Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The ongoing situation in Gaza today poses a significant test to the international framework set up by the nations victorious in World War II in 1945, which was founded under the auspices of the United Nations. This framework was based on principles such as state sovereignty, the right to self-determination, and the respect for human rights.
The recent hostilities in Gaza, as depicted by the international media, have brought to light a perception that the notions of human rights and the right to life are predominantly associated with Europeans and Americans. This viewpoint suggests that those who do not align with these groups or are not under their influence are considered less worthy of human rights and the right to life.
Since its establishment on Palestinian lands, Israel has been frequently cited as a significant violator of international law. Despite this, it has largely escaped any form of sanction or dissuasive measures from global institutions, partly due to the protective use of the American veto. Despite the perpetration of acts that contravene humanitarian principles, this state has also received consistent and comprehensive support from the United States and its allies, encompassing financial, military, and media assistance.
Observing the media coverage in these supportive countries, especially towards any group resisting subjugation and upholding principles of equality, dignity, and independence, can be quite revealing. Furthermore, reports from the United Nations have documented numerous instances of this state’s violations of international law against Palestinians. A striking example of the humanitarian impact of these actions is evident in northern Gaza, where over 1.1 million people have been displaced, finding themselves without shelter or a clear destination, often having to sleep in the streets.
The imposition of colonial rule in the region was strategically designed to dominate vital trade routes. Subsequently, it fostered conditions of underdevelopment and lack of education to control the local populations. Furthermore, authoritarian regimes were established to act as proxies for colonial interests, ensuring the protection of these interests within the region.
Based on these events, we can observe the conduct of the Zionist entity from its inception to the present, engaging in actions that have brutally killed the children of Gaza openly and without constraint in the sight of the global community. In a show of support for this severe offensive, the United States of America has dispatched two aircraft carriers to bolster the assault on a beleaguered and besieged population. This population is cut off from essentials such as electricity, water, and fuel, disrupting health and educational services and directly impacting the fundamental human rights recognized globally.
The stance of Western countries, with Washington at the forefront, seems to indicate a disregard for the inclusion of certain peoples within the broader human community through their policies and actions. This sentiment is echoed in the words of the Zionist Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who reportedly referred to the people of Gaza as ‘human animals’, an assertion that has not drawn condemnation from the international community, often self-described as the “free world.”
The inequitable resolution of the Palestinian issue casts significant doubt on the integrity of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This pivotal document in human history was designed to safeguard human dignity and the right to life. Crafted by legal experts from diverse cultural backgrounds, it was proclaimed in Paris on December 10, 1948, under Resolution 217 A (III), as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and nations.
Given the myriad incidents that highlight its shortcomings, it might be argued that the title ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ becomes somewhat of a misnomer. The Declaration is called into question because it appears to fail in its intended role as a protective instrument for all, seemingly excluding certain groups or states from its ambit of protection.
The establishment of the Zionist state in the Middle East can also be seen as an outcome of Western colonial ambitions, which sought to create a national home for Jewish people globally, thereby alleviating demographic pressures on Europe.
Both historians and political analysts concur that the term “Middle East” itself is a vestige of colonial language tied to the geopolitical interests of colonial powers. It was initially coined by Alfred Thayer Mahan, an American naval strategist, in 1902 while examining British imperial tactics pertaining to the western and northern passageways to India.
The imposition of colonial rule in the region was strategically designed to dominate vital trade routes. Subsequently, it fostered conditions of underdevelopment and lack of education to control the local populations. Furthermore, authoritarian regimes were established to act as proxies for colonial interests, ensuring the protection of these interests within the region.
The suppression of protestors in the streets of Arab capitals is indicative of these regimes’ complicity in the wartime atrocities carried out by the entity against the civilians of Gaza, which include women and children, as was witnessed at The Al-Ahli Arab Hospital (also known as the Baptist Hospital or Al-Maamdani). Such complicity is emblematic of a moral breakdown, which is further illustrated in the imagery of Arab foreign ministers and ambassadors engaging in handshakes with their Zionist counterparts.
The issue extends far beyond a mere lapse in moral judgment; it permeates the nature of official statements delivered to European diplomatic circles and those emerging from Bahrain, for instance. The language used in these statements bears little resemblance to the on-ground realities, especially when contrasted with the stifled protests, and is deemed inappropriate for a regime that has established normalization with the Zionist entity.
Peeling back these layers reveals an attempt to reshape the world order established in the last century. This system has perpetuated a methodology positioning the West as the principal arbiters in the destiny of nations, controlling not only the narrative but also how the identity of each person is projected, all aligned with Western interests.
a more significant confrontation may arise within Arab countries between the populations and their governments. Influenced by events in Gaza and elsewhere, the people might exert pressure on their leaders to adopt policies prioritizing national interests over external alliances. This internal dynamic could lead to some of the most impactful repercussions of the current situation in Gaza.
The United States has consistently exercised its veto power to block any Security Council resolution about the ongoing aggression, with the veto being employed 10 out of the last 11 times in support of Israel. The most recent veto was used to thwart a joint Russian-Emirati proposal following an assault on the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital.
It is well understood that healthcare facilities are considered civilian entities and are afforded special safeguards under the laws of armed conflict. Despite this, Israel consistently demonstrates a refusal to adhere to these laws, offering the rationale that their actions are retaliatory. However, international law does not permit the violation of its statutes, even under the pretext of retaliation.
Hence, the Palestinian cause poses a profound test and challenge to the colonial West, now under modern guises, which opposes any resistance movement aimed at liberating Palestinian land. It also challenges those who have opted for normalization with the Zionist entity, as such a move represents a false sense of security. The underlying aim is to infiltrate local societies to shift long-standing narratives, ultimately leading to the entity’s acceptance as an ally rather than an adversary. This is evident in the educational materials of countries that currently support this stance.
The Palestinian struggle offers many insights, with a key lesson being the dynamics of power and perception in the conflict involving the Palestinian resistance, particularly Hamas, which is widely regarded as a terrorist organization by the West and its regional allies. Despite being under siege for 17 years and facing substantial misrepresentation in the media, this resistance has significantly challenged the Zionist state. This defiance could potentially contribute to reshaping global perspectives on the world order, an order that has long been criticized for its bias towards Israel and the consequent turmoil it has caused.
Looking ahead, a more significant confrontation may arise within Arab countries between the populations and their governments. Influenced by events in Gaza and elsewhere, the people might exert pressure on their leaders to adopt policies prioritizing national interests over external alliances. This internal dynamic could lead to some of the most impactful repercussions of the current situation in Gaza.
- The opinions expressed in this article express the opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions and opinions of Muwatin.