When human rights rhetoric becomes anti-Israel propaganda

Once again, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, has chosen to vilify Israel while ignoring the brutal realities that led to the war in Gaza. 

In his address to the 60th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, Turk accused Israel of “mass killing” of Palestinians and “hindering lifesaving aid.” But his rhetoric, which has become his trademark since the October 7, 2023 Hamas massacre, is more a political broadside than an impartial human rights assessment.

Since the slaughter of 1,200 Israelis and the abduction of 251 hostages by Hamas, Turk has consistently downplayed Israel’s right to self-defense. 

His language—loaded with accusations of “war crime upon war crime” and “genocidal rhetoric”—reeks of political hostility rather than sober legal analysis. By stopping short of labeling the war a genocide, he attempts to appear cautious, but his relentless barrage against Israel leaves little doubt about his stance.

This hostility is not new. Turk’s record reveals a long-standing fixation on condemning Israel while turning a blind eye to Hamas’s use of civilians as human shields, the deliberate targeting of Israeli civilians, and the terror group’s refusal to release hostages.

Selective Outrage

Turk claims Israel is “shocking the conscience of the world,” yet he shows no comparable outrage at the deliberate atrocities of Hamas or the cynical tactics that have turned Gaza’s civilians into pawns of war. 

His selective outrage exposes the deep double standards that plague the UN human rights system: Israel is condemned endlessly, while terrorist groups are excused or ignored.

Moreover, Turk’s reference to “genocidal rhetoric” from Israeli officials conveniently omits the openly genocidal charter of Hamas, which explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews.

Turk’s rhetoric not only undermines his own credibility but also further damages that of the United Nations. For years, Israel has been a favorite punching bag at UN bodies, from the Human Rights Council’s disproportionate number of resolutions targeting it to the obsessive focus of agencies meant to be global in scope.

The result is a collapse of confidence in the UN as a fair arbiter. Instead of safeguarding universal human rights, the institution is increasingly viewed as a platform for anti-Israel propaganda. Turk’s statements only deepen this perception.

Even as Turk rails against Israel, the world is witnessing human rights catastrophes in Ukraine, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

His fleeting references to these conflicts pale compared to his fixation on Israel. Meanwhile, his criticism of the United States for withdrawing from certain international frameworks shows his willingness to antagonize democracies, while brutal dictatorships often escape with token condemnation.

Turk has every right to criticize governments. But when criticism becomes obsession, and when obsession aligns with a decades-old institutional bias against the Jewish state, it ceases to be credible. 

His hostility toward Israel is not the impartial defense of human rights—it is the continuation of a narrative that has delegitimized the UN in the eyes of millions.

The tragedy is not only that Israel is unfairly singled out, but that the UN itself loses its ability to act as a serious guardian of human rights. With leaders like Turk, the institution is not advancing justice but eroding it.