Thread by @HillelNeuer

BREAKING: @UNHumanRights to publish anti-Israeli blacklist next month, reports Israel’s @ynetnews, after Maduro’s Venezuela & slaveholding Mauritania join UNHRC. US is trying to get UN to postpone release, with Amb. David Friedman liaising with Jerusalem.
ynet.co.il/articles/0,734…

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews Sponsors of the UNHRC resolution creating the anti-Israeli blacklist include #Syria #Iran #Venezuela #Pakistan #Libya #Yemen & #Cuba. Joining this club of tyrants, murderers and rapists as its most ardent supporter for the past 3 years has been Human Rights Watch chief @KenRoth.

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth Nearly a third of the UNHRC refused to support the resolution, including Britain, France, Germany, US Netherlands & Belgium. UK officials strongly criticized the UNHRC for exceeding its authority in creating the blacklist. haaretz.com/israel-news/fr…

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth “Human rights obligations are directed at states," said the UK, "and not individuals or businesses, who must determine their trading relationships for themselves; as such, we have no plans to set up an equivalent database."

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth “Ultimately it is the decision of an individual or company whether to operate in settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The British Government neither encourages nor offers support to such activity,” said the UK.

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth The European Union opposed the blacklist provision and attempted unsuccessfully to persuade the Palestinians to remove that paragraph in return for EU support of the rest of the resolution. haaretz.com/israel-news/.p…

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth Likewise, the Obama Administration rejected the blacklist. "The United States strongly and unequivocally opposes the very existence of [UNHRC] Agenda Item 7 [targeting Israel], and therefore, any resolutions at the HRC that come from it."

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth "It does not serve the interests of the council to single out one country, in an unbalanced manner," said the Obam Admin. "Such a database would be an unprecedented step by the council. This is far outside their scope of authority. So we are opposed." jpost.com/Breaking-News/…

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth In addition, many countries refused to engage with information requests made by the UN about the blacklist, as confirmed by former High Commissioner Zeid in his report.

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth MYTH: The blacklist is fully in line with EU policy to deny support to occupations and settlements anywhere in the world.

FACT: The EU has no such policy of denying support to occupations or settlements, except in the case of Israel.

Indeed, with Morocco, the EU has a fishing agreement in place for which it pays €40 million annually and receives access to all of Morocco’s fishing waters, including the waters off the coast of Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara.

@UNHumanRights @ynetnews @KenRoth Similarly, with Turkey, the EU has placed no restrictions on grants to Turkey for the Horizon 2020 scientific research program to ensure monies would not reach Turkish universities operating in Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus.

In addition, the EU has not advocated boycotts of the Turkish hydrocarbon company or Turkish universities operating in Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus. The EU provides direct annual aid of €28 million to the Turkish Cypriot community, including grants to students & businesses.

MYTH: All business activity in "settlements" is illegal.

FACT: As a matter of international law, business activity in “settlements” is not illegal.

Business activity in settlements is ubiquitous:

EU countries whose businesses operate in Occupied Western Sahara and Occupied Northern Cyprus have never tried to stop such commercial operations. Such companies receive advice from international law experts that business in settlements does not violate int'l law or human rights.

International treaties permit the occupying power to conduct business in occupied territories. Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Convention obligates the occupying power to “restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.”

This is understood to permit the occupying power to build infrastructure — roads, sanitation, communications & security. The Fourth Geneva Convention authorizes the occupying power to do business in territory it controls and does not permit the occupied population to veto this.

The UN's own Legal Advisor, Hans Corell, approved business activity in settlements. In a 2002 memo on Western Sahara, he allowed the exploitation of the natural resources of an occupied territory under specific conditions:

It "should only be done “for the benefit of the peoples of those [t]erritories, on their behalf or in consultation with their representatives.”

But, wrote the UN Legal Advisor, other economic activity in the territory not involving exploitation or physical removal of natural resources could be undertaken without particular approval from, or benefit to, the local population.

When BDS militants tried to stop the sale of Israeli Dead Sea products in London, the UK Supreme court ruled that the sale of settlement products does not aid international law violations. (See Richardson v. Director of Public Prosecutions, 2014.)

Likewise, French courts ruled settlement products are not illegal. The Court of Appeals of Versailles dismissed a case against French companies involved in building the Jerusalem light rail, which partially crosses the 1949 Armistice Line.

The court held that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to private companies, and thus do not ban private economic activity in settlements. It confirmed that the occupying power has a duty to administer the territory, including by creating transportation infrastructure.

For more Myths & Facts on the UN's anti-Israeli blacklist, click here: unwatch.org/u-n-s-anti-isr…