US hypocrisy stopping peace

Washington’s Israel stance behind repeated Western failures to resolve Palestinian question

The Palestine-Israel conflict, which spans over seven decades, serves as a potent illustration of the persistent failures of Western nations, particularly the United States, to facilitate an equitable and enduring resolution.

Over the past month, the world has been appalled by unprecedented violence which has prompted critical contemplation of the efficacy of international law, the historical backdrop of colonization, and the ramifications of massive civilian casualties that the Western media would otherwise characterize as genocide.

Reactions from Western countries to the ongoing conflict have exhibited divergence, reflecting the varying stances of individual governments. Traditionally, countries with close ties to Israel, such as the US, have vehemently asserted Israel’s right to self-defense, emphasizing its role as a pivotal ally in the Middle East. The US, in particular, reinforced its support for Israel by deploying two aircraft carriers to the region apart from sending arms and intelligence. Simultaneously, the European Union expressed solidarity with Israel’s right to self-defense.

The US has consistently displayed a pro-Israel stance, failing to act as an impartial mediator in the socalled Palestine-Israel conflict. This approach disregards the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people and bears a resemblance to the historical treatment of Native Americans by the first European settlers.

Another striking historical parallel is between the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the contemporary failure of the US approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict. The Balfour Declaration, issued by the British government during World War I, starkly exemplifies the persistent Western failure in addressing the Palestinian question.

Similarly, the US approach to the conflict, rooted in the belief that hard power can quell legitimate grievances, has conveyed counterproductive messages, exacerbating violence against Palestinians. This pattern continues as Washington supports Israel’s settlement project.

By consistently condemning Palestinian armed resistance while failing to condemn Israeli settlement expansion and nonviolent Palestinian dissent repression, the US has delegitimized all forms of resistance to occupation. Recent events vividly expose the adverse outcomes of this approach. The Biden administration’s failed attempt to normalize relations between Israel and Libya, as well as the improbable prospects for Saudi Arabia’s inclusion in the Abraham Accords, reveal the fragility of the administration’s Middle East policy.

Widespread protests across the Middle East, from Amman to Beirut, have arisen, compelling Arab leaders to denounce Israel and affirm support for the Palestinian cause. These developments have pressured Arab governments to issue active collective support for the Palestinians and refrain from directly criticizing Hamas.

Increasingly, it is becoming challenging to imagine the Global South taking the US administration’s rhetoric on human rights seriously. The glaring hypocrisy of the US and its European allies, who blindly support Israel while it restricts aid, water, and food to besieged Gaza residents and attacks on Gaza hospitals and schools, has not gone unnoticed. These nations were vocal in their condemnation of the Syrian regime’s actions in Homs, Ghouta, Aleppo, and other locations, yet they exhibited a noticeable reluctance to criticize their own ally when it employed similar tactics.

A significant Western failure, primarily led by the US, is evident in international law. The US has consistently used its veto power to block United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions related to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Since 1945, 36 UNSC draft resolutions addressing this conflict have been vetoed, with the US responsible for 34 vetoes, while Russia and China vetoed two. These resolutions aimed to establish a framework for peace, including calls for Israel to adhere to international laws, support for Palestinian self-determination, and condemnation of Israeli actions in occupied Palestinian territories.

The resolutions related to Israel vetoed by the US included issues like the invasion of southern Lebanon and the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. Notably, in 2019, the US officially recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a departure from established US policy. The only instance where the US abstained from vetoing a draft resolution was in 1972, long before the UNSC adopted China-initiated resolution 2712 (2023) on Nov 15.

A fundamental shift in the White House’s approach to the Middle East would be a prudent one, accompanied by a rigorous examination of the circumstances that have led to the current impasse.

However, two principal factors cast doubt on the likelihood of such a shift. First, the current administration continues to base its calculations on short-term interests, particularly those related to upcoming elections. It clings to the belief that victory at the polls is contingent upon demonstrating unwavering support for Israel.

Second, the deeply ingrained personal biases of the US administration, particularly within the State Department, hinder a clear-eyed, independent, and America-centric approach to the conflict. Instead, the administration’s disposition towards Israel appears to be heavily influenced by personal and familial sentiments of affinity. Undoubtedly, the US’ longstanding allegiance to Israel remains unwavering.

Meanwhile, as the world cannot tolerate the continued humanitarian disaster in Gaza, it is no longer relevant for the US-led Western countries to continue relegating the Palestinian question to obscurity. Instead, their only equitable, legitimate, and humanitarian path is to join the rest of the world in pragmatic steps to implement the two-state solution in earnest and restore lasting peace for both Israel and Palestine.