Crikey

If an American envoy to Iraq were to comment proudly in the press that he’d never shaken hands with a black man, or a Buddhist, or someone from Thailand, there would be burnings-in-effigy and rioting in the streets. And if Bush then declined to condemn the comment and fire the guy, it would discredit US diplomacy around the world.

So why do these guys get a pass?

Israel’s mission to the United Nations officially protested statements made last week by the UN’s envoy to Iraq, Lakhdar Brahimi, in which he called the Jewish state’s policies “the great poison in the region.”
The protest comes amid revelations by UN sources that Brahimi, a UN undersecretary-general and former Foreign Minister of Algeria, has boasted that he has never knowingly shaken hands with an Israeli or a Jew. Israel’s ambassador to the UN Dan Gillerman said that the boast, reported Tuesday in the New York Sun, proves Brahimi’s “prejudice, bigotry and anti-Semitism.”
In an April 26 letter to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Gillerman wrote that Brahimi’s statements, made to a French radio station last week, “put in doubt the objectivity of the UN staff.”
Gillerman added: “This is particularly true in this case given that Israel’s situation is not a part of Mr. Brahimi’s responsibilities, and it is improper for him to use the stature provided by his UN office to vent his personal opinions. Doing so, especially in such a vitriolic and biased manner, heightens concerns that have been raised about the UN’s own impartiality and objectivity.”

And remember that this is the wise diplomat sent to Iraq by the UN to help promote Iraqi sovereignty. Well, at least he doesn’t have the support in this stuff from his bosses, right?

The Israeli mission has also expressed concern with the UN’s response to Brahimi’s comments; last week, Annan’s spokeman, Fred Eckhard, said Friday at a press breifing that Brahimi was speaking in his personal capacity, and he noted that as a former Algerian official, Brahimi “brings to the table strongly-held and strongly-expressed views about the Middle East peace process.” Asked whether Israel’s policies are, in fact, “poison,” Eckhard called the issue “politically complex.” He noted after repeated questioning that Annan’s views on Israel “do not contain the word ‘poison.'”

Well, that’s reassuring.

(via Daimnation)