H. Res. 867 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

November 3, 2009. 

Whereas, on January 12, 2009, the United Nations Human 

Rights Council passed Resolution A/HRC/S–9/L.1, which 

authorized a ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ regarding Israel’s 

conduct of Operation Cast Lead against violent militants 

in the Gaza Strip between December 27, 2008, and January 18, 2009; 

Whereas the resolution pre-judged the outcome of its investigation, by one-sidedly mandating the ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ to ‘‘investigate all violations of international human 

rights law and International Humanitarian Law by * * 

* Israel, against the Palestinian people * * * particularly 

in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression’’; 

Whereas the mandate of the ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ makes no 

mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, 

which numbered in the thousands and spanned a period 

of eight years, by Hamas and other violent militant 

groups in Gaza against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive measures; 

Whereas the ‘‘fact-finding mission’’ included a member who, 

before joining the mission, had already declared Israel 

guilty of committing atrocities in Operation Cast Lead by 

signing a public letter on January 11, 2009, published in 
2 

•HRES 867 EH 

the Sunday Times, that called Israel’s actions ‘‘war 

crimes’’; 

Whereas the mission’s flawed and biased mandate gave serious concern to many United Nations Human Rights 

Council Member States which refused to support it, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, 

and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern 

Ireland; 

Whereas the mission’s flawed and biased mandate troubled 

many distinguished individuals who refused invitations to 

head the mission; 

Whereas Justice Richard Goldstone, who chaired the ‘‘United 

Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’, 

told the then-President of the UNHRC, Nigerian Ambassador Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi, that he intended to 

broaden the mandate of the Mission to include ‘‘all violations of international human rights law and international 

humanitarian law that might have been committed at any 

time in the context of the military operations that were 

conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 

2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or 

after’’, a phrase that, according to Justice Goldstone, was 

intended to allow him to investigate Hamas attacks on 

Israeli civilians; 

Whereas Ambassador Uhomoibhi issued a statement on April 

3, 2009, that endorsed part of Justice Goldstone’s proposed broadened mandate but deleted the phrase ‘‘before, 

during, and after’’, and added inflammatory anti-Israeli 

language; 
3 

•HRES 867 EH 

Whereas a so-called broadened mandate was never officially 

endorsed by a plenary meeting of the UNHRC, neither 

in the form proposed by Justice Goldstone nor in the 

form proposed by Ambassador Uhomoibhi; 

Whereas, on September 15, 2009, the ‘‘United Nations Fact 

Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ released its report; 

Whereas the report repeatedly made sweeping and unsubstantiated determinations that the Israeli military had deliberately attacked civilians during Operation Cast Lead; 

Whereas the authors of the report admit that ‘‘we did not 

deal with the issues * * * regarding the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas and secondguessing decisions made by soldiers and their commanding officers ‘in the fog of war.’ ’’; 

Whereas in the October 16th edition of the Jewish Daily Forward, Richard Goldstone, the head of the ‘‘United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’, is 

quoted as saying, with respect to the mission’s evidencecollection methods, ‘‘If this was a court of law, there 

would have been nothing proven.’’; 

Whereas the report, in effect, denied the State of Israel the 

right to self-defense, and never noted the fact that Israel 

had the right to defend its citizens from the repeated violent attacks committed against civilian targets in southern Israel by Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations operating from Gaza; 

Whereas the report largely ignored the culpability of the Government of Iran and the Government of Syria, both of 

whom sponsor Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations; 
4 

•HRES 867 EH 

Whereas the report usually considered public statements 

made by Israeli officials not to be credible, while frequently giving uncritical credence to statements taken 

from what it called the ‘‘Gaza authorities’’, i.e. the Gaza 

leadership of Hamas; 

Whereas, notwithstanding a great body of evidence that 

Hamas and other violent Islamist groups committed war 

crimes by using civilians and civilian institutions, such as 

mosques, schools, and hospitals, as shields, the report repeatedly downplayed or cast doubt upon that claim; 

Whereas in one notable instance, the report stated that it did 

not consider the admission of a Hamas official that 

Hamas often ‘‘created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the mujahideen, against [the Israeli 

military]’’ specifically to ‘‘constitute evidence that Hamas 

forced Palestinian civilians to shield military objectives 

against attack.’’; 

Whereas Hamas was able to significantly shape the findings 

of the investigation mission’s report by selecting and 

prescreening some of the witnesses and intimidating others, as the report acknowledges when it notes that ‘‘those 

interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about 

the presence of or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups * * * from a fear of reprisals’’; 

Whereas even though Israel is a vibrant democracy with a 

vigorous and free press, the report of the ‘‘fact-finding 

mission’’ erroneously asserts that ‘‘actions of the Israeli 

government * * * have contributed significantly to a political climate in which dissent with the government and 

its actions * * * is not tolerated’’; 
5 

•HRES 867 EH 

Whereas the report recommended that the United Nations 

Human Rights Council endorse its recommendations, implement them, review their implementation, and refer the 

report to the United Nations Security Council, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, and the 

United Nations General Assembly for further action; 

Whereas the report recommended that the United Nations 

Security Council— 

(1) require the Government of Israel to launch further investigations of its conduct during Operation Cast 

Lead and report back to the Security Council within six 

months; 

(2) simultaneously appoint an ‘‘independent committee of experts’’ to monitor and report on any domestic 

legal or other proceedings undertaken by the Government 

of Israel within that 6-month period; and 

(3) refer the case to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court after that 6-month period; 

Whereas the report recommended that the United Nations 

General Assembly consider further action on the report 

and establish an escrow fund, to be funded entirely by 

the State of Israel, to ‘‘pay adequate compensation to 

Palestinians who have suffered loss and damage’’ during 

Operation Cast Lead; 

Whereas the report ignored the issue of compensation to 

Israelis who have been killed or wounded, or suffered 

other loss and damage, as a result of years of past and 

continuing rocket and mortar attacks by Hamas and 

other violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian targets in southern Israel; 

Whereas the report recommended ‘‘that States Parties to the 

Geneva Conventions of 1949 start criminal investigations 
6 

•HRES 867 EH 

[of Operation Cast Lead] in national courts, using universal jurisdiction’’ and that ‘‘following investigation, alleged perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted’’; 

Whereas the concept of ‘‘universal jurisdiction’’ has frequently been used in attempts to detain, charge, and 

prosecute Israeli and United States officials and former 

officials in connection with unfounded allegations of war 

crimes and has often unfairly impeded the travel of those 

individuals; 

Whereas the State of Israel, like many other free democracies, has an independent judicial system with a robust 

investigatory capacity and has already launched numerous investigations, many of which remain ongoing, of Operation Cast Lead and individual incidents therein; 

Whereas Libya and others have indicated that they intend to 

further pursue consideration of the report and implementation of its recommendations by the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the 

United Nations Human Rights Council, and other multilateral fora; 

Whereas the President instructed the United States Mission 

to the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva to vote against resolution A–HRC–S–12– 

1, which endorsed the report and condemned Israel, at 

the special session of the Human Rights Council held on 

October 15–16, 2009; 

Whereas, on September 30, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary 

Clinton described the mandate for the report as ‘‘onesided’’; 

Whereas, on September 17, 2009, Ambassador Susan Rice, 

United States Permanent Representative to the United 
7 

•HRES 867 EH 

Nations, expressed the United States’ ‘‘very serious concern with the mandate’’ and noted that the United States 

views the mandate ‘‘as unbalanced, one-sided and basically unacceptable’’; 

Whereas the ‘‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 

Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ reflects the longstanding, 

historic bias at the United Nations against the democratic, Jewish State of Israel; 

Whereas the ‘‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 

Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ is being exploited by 

Israel’s enemies to excuse the actions of violent militant 

groups and their state sponsors, and to justify isolation 

of and punitive measures against the democratic, Jewish 

State of Israel; 

Whereas, on October 16, 2009, the United Nations Human 

Rights Council voted 25–6 (with 11 states abstaining and 

5 not voting) to adopt resolution A–HRC–S–12–1, which 

endorsed the ‘‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ and condemned Israel, 

without mentioning Hamas, other such violent militant 

groups, or their state sponsors; and 

Whereas efforts to delegitimize the democratic State of Israel 

and deny it the right to defend its citizens and its existence can be used to delegitimize other democracies and 

deny them the same right: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) considers the ‘‘Report of the United Nations 

Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ to be irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration 

or legitimacy; 
8 

•HRES 867 EH 

(2) supports the Administration’s efforts to combat 

anti-Israel bias at the United Nations, its characterization of the ‘‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding 

Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ as ‘‘unbalanced, one-sided 

and basically unacceptable’’, and its opposition to the 

resolution on the report; 

(3) calls on the President and the Secretary of 

State to continue to strongly and unequivocally oppose 

any endorsement of the ‘‘Report of the United Nations 

Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ in multilateral fora, including through leading opposition to any 

United Nations General Assembly resolution and 

through vetoing, if necessary, any United Nations Security Council resolution that endorses the contents of this 

report, seeks to act upon the recommendations contained 

in this report, or calls on any other international body 

to take further action regarding this report; 

(4) calls on the President and the Secretary of 

State to strongly and unequivocally oppose any further 

consideration of the ‘‘Report of the United Nations Fact 

Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’’ and any other 

measures stemming from this report in multilateral fora; 

and 

(5) reaffirms its support for the democratic, Jewish 

State of Israel, for Israel’s security and right to self-de-
9 

•HRES 867 EH 

fense, and, specifically, for Israel’s right to defend its 

citizens from violent militant groups and their state 

sponsors. 

Attest: 

Clerk.