India's No.1 PU & Degree With Integrated IAS & IPS(UPSC/PSC) Training College.
Is Israel’s War in Gaza Putting the Global Order at Peril?
Relevance: GS 2 – Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests
Why in the News?
- Over 400 days since the October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, the conflict continues with no resolution in sight.
- More than 43,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed during Israeli bombardments in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon.
- The United Nations (UN) has issued calls to address the humanitarian crisis in the region.
More About the News
- The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has highlighted the risk of genocide being perpetrated in
- The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued warrants for alleged war crimes against:
- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
- Former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
- Hamas military leader Mohammed Deif.
- Despite international legal and humanitarian interventions, violence persists without significant de-escalation.
Global Polarisation on Institutions
- Accusations of Genocide: The ongoing conflict in Gaza is perceived by many, including experts like Trita Parsi, as a genocide. The Lancet estimates over 1,86,000 deaths, far exceeding the 43,000 officially counted in hospitals.
- Intensity of Conflict: In Gaza, over 20,000 children have been killed in just about a year, starkly contrasting with 700 children killed in Ukraine over two-and-a-half years.
- Shifts in Global Governance: The U.S. has transitioned from supporting international law to promoting a “rules-based international order,” whose rules are unclear and often crafted by coalitions of allies rather than universally accepted institutions.
- Selective Accountability: International institutions like the ICC face challenges in enforcing warrants or rules universally, contributing to global polarisation.
U.S. Policy on Israel
- Strategic and Moral Ties: Israel is seen as a critical ally and a moral responsibility, being the Jewish homeland established after the Holocaust. It is perceived as a democracy in a challenging region (West Asia) and a strategic deterrent against countries like Iran, potentially with nuclear capabilities.
- Historical Protection: The U.S. has consistently treated Israel as if it is integral to its own interests, offering unwavering support, especially after events like the October 7 Hamas attacks.
- Contradictions in Policy: While Israel is considered a democracy, its actions as an occupying power create contradictions. These are often overlooked due to the S.’s strategic, moral, and historical reasons for supporting Israel.
- Shift in Enforcement: The Biden administration has been criticized for bypassing its own regulations to allow Israel greater freedom, marking an unprecedented shift in U.S. policy enforcement
Legal Basis for the ICC Warrant: Jurisdiction Over War Crimes
- The ICC can issue a warrant even if Israel is not a member state.
- This is because the alleged war crimes are being committed in Palestine, which is recognized as a member state of the ICC.
- The ICC previously addressed jurisdictional questions before taking up cases involving Palestine.
- Violation of International Humanitarian Law: Beyond the warrant, the prolonged violations of international humanitarian law are a pressing concern. These violations have been ongoing in full view of the international community.
- Global Responsibility: The international community shares responsibility for failing to prevent the humanitarian crisis and continuing violence. The U.S., in particular, has been accused of diplomatic inaction, as it could potentially exert pressure to halt the conflict but has chosen not to do so.
Reasons India Did Not Join the ICC: Key Concerns
India actively participated in the negotiations for the Rome Statute that led to the ICC’s formation in 2002, with only 124 member states now. However, it did not sign or ratify the statute.
- National Sovereignty: India felt the ICC did not sufficiently accommodate national administrative and judicial systems to handle crimes.
- Exclusions in the Statute:
- Non-recognition of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction as crimes under the ICC’s jurisdiction.
- Terrorism, a major issue for India, was not considered a punishable crime against humanity, which was a critical deal-breaker.
- Pragmatism in Approach: India preferred not signing over signing and potentially flouting terms, maintaining its credibility in international law.
- Current Stance: India has expressed limited faith in the ICC, including its recent warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Challenges to the International World Order
- UNSC Veto Power and Gridlock: The U.S. routinely vetoes resolutions against Israel. Russia uses its veto to protect its interests, as seen in recent conflicts.
- Erosion of Authority: UNSC resolutions are often disregarded, as evident in Afghanistan, Myanmar, and other cases. The current structure of the UNSC, designed for a post-World War II world, is increasingly outdated and ineffective.
- Transactional Diplomacy: International relations are increasingly driven by short-term, transactional policies. The emphasis on “realpolitik” and national interest has overtaken value-based approaches to diplomacy.
Steps Towards Reform and Compliance
- UNSC Reforms: Comprehensive reform is essential to restore credibility and relevance to the UNSC. Expanding membership or adjusting veto powers could improve functionality.
- Tipping Point for Change: Despite systemic failures, a tipping point may come where a critical mass of countries recognizes the importance of a functional global order. This could spur collective action to strengthen international institutions and enforce global norms.
- Restoring Trust in Global Systems: While failures dominate headlines, many international interactions still follow rules and laws. Strengthening existing frameworks and enhancing compliance mechanisms will be key to restoring faith in international governance.
International Accountability for Israel
- Challenges in Enforcement: Israel’s close ties with powerful nations like the U.S., combined with veto powers at the UNSC, make international accountability difficult. Institutions like the ICC and ICJ face resistance from states unwilling to comply with their rulings.
- Broader Implications: Even if accountability mechanisms are pursued, they may not lead to immediate changes on the ground without wider international support and enforcement mechanisms.
Likelihood of a Ceasefire in Gaza
Influence of the U.S. Administration: Donald Trump’s Potential Role
- As incoming U.S. President, Trump may push for a ceasefire to project himself as a peacemaker, aligning with his campaign promises.
- His reluctance to see the U.S. entangled in another West Asian conflict could motivate a firm stance on ending the war.
- Transactional Diplomacy: While Trump is unlikely to emphasize global institutional norms, his focus on practical outcomes might lead to short-term de-escalation.
Challenges Post-Ceasefire
- Unresolved Core Issues: A ceasefire will not address the root causes of the conflict, such as the demand for a sovereign Palestinian state. The underlying tensions between Israel and Palestine are likely to persist without meaningful dialogue and long-term solutions.
- Abraham Accords Revisited: Trump may aim to revive the Abraham Accords to normalize relations between Israel and Arab nations.
- However, the changing political landscape in signatory states (UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco) and hesitant players like Saudi Arabia makes this more complex than during Trump’s first term.
Associated article
https://universalinstitutions.com/tag/israel/
Mains question
Critically analyze the challenges in holding nations accountable for violations of international humanitarian law with a focus on the Israel-Palestine conflict and the role of global institutions like the ICC and UNSC.
