by Eze Eluchie
As bombs
fell on private residences in the Balkans, slicing limbs off and splattering
blood across neighborhoods, and as the Serbs congregated Bosniaks in Srebrenika
for what would ultimately result in a massacre, the real time beaming of the
revolting images into homes across the world spiked palpable revulsion at the
inability of the international community to effectively and timeously intervene
to stem the atrocities being televised. There later was some intervention – but
only after thousands had been slaughtered.
Less than a
decade later, the gory spectacle of whole families and villages being rounded
up by machete wielding murderous mobs, who smashed skulls, slit throats and set
fire to entire communities, actions which made many across continents cringe in
horror, proved simply too much for many to comprehend and rationalize why the countries
which bordered Rwanda, or the broader international community, could not simply
move in and come to the assistance of the hapless victims of genocide. The
world watched in consternation as over 800,000 people were killed in an orgy of
ethnic violence within 100 days – a killing spree that when one factors in the
reality that the world watched it evolve and did nothing to stop it, questioned
the commonality of our humanity.
Events which assault our common
humanity
Reeling from
the seeming helplessness with which the world observed mass atrocities which
were televised live, via international broadcast channels, into homes across
the continents, there was a convergence of opinions that there simply must be a
mechanism through which the international community can intervene in conflicts
wheresoever it was felt that our collective sense of humanity was being violated.
It was also taken as a given that the doctrine of sovereignty of States cannot
serve to prevent other States from intervening to protect victims of egregious
crimes, when the State which has that primary duty is of protection of its
population is incapable of according such and or is the perpetrator
The concern
of humanity regarding sovereignty questions raised against international
interventions where a State is incapable of protecting its residents from
serious crimes, was aptly captured in Year 2000 Millennium Report of former
United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, presented to the UN where he
asserted: “If humanitarian intervention
is, indeed, an unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how should we respond to a
Rwanda, to a Srebrenica, to gross and systematic violation of human rights that
offend every precept of our common humanity?”.
In response
to Kofi Annan’s query, diverse ideas were enunciated by diverse think-tanks
across the globe, but the response that quickly gained acceptance across
divides was contained in the report of the International Commission on
Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) set up by the Canadian Government
which postulated that there ought to be a shift in responsibility to the
broader international community in instances where a State fails to protect its
people either due to a lack of willingness or ability. The broader
international community at that stage, assumes a Responsibility to Protect
(R2P) the peoples whose State lacks the ability or is unwilling to protect.
After
fine-tuning the submissions of the Canadian ICISS by various High Level Panels
within the UN system, the R2P was finally adopted by the Heads of States and
Government at the 2005 World Summit, and had three ‘pillars’, to wit:
a. * Every State had a responsibility to
protect all peoples within its borders;
b. * The broader international community
should help States attain their responsibility in (a) above; and
c. * The broader international community
has a responsibility to use diplomacy, peaceful means or force to protect
peoples where their State is incapable or unwilling to accord such protection
The third
‘pillar’, which authorizes foreign interventions in the affairs of a State
which has failed, or is incapable of protecting its own peoples, has proved the
most contentions.
Recourse to R2R
The first
and second pillars of R2P has been cited in addressing domestic violence in
diverse African countries, such as Sierra Leone, Cote D’Ivoire, Liberia, Guinea
and Kenya. The third pillar, which allows the use of force to protect citizens
where their State is incapable or unwilling to offer such protection was
approved for use in the case of Libya in 2011, following the deployment of very
brutal means by the Muammar Ghadaffi regime to suppress opposition elements.
The surreptitious conversion of the UN Security Council (UNSC) approval for
foreign troops deployment to attain humanitarian outcomes, by NATO member
States to attain a regime-change mandate caused alarm and regrets in some
quarters as to the use of the R2P doctrine.
Quite
clearly, the misuse of R2P in the case of Libya, adversely affected the
possibility of unanimity of purpose by the UNSC in subsequent episodes when
such unanimous actions by the UNSC would have served to bolster R2P and perhaps
elevate the principle to the status of international law. Efforts to deploy the
principle to protect the Rohinghya peoples from genocide-grade attacks by the
Myanmar regime, proved to be a primary consequence of the misuse of R2P in
Libya.
The R2P
principle was also unsuccessfully invoked to urge Turkiye to come to the aide
of Kurds in the city of Kobani, Syria, as the people of that city, for weeks,
expected to be overrun by Islamic State terrorists. It had been hoped that
Turkiye troops who were just across basically unmarked borders, would have
stepped in to prevent the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity
by the approaching ISIS terrorists – the Turks, simply, probably on account of
their age-old schisms with the Kurds, simply failed to step in. What followed was
unfortunate decimation of civilian population of Kobani by ruthless terrorists. https://ezeluchie.blogspot.com/2014/10/a-justiciable-responsibility-to-prevent.html
Gaza
In the
course of the past 60 days, the world has looked on in horror, as hellish
nightmares become the norm of the Palestinians in Gaza, as the occupying
authority over their territory, the State of Israel, has unleashed brutal,
debilitating and vicious attacks seemingly geared towards obliterating any
semblance of life and development in the Gaza strip. The attacks commenced with
a total blockade of Gaza, cutting off all food, water and electricity from the
strip, actions that in itself, constitute war crimes. Over 40,000 tons of
bombs, over three times the quantity of bomb dropped on Hiroshima, killing,
thus far, over 17,000 residents of Gaza, with over 7,000 children and several
thousand women.
As the world
looked on, a classic example of a situation where the R2P ought to be applied
unfolded before everyone. All hospitals and medical facilities in Gaza were
targeted and bombed to ruins; medical personnel and journalists were
specifically targeted with hundreds of them and their families being killed in
the process; forced deportation of Gaza residents was ordered by the
perpetrator, the Netanyahu regime; roads, water pipes and other infrastructure
were targeted and destroyed; buildings dedicated to Educational, Religious,
Science and Art were likewise targeted and destroyed. Gaza was effectively
bombed back into the middle ages, as carts and donkeys soon replaced vehicles,
wood and furniture were used for heating and cooking, life and living was
scuttled.
The genocidal
intents of the scorched earth policies the Netanyahu-led regime is implementing
over Gaza is never in doubt and was brazenly audaciously broadcast, inclusive
of biblical references by the Israeli Prime Minister to episodes of genocidal
atrocities in Amalek, a suggestion by a serving Israeli cabinet Minister that a
nuclear bomb could be dropped in Gaza, and sundry acts to reveal intent to
commit crimes against humanity.
Yet, the world
continues to fail in its responsibility to protect Palestinians, resulting in
the commission of heart rendering mass atrocities, and this continuing failure
serves to diminish our shared humanity and questions the fundamentals of global
order. The continuing failure of humanity to abide by our collective
responsibility to protect the victims of an ongoing genocide directly questions
the utility of the United Nations Organization and semblance of global order
that might have existed.
Questions
that now agitate minds across the world include: Can a similar episode of mass
atrocities be visited on another group and the world fail to act in protection
of the victim group? Can another powerful country decide to wipe out a less
endowed people knowing that there would be no consequences and world would
remain docile? In failing in its R2P responsibilities to the Palestinians, the
World has failed itself and humanity collectively diminished.
Has time run
out? No.
The
atrocities thus far committed has no doubt widened gaps and gulfs between
peoples and might have foisted and deepened transgenerational hatred in the
Middle East region, and strengthened suspicion that the existing international
order is hypocritical and rooted in bias. The Veto against the Special UNGS Resolution
brought sequel to Article 99 of the UN Charter on Friday, 8th
December, 2023, , which sought an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza,
served as a particularly pungent jab at the R2P principle. An immediate humanitarian
ceasefire will prove that indeed there is still hope in humanity and a general
common revulsion of atrocities.
Necessary addendum
Origin of Gaza Genocide
This piece will be incomplete in the
view of some if mention is not made of the events which precipitated the
ongoing genocide in Gaza. Can anything justify the bestiality, carnage, destructions
of lives and properties being collectively visited on Palestinians in Gaza? Certainly
not! It is however, important, that the topic of the immediate origins be
addressed. Reference is often made to the horrific terrorist attacks by the
terrorist group Hamas, on Israel on the 10th of October, 2023,
during which over 1,200 people, mainly citizens of Israel were killed, in
attacks lasting over two days, with over 100 people abducted and taken into
Gaza, by Hamas.
The dastardly attacks by Hamas on the
7th October are condemned in its entirety. Hamas, its officials and
processes should be targeted and made to bear the full consequences of its vile
actions. Under no circumstances, however, should inflicting collective
punishment on all Palestinians (in Gaza and the West Bank) be condoned or
deemed as acceptable – in fact, collective punishment in itself, constitutes
war crimes and a crime against humanity.
It must be realized that the Hamas attacks
of 7/10 was not a stand-alone event. There have been perennial bouts of
violence between the peoples of Palestinians and the State of Israel. Of
crucial importance also is the reality that for over 50 weeks prior to the Hamas
attacks, Israel had been embroiled in weekly protests against efforts by the
Netanyahu regime to force through Judicial sector reforms which will greatly
subject Judges to political interference from the political stakeholders. The protests
were approaching a crescendo, when the Hamas attacks occurred - attacks that easily
breached highly fortified security fortifications and continued for hours
before any meaningful response from the ordinarily highly effective Israeli
Defense Forces. The combination of the fact that the attacks served to ‘unify’
the population of Israel against external threats, the reality that security
forces deployed to protect the border with Gaza were surreptitiously withdrawn
some days prior to the attack itself, and the fact that some stock traders
seemed to have foreknowledge of the attacks of 7/10, raises the likelihood that
perhaps the 7/10 attacks might have been perfectly orchestrated to actualize
long planned atrocities against the peoples of Palestine.
Need to guarantee Israel’s security
Considering that it is surrounded by
people who seemingly have vested in her ultimate destruction, effective and
verifiable guarantees must be institutionalized which will guarantee Israel’s right
to peaceful and sustainable existence as a prerequisite to any resolutions to
the conflict in that region.
Picture: Aerial view
of parts of destroyed Gaza (@Reuters)
No comments:
Post a Comment