TEHRAN — If a state’s record is entirely clean, it usually welcomes independent scrutiny to vindicate its name. Yet, Israel’s explosive reaction to the United Nations’ latest report on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence suggests an entirely different strategy: aggressive deflection.

The report, released publicly by UN Secretary-General António Guterres, formally adds Israel to a blacklist of countries whose military and security forces exhibit a documented pattern of using sexual violence and rape against detainees. The fallout was immediate. Upon viewing an advance copy, Israel’s UN mission announced it would sever all ties with Guterres’s office. Israel's permanent representative, Danny Danon, took to X to declare, "WE’RE DONE WITH YOU!" before telling news outlet i24 that listing Israeli soldiers alongside Hamas was a line that had been crossed.

But this fiery indignation avoids the central question: If Israel has nothing to hide, why is it so terrified of an independent investigation?

A documented pattern of abuse

The latest UN findings do not exist in a vacuum. They are part of a long, deeply disturbing timeline of documented abuses by Israelis against Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

- March 2025: The UN released a comprehensive report detailing the "systematic" use of physical and psychological force against Palestinian captives.

- July 2025: A subsequent UN update highlighted a horrific pattern of torture, including targeted genital beatings and severe burns inflicted during interrogations.

The latest report examines cases from 2023 onward and cites 31 explicitly verified cases of sexual violence used as a form of torture by Israeli forces. Shockingly, 10 of these victims were minors. According to Guterres, the violations spanned a horrific spectrum:

"Violations consisted of rape, including with objects, gang rape, attempted rape, physical violence to the genitals, instances of targeted shooting of the genitals, touching of breasts and genitals, strip and cavity searches conducted without apparent security justification, forced nudity, and threats of rape."

The report explicitly names the entities involved, proving that these are not the actions of a few "bad apples" but involve a broad swath of the state apparatus, including the Israeli army, the Israel Prison Service, the Keter special forces, and the Yamam unit. The abuse occurred across a network of facilities, including the notorious Sde Teiman military camp, the Etzion and Majnunah bases, and prisons such as Megiddo, Ofer, and Damon. Victims included ordinary citizens, journalists, and human rights defenders.

When confronted with these heavy charges, Israel’s diplomatic defense relies on an angry counter-attack. Ambassador Danon’s emotional pivot—asking how anyone could place his "son or daughter" on the same list as the perpetrators of the October 7 attacks—is a classic rhetorical distraction.

The existence of crimes committed on October 7 does not grant a blanket moral immunity to Israel, nor does it justify the systematic degradation of Palestinian prisoners. By focusing entirely on the crimes of its adversary, Israel attempts to shift the global gaze away from its own documented offenses.

Furthermore, Guterres noted a "continued denial of access by the Government of Israel to competent United Nations bodies to carry out investigations." For years, Israel has similarly barred the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) from inspecting the conditions of Palestinian detainees. This systematic obstruction reveals a glaring contradiction: you cannot claim an accusation is "shameful and absurd" while simultaneously locking the door to the investigators who can prove your innocence.

The myth of democratic accountability

The defense of Israel often relies on a geopolitical shield provided by Washington. U.S. Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz quickly slammed the UN report, calling it "ridiculous" to place "a democracy like Israel—with a robust rule of law that conducts investigations and holds criminals accountable—on the same level as terrorist organizations."

This defense, however, rings entirely hollow to the international community. The "robust rule of law" that Israel boasts of vanishes completely when applied to Palestinians.

This systemic failure was laid bare in a landmark disclosure by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. He detailed stomach-churning accounts of Palestinian detainees being subjected to horrific violations, including being terrorized by dogs and penetrated with batons, resulting in severe internal trauma.

Kristof correctly added a layer of political accountability that Washington desperately wishes to ignore: "American tax dollars subsidize the Israeli security establishment, so this is sexual violence in which the United States is complicit."

The response from the Israeli Foreign Ministry to Kristof's piece was predictable: they condemned it as "blood libel" and demanded the New York Times fire him. Kristof later challenged the political establishment on X, noting that if the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, the avowed Zionist Mike Huckabee, genuinely cared about human rights, Washington would condition arms transfers on ending these abuses and ensure that the Palestinians who risked their lives to speak out are not brutalized further.

For decades, Israeli officialdom has weaponized the rhetoric of civilization, routinely branding Palestinians as "uncivilized" to justify the theft of their land and the erasure of their rights. Yet, the UN report exposes the deep rot behind this civilized facade.

Reacting with theatrical rage, insulting the intelligence of the international community, and cutting ties with the UN will not change the reality on the ground. The sexual abuse of Palestinians has been documented by the UN, independent journalists, and human rights organizations alike. Until Israel allows open, unhindered international investigations, its furious denials will be seen for exactly what they are: the frantic deflections of a regime desperate to evade accountability.