Continuation of the morning meeting
🇮🇱 Israel, 🇮🇷 Islamic Republic of Iran
Thank you, Chair. I'm taking the floor to respond to a statement made today during the consideration of the resolution on the human rights in Iran. Unfortunately, as we have seen time and again, countries violating basic human rights, women's rights, rights of minorities, including religious minorities such as Jews, Baha'is, and so on, choose to cynically focus their statement on Israel. And tarnish our name in a deliberate in a deplorable attempt to shift the focus from themselves. We are deeply troubled by the reckless use of the term genocide in the meeting today. Such use of the term made without any legal determination or judicial findings amounts to misinformation and disinformation. It trivializes the gravest of crimes, distorts historical truth, and risks fueling hate speech, incitement, and threats to vulnerable groups. Israel will continue to stand firm. The crime of genocide must never be distorted, politicized, or trivialized. Israel stands with the Iranian people, who continue to demand freedom and dignity instead of oppression and fear, and we call on the international community to show the same courage and hold Tehran accountable for its actions. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to take the floor in exercise of right of reply to to several biased, unsubstantiated, and baseless allegations made against my country by the representative of Australia, UK, US, EU, and the Israeli regime during the adoption of today and during the adoption of the resolution on the so-called situation of human rights in Iran. Mr. Chair, Iran categorically rejects all of those assertions and accusations and wishes to set the record. Straight. These statements pursued confrontation rather than dialogue and consultation. They were deliberately based on false and fabricated information as well as disinformation and misinformation. None of those allegations referred to the negative consequences of unilateral coercive mission and the Israeli US aggression against Iran. This once again confirms what we have consistently said, that this resolution is political in nature and serves only as a tool of pressure against my country. How ironic. Australia does not appear to believe in its own words. Together with many others who spoke against Iran, Australia delivered a one sided, unbalanced statement regarding the human rights situation in my country. The atrocities committed by the Israeli regime against the Palestinian people, particularly in Gaza, are a stark reminder of the egregious human rights violations that have been perpetrated for f for far too long. The use of starvation as a weapon of war denying civilians access to food and water is a war crime that defies all norms of humanity. We are alarmed by the report of Ms. Francesca Albanis, a special reporter on the occupied Palestinian territories, which can which documents the complicity of Western countries in genocide in Gaza. We believe in genocide in Gaza. We need a new mechanism to report on such a proud Western countries. They shouldn't be selective when it comes to the reports and mechanisms which are against them and try to reveal the other side of the coin. A credible commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights requires coherence between the state's own acknowledgments. And the standards it applies to others. Yesterday, the UK representative acknowledged that migrants bring benefits but also bring complex challenges. Yet this recognition disappears when addressing countries such as Iran, which has hosted millions of Afghan refugees for decades and bears substantial economic and security burdens as a result. This country denies many refugees the right to seek and receive asylum, contrary to international law. The UK's position on migrants and refugees reflects a notable double standard in addressing human rights. The US, since the beginning of the Third Committee, claimed to avoid politicizing this committee, yet it has fully aligned with the backers of this purely political resolution, revealing a stark gap between words and deeds. This is particularly striking given its persistent record of racial racism and racial discrimination against Africans, people of African descent, and the suppression of students and NGOs peacefully supporting Palestine. Such contradictions are unsurprising from a state that has imposed decades of sanctions on Iran. The US is actually applying double standards, even in choosing which resolution it considers as politicizing the third committee and which it does not. It says the UN's core mission is to safeguard peace and security, yet it has vetoed every legitimate resolution seeking to stop Israelis' actions in Gaza and its warmongering in the region. We strongly urge the representative of the U.S. to remind himself that this committee is meant to promote human rights, not to punish the UN member states. Your persistent competition in making unfounded accusations has become increasingly absurd and humorous. For the EU, which has violated the human rights of all Iranians along with the US by the imposition of illegal unilateral coercive measures, we urge them to focus on their territories and save energy to handle their human rights concernings and systematic issues. They deem to espouse a commitment to human rights and democratic values, but in practice, the policies and actions of the Union and its member states always fall short. Concerning issues like sealing borders and externalizing responsibility for refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers, lack of action in combating racism and Islamophobia, the prevalence of domestic violence, high rate of trafficking of women and girls for sexual exploitation, they should be scrutinized. I thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. I see Canada asking for the floor. Are you exercising the right of reply? Uh no, this was in an explanation of vote regarding uh L thirty one. I understand there may have been a technical issue earlier with the microphone not being registered. We we have already been through that. I'm afraid I cannot give you the floor. Thank you.
Verbatim from the transcript. A reply is identified from its own words, the Chair's grant, or its place in the right-of-reply sequence; delegations and addressees follow the transcript's attribution.