UN report targeting Israel sparks backlash, author accused of overstepping her mandate
The report was authored and presented by U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories Francesca Albanese, a controversial figure who has been condemned by multiple nations for making allegedly antisemitic remarks. In her latest report, she calls for sanctions against "entities and individuals involved in activities that may endanger the Palestinians."
NGO Monitor Legal Advisor Anne Herzberg said that while it's not surprising that Albanese would issue a scathing report on Israel, as she has done so many times in the past, this latest report was unique.
"I think that the difference now is that this report explicitly endorses adopting BDS — boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel — in a very overt way," Herzberg told Fox News Digital. She added that even though Albanese is an independent investigator, the report could be interpreted as the U.N. supporting the BDS movement against Israel.
In response to a Fox News Digital request for comment, the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said "special procedures experts," like Albanese "work on a voluntary basis," do not receive a salary and are not U.N. staff.
"While the U.N. Human Rights office acts as the secretariat for special procedures, the experts serve in their individual capacity and are independent from any government or organization, including OHCHR and the U.N.," OHCHR's media team told Fox News Digital. "Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the U.N. or OHCHR."
Herzog told Fox News Digital that not only did Albanese overstep the boundaries of her role, but so did the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC), as it does not have the authority to issue sanctions, something the report recommends.
"The U.N. Human Rights Council, which is where she presented her report, and that's under whose auspices she is working, does not have the power under the U.N. charter to issue sanctions," Herzog said. "And so not only has she overstepped her mandate as a rapporteur, the U.N. Human Rights Council by endorsing this, not endorsing the report, but by allowing this report to be published."
Herzog said she saw "threatening and harassing" letters that Albanese sent to companies and NGOs "basically threatening them with being included on her boycott list and claiming that they were complicit in international crimes like genocide, apartheid, blocking self-determination or Palestinians."
The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights is a voluntary code that companies can sign on to as a pledge to be mindful of how their operations run and their customers are treated. Herzog argued that Albanese "weaponizes this voluntary positive, pluralistic framework" and that she does so improperly, making it a "binding punitive framework."
"Not only is she distorting international law, she's distorting this UNGP framework, and I suspect that if this type of activity of hers gains purchase or other people start following in her footsteps, she's going to be responsible for basically destroying the whole area of business and human rights."
Albanese presented her report to the UNHRC on Thursday, just two days after the U.S. called for her removal over her "years-long pattern of antisemitism and anti-Israel bias."
In the report, Albanese claims that corporations have aided Israel in "its ongoing genocidal campaign in Gaza." She repeated this claim at UNHRC on Thursday, charging Israel with being "responsible for one of the cruelest genocides in modern history." She also accused Israel of using the war in Gaza as a testing ground for new weapons "to exterminate a people without restraint."
Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. in Geneva Daniel Meron, who was not present at the UNHRC meeting, told Fox News Digital that through her report Albanese is "willingly spearheading the global efforts to promote terrorism propaganda."
"This report, just like all others by this rapporteur, is riddled with inflammatory rhetoric and is legally baseless," Meron told Fox News Digital. "Her obsession with demonizing Israel is clear in the narrative she pushes."
Albanese did not respond to Fox News Digital's questions or request for comment in time for publication.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
44 minutes ago
- New York Post
Rep. Ilhan Omar's activist daughter unemployed, selling used clothes 15 months after arrest at Columbia anti-Israel protest
Rep. Ilhan Omar's (D-Minn.) daughter revealed Tuesday that she's unemployed after graduating from Barnard College — the elite school that suspended her last year after her arrest at a Columbia University anti-Israel protest. 'Unemployment got me,' Isra Hirsi captioned an Instagram Story selfie. The 22-year-old jobless activist is apparently getting by peddling some of her old clothes to her more than 82,000 followers on the social media platform. Advertisement 'I am now selling on [Depop]!! Check out if u wish,' Hirsi wrote, including a link to her page on the clothing resale app. 3 Hirsi revealed she's still unemployed following her graduation from Barnard in May. Instagram Multiple skirts, a pair of Dr. Martens boots and Hirsi's 'beloved multicolored striped cardigan' are among the items the keffiyeh-wearing college grad is looking to unload on the marketplace. Advertisement Hirsi was one of more than 100 anti-Israel protesters who were hauled away in cuffs by the NYPD last April after erecting a tent city on Columbia University's Morningside Campus. The self-described 'hyper-woke' member of the Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD) group was suspended from Barnard College after her arrest, but the institution's president offered to lift the punishment less than a week later — after Hirsi claimed she was homeless and couldn't get food after being kicked out of the $90,000-per-year school. Hirsi graduated from Barnard in May. 'There is no greater joy as a parent than seeing your child succeed, and today I am overwhelmed with joy and gratitude to see my eldest daughter Isra Hirsi graduate college,' Omar wrote on Facebook at the time, sharing pics from commencement. Advertisement 'It's been an incredible four years of tremendous growth and challenges as she navigated college life through a pandemic, move to NYC and a righteous fight against Columbia University's support of genocide,' the Minneosta Democrat added. 'I am so proud of you, Isra and I can't wait to see you flourish in the real world.' 3 Omar praised her daughter's 'righteous fight against Columbia University's support of genocide' in a Facebook post celebrating her graduation from Barnard earlier this year. Shutterstock 3 Hirsi's suspension from Barnard was quickly overturned, and she was allowed to graduate in May. William C Lopez/New York Post Advertisement Several top law firms and American CEOs have vowed not to hire graduates who engaged in discrimination or harassment of Jewish students during anti-Israel college protests that swept the nation in late 2023 and 2024. It's unclear if Hirsi's unemployment is related to her anti-Israel activities at Columbia University or Barnard.
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
USAID review raised ‘critical concerns' over Gaza aid group days before $30 million US grant
An internal government assessment shows USAID officials raised 'critical concerns' last month about a key aid group's ability to protect Palestinians and to deliver them food – just days before the State Department announced $30 million in funding for the organization. A scathing 14-page document obtained by CNN outlines a litany of problems with afunding application submitted by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a US-backed group established to provide aid following an 11-week Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. The United Nations human rights office says that hundreds of Palestinians have since been killed around private aid sites, including those operated by GHF. The assessment flags a range of concerns, from an overall plan missing 'even basic details' to a proposal to potentially distribute powdered baby formula in an area that lacks clean water to prepare it. A USAID official came to a clear conclusion in the report: 'I do not concur with moving forward with GHF given operational and reputational risks and lack of oversight.' 'The application was abysmal… it was sorely lacking real content,' a source familiar with the application told CNN on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Trump administration officials have consistently downplayed and rejected criticisms about GHF. Israel has also disputed media reports, eyewitness and doctor accounts, and Palestinian officials blaming the Israeli military for killing aid-seekers near GHF sites. A State Department spokesperson said in a statement to CNN Tuesday that the funding for GHF will fulfill 'President Trump's commitment to feed the people of Gaza' and accused critics of engaging in 'bureaucratic turf wars.' 'The Department provided emergency support to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation after determining that it was the only viable way to get aid into Gaza without empowering Hamas,' the spokesperson said. 'GHF is a results-focused alternative to a broken aid system, delivering more than 66 million meals to the people of Gaza in just weeks.' A GHF spokesperson defended the organization's work in Gaza and described the USAID assessment as normal for a funding application. 'As with any U.S. Government procurement process, questions and requests for clarification from USAID/State are routine,' GHF spokesperson Chapin Fay told CNN in a statement. 'We are addressing each question as per regulations and normal procedure and will continue to do so as required.' The 14-page document outlining USAID's outstanding questions and concerns was not sent to GHF before the funding was approved, according to another source familiar with the matter who spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity because they are not officially authorized to speak. Instead, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the top political appointee for foreign assistance, Jeremy Lewin, pressed for the approval for U.S. funding to be fast-tracked, the two sources said. It is unclear whether top political leadership read the full 14-page document. One of the sources said USAID staff had voiced concerns internally about working with GHF, especially given the humanitarian principle of 'do no harm.' In an internal memo dated June 24 – four days after the date listed on the assessment – a top political appointee at the State Department, Kenneth Jackson, recommended that Lewin 'waive the various criteria given the humanitarian and political urgency of GHF's operations.' Both Lewin and Jackson were initially installed into government roles by the Elon Musk-backed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The State Department announced the award two days later and sent GHF a document conveying requirements for the funds, including some related to concerns raised by USAID. Tranches of the $30 million award will be released when GHF completes key tasks – including many typically required before funding is approved, like registering in the government system, pre-vetting partners and providing evidence of external audits. As of last week, the funding had not yet been disbursed, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said. The previously unreported details in the assessment echo international criticism of GHF's ability to act as the primary aid distributor to thousands of Gazans living in desperate conditions and highlight how the Trump administration greenlit funding for the group despite career staffers' concerns. The swift approval of the funding for GHF comes amid mounting international pressure against the group's militarized operation, which relies on armed American security contractors working in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces. 'Today, Palestinians in Gaza face an impossible choice: starve or risk being shot while trying desperately to reach food to feed their families,' said a joint statement last week from over 240 NGOs calling for an immediate end to GHF's operation. GHF has faced significant controversy since it was established. The group's head resigned before operations began in late May, citing concerns over the organization's adherence to humanitarian principles. Amid ongoing reports of deadly violence outside GHF's four Gaza aid sites, the group in early June submitted a page-and-a-half long request seeking emergency humanitarian funding, according to one of the sources. USAID officials asked GHF to submit more documentation to support the request. But a more fulsome proposal sent by the group was still 'missing several required elements,' according to the USAID assessment, which included dozens of clarification questions and requests for more details. The internal review found that GHF's application was missing at least nine elements typically required for an award to be approved. A three-page long risk planning document lacked detailed explanations on its plans to ensure Palestinians in need would receive aid, the USAID assessment found. The risk management plan 'does not provide sufficient information to ensure that aid will reach intended recipients,' it said. Another brief document meant to detail GHF's mission did not meet 'requirements for Safe and Accountable programming,' the review said. 'GHF must explain how it will Do No Harm,' USAID said in the feedback form, asking the group to provide 'specific details' of plans to ensure safety, access, and accountability. USAID also asked GHF to review its budget to ensure line items correctly added up, and noted 'inconsistent' timelines for the project across the application. According to the proposal, GHF estimated that in the month of June it needed roughly $100 million in operating costs, with the group seeking $30 million of that total from the State Department. GHF's proposal also noted a planned expansion from four to eight aid distribution sites across Gaza – but did not include details on where the sites would be located. 'Is GHF able to provide a map indicating where the distribution points will be?' USAID asked in the feedback form. It also questioned how the $30 million in funding would be used for the expansion, noting the budget 'does not provide sufficient detail' to assess whether GHF would have adequate staffing for eight sites. While GHF proposed that it could distribute infant formula, the assessment noted that without following USAID guidelines, formula 'is dangerous and can increase infant morbidity and mortality due to contamination from unsafe water and poor preparation practices.' 'Powder milk formula must be prepared with sterilized/boiled water, which is difficult in the current context,' the form said. It also asked the organization to give details on how it was working to ensure that there were facilities and fuel for people to prepare the food it distributed. Under normal procedures, the concerns outlined in the assessment would have been relayed to GHF before the funding was approved, the sources told CNN, and the group would have time to reply before a decision was made. That did not happen. On June 26, the State Department publicly announced the approval of the $30 million in funding and encouraged other countries to contribute. A former USAID official who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation said that there is precedent for a quick approval process, but that is typically reserved for trusted partners. Under normal procedural circumstances, GHF would likely not have been funded, the official said. In an internal State Department memo on June 30, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee touted the approved award and praised GHF's operations inside Gaza. 'After monitoring the success of GHF, the Department of State announced a $30 million grant to GHF on June 26 that will enable GHF to continue its critical operations and expand to more distribution sites,' Huckabee wrote. The memo focused on GHF's 'success' in undermining Hamas, alleging the militant group is stealing aid in Gaza and profiting from sales, though Israel hasn't presented any evidence publicly to back up the claim. Trump administration officials defended GHF against growing criticism from human rights groups amid mounting death tolls around the aid sites as starving Palestinians clamor for assistance. Officials have blamed Hamas for the deadly violence and suggested publicly and privately that GHF is the only effective way to get aid into the besieged enclave. 'GHF is a decisive break from a status quo that has enabled corruption and complicity in enabling the continued rule of terrorists,' a State Department spokesperson said in a statement to CNN. Last week, an Associated Press report found American contractors guarding aid distribution sites in Gaza used live ammunition and stun grenades as Palestinians attempted to access food. An internal State Department memo outlining coverage of GHF, including negative headlines, was recalled and replaced with a memo only containing positive coverage, another source told CNN. A State Department official last week suggested the US could provide further funding to GHF, saying that if the organization continues to operate 'safely and securely and consistent with sort of the principles that we've laid out for them, then we're happy to invest more in them.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
If there is a ceasefire tomorrow, were the last four months of fighting 'worth it?'
How much more did Israel really defeat Hamas than it had already done, and how much did it lose in doing so? Whether it is one day, a few days, or a couple of weeks, the chances of another ceasefire is growing – possibly one that ends the war entirely – which will leave the question of whether Israel's returning to fighting since March and other new moves were worth it. How much more did Israel really defeat Hamas than it had already done – and how much did it lose in doing so? On the con side of the coin, 37 IDF soldiers have been killed since March, and another approximately 200 have been wounded. The numbers especially increased since the anti-Hamas operation picked up its intensity in early May, with more soldiers standing in fixed spots and performing patrols in repetitive patterns in order to hold territory, which makes them easier to target. All of this was once again highlighted on Tuesday with the IDF announcing that five soldiers had been killed and 12 wounded in an ambush in Beit Hanun in northern Gaza – one of sometimes weekly, sometimes daily announcements of soldiers' deaths and injuries in recent months. Another con is that throughout this time, the 20 remaining live hostages have continued to suffer unimaginable conditions that they might not have suffered if the January-March ceasefire had continued and Israel had ended the war. Extending the war for four more months has seen between 20% and 40% of reservists' commitment to serve become shaken in many units (there is a constant debate on the real number), with potential long-term negative impacts on the IDF. This has neutralized and overtaken some of the unusual 'rally round the flag' effect that was seen at the start of the war. On the pro side, the IDF invasion progressed into new areas, and destruction of more tunnels helped it finally locate and kill Mohammed Sinwar, who had replaced his brother Yahya Sinwar as head of Hamas since the latter was killed in October 2024. Moreover, the IDF rescued several bodies of deceased hostages in multiple special operations, which it likely was only able to do after it held complete and extended control of specific areas it had not dared to remain in for any length of time at earlier stages of the war. Leaks from Israel-Hamas ceasefire negotiations have indicated that increased military pressure since March has led Hamas to give up on getting Israel to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor. In addition, the Gazan terror group seems ready to handover more hostages without a loud and precise Israeli commitment to end the war, something it was not ready to do four months ago. Whether this is because of added IDF military pressure or a greater readiness by Hamas to trust that US President Donald Trump will hold Israel back, after he called back an Israeli airstrike following the ceasefire with Iran, is an open debate. But either way, the events of recent months do seem to have weakened Hamas's negotiating positions somewhat. Maybe the largest issue in determining success or failure is the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's aid initiative. The purpose of this initiative was to break Hamas's control over food in Gaza, and therefore, to take a major bite out of its political control of Palestinian civilians there. GHF has had some notable successes, but also some notable failures. Although some of them have not been the 'fault' of the foundation, they have been failures nonetheless. On the overwhelmingly positive side, GHF has now provided 66 million meals from four different food distribution centers in southern and central Gaza to Palestinians since it started operating in late May. For several hundred thousand Palestinians and possibly far more, Hamas no longer controls their food needs as a threat to hold over them. This is a radical change in the reality of Gaza and one of the first major challenges to Hamas's political rule. The initiative has yet to help Palestinians in northern Gaza and some other areas, but it is a potential game changer in many ways if it manages to continue. On the other hand, somewhere between several dozen and several hundred Palestinians have been killed with some kind of connection to the new GHF project. According to the aid organization, and there is no contrary hard evidence to date, no Palestinians have been killed within their facilities. That said, critics of Israel and the GHF, mostly based on Hamas-sponsored statistics, have claimed that several hundred Palestinians have been killed by the IDF near or on their way to GHF sites. Confusingly, the IDF is not present within those food centers, but does supervise entry to travel lanes that lead to them. Even the IDF has admitted that it has probably mistakenly killed several dozen Palestinians in three to four incidents where soldiers mistook Palestinian crowds for Hamas or otherwise lost their cool when those crowds were running toward the food centers in close proximity to the soldiers. Some of these incidents are under investigation by the IDF and could even lead to charges being brought against some soldiers, but the military still says that the Hamas-sponsored numbers parroted by much of the global media are highly exaggerated. One reason to believe the IDF regarding the GHF controversy is that it has not challenged the idea that it has mistakenly killed tens of thousands of Palestinians during the 20-month war, though it frames that point with reducing the Hamas sponsored numbers of dead by over 20,000 killed Hamas fighters and blames the terrorist group for using civilians as human shields. Taking all of this into account, the fact is that if not for Israel and the GHF starting this new food distribution project, at least dozens of Palestinian civilians would probably not have been killed, even if their food needs would still be wrongfully controlled by Hamas. However, Israel tries to spin that fact, in broad terms, it is clearly on the failure side of the 'balance sheet' in grading the last few months of the war. There are other, smaller negative incidents regarding the mix of the IDF and the GHF. In fact, the aid group, though clearly supportive of Israel, even filed a series of complaints against soldiers for 'harassing' their food trucks near the central Gaza food center for several consecutive days. GHF never explained the nature of the harassment, but it was significant that they publicized the criticism of the IDF and that it took several days to be resolved. There have been two incidents in which foundation workers were either killed or wounded due to attacks by Hamas. These workers knew the risks they were taking and their deaths or injuries may not have strategic significance, but they are certainly cons in the overall scheme. Meanwhile, the UN and the NGO community continue to boycott the GHF. This boycott may be well-meaning, in a vacuum divorced from reality, in terms of general humanitarian principles that the GHF should not restrict food distribution to anyone, including members of Hamas. But in the real world, the boycott is unfair and short-sighted in that it puts pressure on Israel to allow Hamas to retain its control over food for Palestinian civilians. And yet, after around seven weeks of operations, the GHF has made no progress bringing the international humanitarian community in to assist it. The reasons for this may ultimately be irrelevant, and the foundation may not be viable long-term. There have always been concerns about its funding, with largely undenied or not fully denied reports that Israel has provided some funding through odd side channels and straw companies, and with other funding coming on a temporary basis from the US or American Evangelicals supportive of Israel. But is that mix of sponsors a steady permanent source of support for food for over two million people? Also, in terms of the food distribution process within the GHF facilities, top Israeli officials have simultaneously praised the aid group while labeling the process 'chaos,' with Palestinians dashing in first come first serve to grab food, and not always leaving enough food for slower or weaker sectors. The GHF has responded to questions from The Jerusalem Post on these matters, saying, "GHF is the only aid organization providing food safely and reliably. In just a few short weeks, we have proven that we can deliver food directly to those who need it in one of the most challenging and complex environments in the world. We are actively working to scale up food aid operations to meet the urgent and overwhelming needs of the population in Gaza." Regarding reports of chaos at aid distribution sites, saying, "There is a food insecurity problem in Gaza. In Gaza's current environment, marked by severe food shortages and widespread desperation, failing to address the reality on the ground is having deadly consequences." "Until there is enough food in Gaza, chaos will persist, and that chaos must be managed responsibly," a representative noted. The GHF also clarified that despite the threats to its personnel, it remains committed to distributing aid to Gazans. "GHF has repeatedly warned of credible threats from Hamas, including explicit plans to target American personnel, Palestinian aid workers, and the civilians who rely on our sites for food. Despite this violence, GHF remains fully committed to its mission: feeding the people of Gaza safely, directly, and at scale." "Attempts to disrupt this life-saving work will only deepen the crisis. We will continue to stand with the people of Gaza and do everything in our power to deliver the aid they urgently need." GHF Interim Executive Director John Acree also pointed to a financial commitment from the US government to the amount of $30 million for funding for continued operations, saying, "This commitment reflects a simple truth: Americans deeply care about the humanitarian situation in Gaza and want to see real action, starting with getting food to those who need it most without interference from Hamas and other terrorists." "We are grateful for the support from President Trump and his administration in getting life-saving aid directly into the hands of the Palestinian people in Gaza. Now is the time for unity and collaboration. We look forward to other aid and humanitarian organizations joining us so we can feed even more Gazans, together," Acree concluded. Returning to the broader picture, reigniting the war in March also led to a return of Yemen's Houthis firing rockets into the home front. While not a strategic problem, this is a large negative for Israel economically, as well as for terrorizing Israelis psychologically. Some may try to debate how the Iran war works into all of this, but Jerusalem could have struck Tehran with or without an ongoing war with Hamas. The Israeli win against Iran may have helped make Hamas more ready to make certain concessions, but it did not completely change its attitude. Looking through this whole list of factors, the question of whether the last four months of war were 'worth it' is highly complex and not one-sided. Ultimately, in deciding whether all of this was 'worth it,' most observers will probably look at what terms Israel and Hamas agree to and how truly different they are than the terms the terrorist group offered for a return of the hostages and an end to the war in March.
