The 2010 Goldstone Report, as it came to be known, accused Israel of crimes against civilians. “If I had known then what I know now,” the judge allows, “the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.”
In his revisionist editorial, the judge writes, it now “goes without saying that crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional, that its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.” Israel, on the other hand, presented clear evidence that “civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.”
“Some have suggested,” he concludes, “that it was absurd to expect Hamas . . . to investigate what we said were serious war crimes. It was my hope, even if unrealistic, that Hamas would do so,[!!!] especially if Israel conducted its own investigations. . . . Sadly that has not been the case. Hundreds more rockets and mortar rounds have been directed at civilian targets in southern Israel.”
The judge’s coup de grace on the report that bears his name is the following: “The United Nations Human Rights Council should condemn these heinous acts in the strongest terms.” Fat chance. As Goldstone well knows, that council’s current membership includes such major human rights exemplars as China, Cuba, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Libya. The South African’s about-face is welcome, but far too little and much too late.
The world is going where it is going. Just interesting.