The ongoing situation in Palestine over the past
seventy-five years stands as a stark testament to the double standards often
exhibited by the international community in its protection of human rights.
The political stances of major Western countries, supporting
the Israeli occupation despite the numerous evident war crimes committed in the
Gaza Strip, and their denial of the Palestinian people’s right to
self-determination and resistance, have reignited the debate on the
international community’s commitment to the human rights system as a cohesive
entity, regardless of these countries’ political interests.
There is no clearer evidence of this than the war crimes and
crimes against humanity that have been taking place over the last six weeks,
including intentional massacres of civilians, forced displacement, bombing, and
occupation of schools and hospitals, and the siege of civilians, starving and
The political stances of major Western countries, supporting the Israeli occupation despite the numerous evident war crimes committed in the Gaza Strip, and their denial of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and resistance, have reignited the debate on the international community’s commitment to the human rights system as a cohesive entity, regardless of these countries’ political interests.
In addition to this, consider the dehumanizing statements
made by leaders of the Israeli Occupation, exemplified by the Israeli Defense
Minister’s assertion that Palestinians are akin to human animals who will be
treated accordingly. Moreover, multiple Israeli ministers have advocated for
the displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank, with some even
suggesting the use of a nuclear bomb as an option to eliminate the Palestinian
population in Gaza.
The evolution of human rights principles, transitioning from
abstract moral frameworks to international legal obligations, is a lengthy and
intricate journey deeply entwined with the changing political contexts and
power dynamics of global history. This transformation, marked by wars and
revolutions, witnessed the emergence of fundamental rights, including the
principle of self-determination and resistance to occupation.
The right of peoples to determine their political status and
freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development is acknowledged
in international law but often faces challenges, particularly in scenarios
involving occupation and colonialism. One of the most visible and enduring
struggles for self-determination is what Palestine has endured for decades. The
Palestinian people persist in their struggle against the Israeli occupation,
with their aspirations to establish their state constantly thwarted.
This situation not only underscores the complexities
inherent in realizing the right to self-determination but also raises questions
about the effectiveness and commitment of the global human rights system in
meeting the needs of occupied populations. Despite the Charter of the United
Nations, the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the United Nations resolutions
explicitly affirming the right to self-determination and the granting of independence
to colonized states and peoples, the practical implementation of these rights
is consistently obstructed in the case of Palestine.
Numerous international resolutions guarantee people the
right to self-determination and the right to resist the colonizer and occupier
by all means, including armed struggle, such as the resolutions of the United
Nations General Assembly in 1960, 1970, and 1974. Resolution No. (3236) of 1974
specifically grants the Palestinian people the right to work to restore their
rights by all means for the United Nations Charter, including armed struggle.
However, this lack of practical implementation is not merely
a matter of legal oversight or bureaucratic inertia. Instead, it is closely
linked to the geopolitical and economic interests of major powers that often
exert significant influence on the international community. These powers,
through their decisions and actions, frequently prioritize their strategic
interests, which may conflict with human rights principles.
However, this lack of practical implementation is not merely a matter of legal oversight or bureaucratic inertia. Instead, it is closely linked to the geopolitical and economic interests of major powers that often exert significant influence on the international community. These powers, through their decisions and actions, frequently prioritize their strategic interests, which may conflict with human rights principles.
The result is a noticeable decline in the international
community’s interest and intervention in issues related to self-determination
and resistance to occupation, especially when these issues do not align with
the interests of these influential countries.
International and regional human rights organizations,
including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, consistently highlight
the double standards followed by the international community in dealing with
human rights, particularly regarding situations of occupation and colonialism.
Their reports often reveal a pattern of selective attention and actions based
on strategic interests rather than a firm commitment to human rights
Moreover, the use of human rights principles as tools to
achieve political interests by major powers is a recurring and troubling aspect
of international relations. These countries selectively defend human rights,
focusing on violations that serve their interests and ignoring others. This
selective approach not only undermines the credibility of human rights advocacy
but also erodes the integrity of the human rights system as a whole.
Restoring peoples’ right to self-determination and
resistance to occupation is not just a legal or moral obligation. It is a
decisive test of the will of the international community in the field of human
rights as an integrated and comprehensive system. Consistent and impartial
application of human rights principles is essential to maintaining the
legitimacy and effectiveness of this system.
As the world continues to navigate complex political
realities, it is necessary to reaffirm and strengthen these basic principles
and ensure their fair and just application to all peoples, regardless of
existing geopolitical interests.
Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Jordan News’ point of view.
Read more Opinion and Analysis