. Has any of this had an effect on Israel’s policies, other than to strengthen the belief in Israel, and among many of its supporters, that this great Organization is too one-sided to be allowed a significant role in the Middle East peace process?”