On December 8, 2023, the United States exercised its veto power in the United Nations Security Council, rejecting a call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas in Gaza. This action marked the 37th time since 1945 that the United States, as one of the five permanent members of the UNSC, employed its veto authority in matters related to Israel-Palestine. Out of these 37 instances, 35 vetoes were attributed to the United States, while Russia and China vetoed two each.
The majority of these vetoed resolutions aimed to establish a framework for peace in the protracted Israel-Palestine conflict. They often called on Israel to adhere to international laws, supported Palestinian self-determination and statehood, or condemned Israeli actions such as the displacement of Palestinians and settlement activities in occupied Palestinian territories.
This history of repeated vetoes by the United States has led to a perception that diplomatic efforts to achieve peace in this longstanding conflict have become exceedingly challenging to pursue.
The gradual and consistent support extended by Western countries, particularly the United States and EU nations, to Israels actions in Gaza has brought to light a concerning double standard in their approach to international conflicts. This support, often perceived as unequivocal, has raised questions about the principles of justice, proportionality, and human rights that underpin Western foreign policy. The consequences of this support have been starkly clear, with innocent Palestinian civilians bearing the brunt of the violence and suffering in the region.
Furthermore, the ongoing occupation of sovereign Palestinian territories by Israel has been viewed by many as a flagrant violation of international law, a monstrosity that persists despite global calls for its resolution. Such occupation not only worsens the humanitarian crisis but also undermines the pursuit of a just and lasting peace in the region.
Recent statements, such as the one where former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu alluded to the possibility of nuclear annihilation, only serve to heighten tensions and deepen the sense of insecurity among Palestinians. Such rhetoric underscores the urgent need for responsible diplomacy and the international communitys commitment to a peaceful resolution that respects the rights and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.
Debates within Eastern societies have given rise to questions about the application of morality in their dealings with non-Western countries. Many individuals argue that the concept of morality is rooted in the East, largely because major religions, often considered the custodians of moral principles, originated in this region. Morality, in this context, is seen as a social mechanism for defence, varying across different societies and cultures. The expectation is that if the West genuinely aspires to create a free and just world, as they often proclaim from a moral ground, their actions and words should align. However, recent instances of Western countries supporting what are perceived as heinous war crimes by Israel in the 21st century have prompted concerns. In response to other countries questioning their support for Israel, Western nations have resorted to threats of sanctions, raising further questions about the consistency of their commitment to universal principles of justice and morality.
The former Malaysian Prime Minister, Mr. Mahathir Mohammad, has been forthright in expressing his views on the Gaza situation. He has openly criticized US President Joe Biden for attributing the missile attack on a Gaza hospital, which led to over 500 casualties, to Hamas. He dismissed Bidens claim as utterly absurd and questioned the ambiguity surrounding the origin of the blast at the Al-Ahli Arab hospital, which he believes was due to an Israeli airstrike.
Mr. Mahathir also took issue with the narrative presented to Biden by the Pentagon and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He pointed out that the Pentagon and other American institutions have previously misled the public about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He said that the US is openly endorsing the terrorist actions of Israel and granting permission for the genocide of Muslims in Gaza.
Therefore, in the contemporary geopolitical landscape, the call for unity within the Muslim Ummah in response to security threats in the Middle East holds significant relevance. The Ummah, comprising Muslim nations worldwide, faces a multitude of security challenges, ranging from political instability to violent conflicts. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and other international organizations must address the need of suffering Muslimswith a cohesive and coordinated response.
Israels actionshave been a contentious issue in the region, with allegations of war crimes and human rights violations. Without a unified stance from Muslim-majority nations, it becomes increasingly difficult to address these concerns effectively. Furthermore, without a united front, non-Western Muslim countries may be susceptible to western sanctions and other security threats. A unified approach not only enhances their bargaining power on the international stage but also facilitates greater diplomatic and economic cooperation within the Muslim world, fostering stability and security in the region.
The writer is a Geopolitical Analyst, Strategic Thinker and Editor at geopolits.com
