Toronto Star

Hope for saving U.S. reputation

- FAISAL KUTTY CONTRIBUTO­R FAISAL KUTTY IS A LAWYER AND LAW PROFESSOR. YOU CAN FOLLOW HIM ON X: @THEMUSLIML­AWYER

According to recent polls, up to 67 per cent of Americans are in favour of a ceasefire in Gaza. Another 62 per cent of Biden voters want an end to weapons shipments “until Israel discontinu­es its attack.”

Despite the resignatio­n of three Biden appointees, the self-immolation of an active-duty U.S. soldier, a growing list of U.S. officials expressing opposition and even an unpreceden­ted 100,000 Michigan voters casting ballots as “uncommitte­d” in the Democratic primary, it is business as usual.

Prior to March 25, the U.S. vetoed three security council ceasefire resolution­s. In December, out of desperatio­n, the UN secretary-general even invoked Article 99 of the UN Charter — last used more than half a century ago — to force the issue. In the resulting vote, 153 of the 186 UN members supported an immediate ceasefire call. Ultimately, the security council did not pursue enforcemen­t steps because of the dreaded U.S. veto.

So, it was a pleasant surprise when Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced a U.S. ceasefire resolution. The March 22 resolution was vetoed by Russia and China because it did not call out Israel, but a revised version passed on March 25 with the U.S. abstaining.

The resolution called for an immediate ceasefire for the rest of Ramadan “leading to lasting peace,” though the council rejected a Russia-proposed amendment for a permanent ceasefire.

UNS 2728 also called for an unconditio­nal release of Israeli hostages, but there was no mention of the thousands of Palestinia­ns held without charges.

In a sneaky twist, the resolution was adopted under Chapter V1, which is different from the usual Chapter of the UN Charter used, allowing the U.S. to exploit difference­s of opinion among jurists to argue that it was not legally enforceabl­e. The U.S. immediatel­y and inaccurate­ly called it “nonbinding.”

On closer review, it appears the U.S. proposal was smoke and mirrors to appease growing opposition while pushing through a “relief” package for Israel.

The massive financial package passed last week allocates $14 billion to support Israel, including $4 billion to boost Israel’s Air defences and $1.2 billion for the Iron Beam, a laser weapons system.

At the same time, it cut funding from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) until March 2025, after Israel accused 12 of the agency’s 13,000 employees of participat­ing in the Oct. 7 Hamas attack. UNRWA head Philippe Lazzarini terminated employees but later expressed regret because he found no evidence.

A fact confirmed by media investigat­ors and others, including U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who called the Israeli claims “flat-out lies.” The European Union and countries including Canada, Sweden, Denmark and Australia subsequent­ly resumed funding, while others, including Saudi Arabia, increased donations.

In what seems like blackmail, the bill limits funding to the Palestine Authority if they seek UN membership or if they pursue or support

Internatio­nal Criminal Court (ICC) investigat­ions against Israelis.

Funding to the Independen­t Internatio­nal Commission of Inquiry, which was mandated to investigat­e war crimes, was also eliminated.

The bill also withholds UN Human Rights Council funding for its alleged “anti-Israel” bias and further directs UN agencies to report on attempts to combat bias. Lastly, all assistance to Gaza will now be co-ordinated with Israel.

Rewarding Israel won’t end killings. That will only happen if the American public calls out the two elephants in the room.

First, the Israeli lobby’s prioritiza­tion of Israeli interests over American interests must be opposed. This was first highlighte­d by congressma­n Paul Findley’s 1985 book “They Dare to Speak Out” and reinforced by the 2007 book “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” by political scientists John Mearsheime­r and Steven Walt.

Second, Biden’s unwavering support for Israel must be challenged. During the 1982 Lebanon invasion, Biden defended Israel, even as President Ronald Reagan urged Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin to halt his actions described as a “Holocaust” in Lebanon.

Begin, a former leader of the Irgun, a designated terrorist group by the UN, U.S. and U.K., was astonished by Biden’s audacity. Begin recounted how Biden praised Israel and to Begin’s shock, Biden had said “he would go even further than Israel, even if that meant killing women or children.”

Salvaging what’s left of America’s global reputation and its claimed liberal, rules-based internatio­nal order now rests solely with American voters, particular­ly Democrats. Wresting control of American foreign policy from the Israeli Lobby and Israel’s staunchest supporter in the White House is imperative for global security.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada