On September 18, the United Nations (UNGA) adopted a resolution calling for Israel to end its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory within a year. The vote, which ended with 124 in favor, 12 against, and 43 abstentions, was interpreted by some as an important victory for the Palestinian cause.
However, the fact that 54 countries (excluding Israel) – which make up about 28 percent of all member states – did not support this resolution cannot be ignored. It not only implies a failure of moral courage but also underscores the rampant hypocrisy that continues to shape global governance. In fact, it reflects ongoing efforts to undermine the international regime to ensure Israel’s impunity.
The resolution in question calls for Israel to “end without delay its illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. It reiterated the findings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which ruled in July that Israel’s occupation was illegal, that its occupation of Palestinian land is illegal and must be dismantled, and that it needs to pay compensation for the damage caused to the Palestinians.
International law is very clear on the question of residency: it is a criminal act. The consensus among international scholars insists that an occupier cannot claim the right to self-defense from his own people – an argument Israel has used to justify its heinous acts of genocide.
In the context of this decision of the World Court, voting against and abstaining from voting on the UNGA decision cannot be dismissed as mere political neutrality. By choosing not to support a resolution that reaffirms the illegality of Israeli occupation, these nations are implicitly condoning Israel’s actions and contributing to the perpetuation of a situation characterized by brutal oppression and suffering. They also openly ignore and thus attack the provisions of international law.
It is important to remember that this vote came amid ongoing Israeli violence against Gaza and the West Bank, where approximately 42,000 Palestinians – most of them women and children – have been killed and more than 100,000 injured. In January, the ICJ issued its first ruling that Israel had “manifestly” violated the Genocide Convention for its actions in Gaza. This genocidal violence is a direct result of decades of illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.
The October 7 attack last year by Hamas cannot be viewed in isolation. It stems from decades of brutal treatment that have left Palestinians trapped in what many describe as the world’s largest open prison, where systematic oppression, displacement and violence have defined the lives of millions of Palestinians. Understanding this context is essential to address the underlying issues and move towards a just and lasting resolution that respects the dignity and humanity of all involved.
One of the 12 countries that voted against the resolution – the United States – has long supported the attack on Israel, sending billions of weapons to its war before and after October. For its role in arming Israel, the US has been repeatedly accused of complicity in Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Ironically, the US representative at the UN voted “no” despite the fact that Judge Sarah Cleveland, the US representative at the ICJ, voted to go along with all of the court’s opinions in the July decision.
What makes America’s position so problematic is that it stands in stark contrast to jobs elsewhere. In 2022, when Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine and seized parts of its territory, Washington was at the forefront of global condemnation, sending billions in military and financial aid to the Ukrainian army. This set an alarming double standard followed by other countries allied with the US.
The United Kingdom, for example, expressed “grave concern” at the ICJ’s January ruling and rejected the allegations of genocide against Israel. On September 18, it chose to bow. Despite its legal advisers warning that British arms could be used for human rights abuses in Gaza, the British government continued to export weapons to the Israeli army, suspending just 30 of its 350 arms export licenses.
Like Washington, London has also extended substantial military support to Ukraine in the fight against the Russian takeover and a wholeheartedly supported investigation into war crimes committed by Russian forces.
Germany, which also abstained on September 18, is another example of a country with a worrying situation. As Israel’s main arms supplier, Germany faces serious allegations of controlling the commission of genocide, complicating its moral position and raising questions about its commitment to human rights. Its government has announced plans to intervene in the genocide trial against Israel at the ICJ, completely rejecting the allegation of extrajudicial killings.
While trying to block the trial against Israel, Germany has accelerated an investigation by its own justice system into war crimes committed in Ukraine.
Various other countries in Europe, Latin America, Asia and the Pacific – most of which are allies of the US and NATO – also voted against the UNGA resolution or did not agree, putting national considerations above international law and ethics.
The hypocrisy inherent in this international cooperation raises serious questions about the integrity of the international legal framework. Why are the violations committed by Israel, a coalition of powerful Western nations, met with silence or adequate condemnation while others are not? This conflict not only deepens the divide between the West and the Global South, but also undermines the legitimacy of international law and its ability to prevent atrocities.
The more Israel is protected by these countries, the more it violates international law without fear of consequences and the more cruel and deadly its abuses become. And its violation does not only affect the Palestinian people. This pattern of impunity undermines the basic principles of justice and accountability and encourages others to engage in such crimes.
The withdrawal of 43 countries and the opposition of 11 others regarding the UNGA resolution sends a clear message to the whole world: “there are no rules”. This alarming trend suggests that countries with powerful militaries can act unilaterally, ignoring international law without consequence. If we fail to stop this erosion of the legal regime, we risk entering a world governed by the “law of the jungle”.
Such a breakdown of international law would have catastrophic implications for human civilization. It can promote a situation where the powerful can trample on the rights of the weak, perpetuating violence and oppression. The hypocrisy seen in the global response to the plight of Palestine is an example of this dangerous disregard for justice and accountability. As these 54 countries continue to ignore serious violations, the foundations of global order are threatened.
To restore faith in international law, countries must prioritize human rights over strategic interests. This requires solidarity from the international community. Nations must hold each other accountable for their actions and speak out against violations, regardless of whether they are political parties or alliances. A true commitment to justice requires that the principles of international law be applied consistently and impartially.
Only with decisive action can the principles of international law be upheld and the world saved from a dark, lawless future.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.
Source link
