JUSTIN AMLER: UN’s anti-Israel obsession goes back decades

The UN’s World Health Organisation recently wrapped up its annual conference in Geneva. But rather than focusing on public health emergencies, it singled out Israel alone for condemnation in a special agenda item. Three resolutions targeting Israel were passed, compared to one each on Russia and Iran while none on any others. Sudan, in which 34 million people require urgent medical assistance, received no mention.

This unhealthy obsession with the one Jewish state is nothing new.

On November 10, 1975 the United Nations passed resolution 3379, arguably one of its most infamous resolutions ever. The resolution declared that “Zionism is racism” and marked a turning point in the relationship between Israel, the Jewish people and the international community at large. To be sure there had been resolutions condemning and criticising Israel before, but this particular resolution marked a profound shift.

Before resolution 3379, the argument had largely been that Israel is doing something wrong. After resolution 3379, the argument became that the very ideology underpinning Israel is racist. It redefined the sovereignty foundation of Israel as a crime, and in doing so, it became an attack on Jewish identity itself.

According to UN voting records, as analysed by UN Watch, more resolutions are passed by the UN General Assembly against Israel than every other country combined, including some of the world’s worst human rights violators such as Russia, Iran and North Korea. In 2025, 15 were passed against Israel compared to the rest of the world’s 11. In 2024, it was 17 to seven. And in 2023 it was 14 against eight.

That’s why UN Special Representative Pramila Patten’s decision to place the Israel Prison Service on the same blacklist as Hamas, ISIS and other terrorist entities accused of systematic sexual violence in conflict zones should not come as any great surprise. It was seen as part of this same pattern of obsession the UN has had with Israel for decades. However, what should shock fair-minded countries is Special Representative Patten’s own words during a press conference. She admitted she had not seen the evidence herself and was relying on findings from other UN investigative bodies.

For Special Representative Patten to rely on such reports without independently examining the underlying evidence, especially for something as serious as placing Israel on a blacklist and causing significant reputational damage, should concern every country. Because if one can use highly disputed and biased reporting as “evidence” of wrongdoing — then quite simply the same can happen to any country, not just Israel.

UN Watch recently released a 100-page report documenting how politicised UN Rapporteurs, rather than upholding human rights, are actually subverting them — making them not part of any solution, but an integral part of the problem.

Reem Alsalem, the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, dismissed or minimised documented sexual violence committed by Hamas against Israelis on October 7 while simultaneously endorsing unverified reports accusing Israeli soldiers of sexually abusing Palestinian women.

Israel has now released its own report documenting how UN actors have manipulated information in the Gaza War. It argues that unverified information from Hamas-controlled authorities was disseminated through UN agencies as authoritative truth, helping shape international perceptions of Israel and legitimising hostility toward Jewish communities globally.

This is not to say that every official or every committee at the United Nations is inherently tainted. Representative Patten herself acknowledged Hamas’ sexual crimes in a 2024 report. However, the bias against Israel remains impossible to ignore, driven in part by a system in which some of the world’s worst human rights abusers sit on bodies ostensibly tasked with defending human rights.

But it does mean that we should treat any report that comes out of such a morally flawed organisation with a high degree of scepticism, knowing how politically and ideologically driven these reports are.

Resolution 3379 was eventually rescinded in 1991, with Australia under prime minister Bob Hawke among the earliest countries to campaign for its repeal. Yet while the resolution itself was overturned, the mentality behind it endures.

Fifty years later, Israel continues to be judged by standards applied to no other nation, and Jewish self-determination remains uniquely suspect in the eyes of many international institutions. That is why, when it comes to the United Nations, caution is not cynicism. It is common sense.

Justin Amler is a policy analyst at the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council