DAILY MAIL COMMENT: An abject betrayal of Israel's terror victims

• e-mail

When it comes to signalling its caring, inclusive, anti-racist credentials, the Football Association is usually quick off the blocks.

Following terror attacks in France and Turkey, the national flags of those countries were projected on to Wembley Stadium's famous arch. After Putin's bloody invasion the arch was emblazoned with the blue and yellow of Ukraine.

And when the World Cup was held in Qatar, where homosexuality is illegal, it was lit up with the rainbow colours of the LBGT community in a show of solidarity.

When it comes to the racially motivated slaughter of 1,300 Israeli citizens, however, the FA's compassion and commitment to human rights seems to have wavered.

There will be no Israeli colours lighting the Wembley arch at tonight's international between England and Australia, with the FA claiming it could cause a 'backlash'. Far more likely is that they don't want to offend the oil-rich Middle Eastern states that now put so much money into the game.

The Wembley Arch was lit up in the colours of the Ukrainian flag just a day after Russia invaded the country in February 2022

It was also illuminated in rainbow colours in support of the LGBTQ + community amid the 'OneLove' armband row at the Qatar World Cup 

A mealy-mouthed statement included the trite phrase: 'We stand for humanity and an end to the death, violence and suffering.'

No explicit condemnation of Hamas. No outrage over the rape and murder of defenceless civilians. No mention of the terrified hostages. No distinction between the blood-soaked terrorists and the Israeli forces now attacking Gaza in retaliation. It was moral cowardice of the worst kind.

Contrast the FA's cravenness with its president Prince William's unequivocal denunciation of 'the horrors inflicted by Hamas's terrorist attack' and recognition of Israel's right to defend itself.

Sadly, though, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex echoed the FA with an equally bland website message deploring 'acts of terrorism and brutality' on all sides.

Let's be clear. There is no equivalence here. Israel is a democratic nation trying to defend itself, Hamas is a group of fanatical and ruthless terrorists bent on destroying it.

Vacuous statements are not enough. Sometimes we have to take sides.

Hypocrisy on Rwanda

There is a glaring hypocrisy in the UN's bitter criticism of plans to send asylum seekers from Britain to Rwanda for their claims to be processed.

In submissions to the Supreme Court, its High Commissioner for Refugees says the African nation is unsafe and may deprive migrants of their human rights.

Yet the UNHCR itself has sent more than 1,700 asylum seekers there since 2019, some as recently as June this year. If it's so dangerous, why would they do that?

In submissions to the Supreme Court, its High Commissioner for Refugees says the African nation is unsafe and may deprive migrants of their human rights. Yet the UNHCR itself has sent more than 1,700 asylum seekers there since 2019, some as recently as June this year. Pictured: Gashora Transit Centre, Rwanda, where UNHCR sent refugees

The Rwandan government is nonplussed. 'We've had a very good working relationship with the UNHCR for decades,' it says. 'They know how welcoming Rwanda is.'

The UN is also angry because it wasn't asked to be involved in thrashing out the UK/Rwanda deal. But why should it have been? As the Home Secretary's lawyers point out, this is a bilateral arrangement between two sovereign nations. 

It is none of the UN's business.

Boss Axel van Trotsenburg says the fall in donations to the bank has caused 'real pain', and he calls on the Government to restore the full funding.

You'd think we had abandoned aid altogether, when in fact the UK spent nearly £13billion last year, an increase of more than 11 per cent on 2021. This huge sum keeps us in the very top rank of the world's most charitable nations.

Instead of carping about our meanness, shouldn't Mr van Trotsenburg be trying to persuade others to match our generosity?