Goldstone defends Israel against 'apartheid' claims

In 'NY Times' op-ed, South African judge who presided over UN's Goldstone Report decries "unfair and inaccurate slander against Israel."

By JPOST.COM STAFF
November 1, 2011 09:09
2 minute read.
Judge Richard Goldstone

Goldstone 311. (photo credit: REUTERS)

 
X

Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again

Judge Richard J. Goldstone, known for accusing Israel of war crimes in a 2009 UN report, defends the Jewish state against claims it pursues “apartheid” policies in an opinion article published in The New York Times on Monday.

The South African justice presided over the Goldstone Commission, which, in addition to the war crimes claims, linked Israel to possible crimes against humanity in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


RELATED:
Comment: Goldstone the belated penitent
Peres asks UN to shelve Goldstone Report

Goldstone subsequently softened his claims against Israel in an opinion piece published in The Washington Post in April, in which he stated, “If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.”

He continued his more conciliatory tone towards Israel in Monday’s Times.

“While ‘apartheid’ can have broader meaning, its use is meant to evoke the situation in pre-1994 South Africa. It is an unfair and inaccurate slander against Israel, calculated to retard rather than advance peace negotiations,” Goldstone wrote in the Times.

Goldstone argues that while there is more de facto separation between Israeli Arabs and Jews than Israelis should accept, the situation in no way resembles South Africa’s apartheid system.

“Israeli Arabs – 20 percent of Israel’s population – vote, have political parties and representatives in the Knesset and occupy positions of acclaim, including on its Supreme Court. Arab patients lie alongside Jewish patients in Israeli hospitals, receiving identical treatment.”

The judge states that in the West Bank as well, “there is no intent to maintain ‘an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group.’” “Israel has agreed in concept to the existence of a Palestinian state in Gaza and almost all of the West Bank, and is calling for the Palestinians to negotiate the parameters,” he states in the article.

Goldstone adds that the need for reconciliation between the sides “has never been greater,” and the Palestinian Authority’s bid for UN recognition of a state “has put hope for any two-state solution under increasing pressure."

Related Content

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
August 31, 2014
Prime minister to Channel 1: I’ll be running again in next election

By Gil Stern Stern HOFFMAN