United States patronizing genocide by Israel

"Given the staggering death toll—with more than 20,000 killed in over two months—and the horrifying scale of destruction and devastation in Gaza, this is simply unacceptable," said the head of Amnesty International.

The United States on Friday abstained from voting on a UN Security Council resolution that it repeatedly stonewalled and lobbied to weaken in the face of intense international opposition as Israeli forces continue to kill hundreds of Palestinians daily.

The newly passed resolution—which was introduced by the United Arab Emirates—calls for urgent and extended humanitarian pauses and corridors throughout the Gaza Strip for a sufficient number of days to enable full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access.

Thirteen Security Council members voted in favor of the resolution. Russia joined the United States in abstaining.

 The resolution language is weaker than that of an earlier draft calling for an urgent and sustainable cessation of hostilities. Also removed from the final version was language condemning Israel's indiscriminate attacks on Palestinian civilians, tens of thousands of whom have been killed, wounded, or left missing during 77 days of Israeli onslaught.

The vote came just after Russia proposed an amendment that would have restored language calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities to the resolution. The US vetoed the amendment.

"It is disgraceful that the US was able to stall and use the threat of its veto power to force the UN Security Council to weaken a much-needed call for an immediate end to attacks by all parties," Amnesty International secretary-general Agnès Callamard said in a statement.

"This is a much-needed resolution—all efforts to address the unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza must be welcomed—but it remains woefully insufficient in the face of the ongoing carnage and extensive destruction wrought by the government of Israel's attacks in the occupied Gaza Strip," Callamard continued. "Nothing short of an immediate cease-fire is enough to alleviate the mass civilian suffering we are witnessing."

"Given the staggering death toll—with more than 20,000 killed in over two months—and the horrifying scale of destruction and devastation in Gaza, this is simply unacceptable," she added.

In a statement giving a qualified welcome to the resolution, Mary Robinson—a former UN high commissioner for human rights and Irish president who currently chairs The Elders—said, "Agreement on this weak and overdue UN Security Council resolution is better than another US veto. But the test of the resolution's success will be how many lives are saved."

"The people of Gaza are facing starvation, they need food, not words," she added. "Neither Hamas nor Israel have complied with the previous resolution agreed last month. If the Security Council is to be credible, its members must push harder for implementation of its decisions."

Lamenting that the resolution "became increasingly meaningless" as US President Joe Biden "managed to delete the call for suspension of hostilities," Trita Parsi, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said on social media Friday, "Biden's changes will help ensure that Israel's slaughter in Gaza continues while minimizing the UN's insight into what increasingly appears to be a genocide."

 Courtesy: Common Dreams

Need for resolving Kashmir conflict

Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhary has described the life of a Kashmiri in a unique manner. He asks the reader to imagine he/she is a Kashmiri born in Srinagar on January 05, 1949. By this time the reader is 73 years old and has completed nearly every phase of life. 

Decisions were taken on what to study, where to work, how to contribute, and preparing to retire, a full circle of life. But at every stage, the reminder was that he/she was not free and under Indian occupation, a kind of colonial rule. It is the story of every man and woman who lives in the Valley of Kashmir or the Jammu region, who feels helpless as well as angry.

For all Kashmiris, January 05 is a reminder that the promise was made to them on this date in 1949, which remains unfulfilled. It is the day, the United Nations Commission on India and Pakistan adopted a resolution calling for a free and fair plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir. Ever since, like a ritual, the Kashmiris mark self-determination day, hoping that the world would listen. But year after year, the frustration has mounted. It is understandably getting hard for the Kashmiris to keep faith in international justice, or even stay optimistic. Yet the Kashmiris struggle goes on, the torch of freedom remains aloft.

The right of a nation or community to self-determination is an important principle of the UN Charter. When the UN was born in 1945, it had only 73 members. Over the years, scores of nations attained their independence thanks to the principle of self-determination, swelling the UN membership to 193. The two peoples that could not access their right to self-determination are the Palestinians and Kashmiris.

Most of the Kashmiris have close relations with the people living in central and northern Punjab. The rivers flow down from Kashmir to present day Pakistan for centuries. All roads from the Kashmir Valley head towards northern Punjab. Kashmir’s mandi (market) had traditionally been Rawalpindi. How can all these links be cut off simply because India does not want to let Kashmiris decide how they wish to live? One is completely surprised that even after seven decades of Kashmiri resistance against Indian rule, the Indian leadership is unable to deduce that the Kashmiris simply do not wish to live with India.

In the past two and a half years, the situation has taken an ugly turn. The Indian government abrogated Article 370 of the Indian constitution, robbed the Kashmiris of their statehood, and started inflicting further excesses on these freedom-loving people. Kashmiris often wonder what end goal India has in mind for Kashmir. Can it realistically maintain its colonial-like rule over eight million people? Perhaps not! India is already experiencing centrifugal tendencies in several parts of the country; how would India keep its internal stability by continuing its occupation of another 8m agitated souls?

Some analysts have argued that India does not wish to let Kashmiris exercise self-determination because if that happens, other regions in the country would also demand freedom. This argument contradicts the historical process. No nation can forever rule an unwilling population. Some strategists assert that Kashmir’s location is strategically important for India. Again, how can an unwilling population be a strategic asset for India? Some ambitious BJP enthusiasts are excited that after the actions of August 2019, and the introduction of a new domicile law, Kashmiris would no longer be a Muslim-majority community. This approach too would not work as all Kashmiris, including pro-India factions, have united in their opposition to the assault on Kashmiri statehood and identity.

It is important for the Indian leadership and its thought leaders to think this through. Ruling a population by force, undermining their identity, and suspecting each Kashmiri who aspires self-determination for his people, will never consolidate the Indian occupation of Kashmir.

A better alternative is to find ways to resolve the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people. The UN Security Council resolutions provide a reasonably good framework to resolve this conflict.

Can we all imagine how life would have been for every South Asian, if India had chosen the path of leading the region, not by coercion, but by mutual respect and nurturing interdependence? Today, South Asia is the least integrated and most conflict-ridden region. Can all this change? Perhaps a resolution of the Kashmir dispute could be a good beginning to defuse tensions, and let South Asia emerge as a region of peace and tranquility. Will India listen to the voice of Kashmiris? Not sure, but one does hope that one day it will.