Skip to main content

Few will thank UN when this war ends

Alvaro de Soto was the chief UN Middle East peace envoy from 2005-2007.

Writing an op-ed piece in The Independent critical of the role the UN has played - or not played more significantly - in the current crisis in Gaza - he says:

"And now the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, flies to the region. In an emotional statement from New York announcing his trip he called for normal life to resume as the only path to peace. Resumption of normalcy is, of course, what Israel has been demanding since the intensification of Hamas rocket fire in December. But don't the Palestinians also have such a right? And can that right be exercised as long as occupation continues? One can take issue with the methods that some Palestinian militants use, and indiscriminate rocket attacks at civilians, however inaccurate and ineffective, are condemnable. But as long as the plight of the 70 per cent of Palestinians in Gaza, who are refugees from what is now Israel, is not addressed convincingly, it is just not realistic to expect them to sit quietly while their neighbours in southern Israel lead normal lives.

The Secretary-General might usefully consider whether his current activity won't remind Palestinians of his association, as part of the Quartet, with the policies that have led to the current pass.

The dramatic plight of the refugees is the overriding concern of the admirable and courageous humanitarian workers of UNRWA and other agencies and programmes in Gaza. There is an old refrain in the humanitarian trade: "first, do no harm." As the violence rages on, perhaps the political players active in the region could draw inspiration from that refrain."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...