The measure received 14 votes in favour, with the US the sole member to reject it. However, because the US is a permanent member of the council, it has the ability to veto any resolution brought forward
Unlike several previous resolutions regarding a ceasefire in Gaza, Wednesday’s measure was brought forward by all 10 elected members of the Security Council.
The US has vetoed four previous attempts at calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, on most occasions being the lone vote against the measures.
🤔
Bruh
Lame duck presidency and can’t even do the right thing
Ducks aren’t even this lame
Shows he and the Democratic leaders never intended to end the genicide. Just another sign the democrats no longer support anyone but the oligarchy. Yes the Republicans are worse by alot but people that are anti genicide, anti oligarchy, anti fascism, anti authoritarianism, etc don’t have a party to vote for. Only the level of oppression they will see in the next 4 years.
deleted by creator
As long as you keep voting limb cutters, they have no motivation to stop cutting limbs. Not voting for limb cutters is the only way to make non limb cutting get on the ballot
deleted by creator
Now imagine next election one person is threatening to kill 4 children and the other team 6. Well obviously we should save 4! Then next election, we have to kill 6, so we don’t vote for the person killing 8. And so on. That’s how we got in this predicament.
deleted by creator
harris had never gotten even thousand votes in the primaries where 10 million people vote. she only got to become vp by sucking up to superpacs who didn’t want a progressive like warren as vp
and since 2016 dnc uses primaries more for just pissing on its members.
the problem is not the voters but dnc which today is run by lobbyists.
Removed by mod
That is a valid position if you intend to use that time to make it so that children don’t need to burn every election.
“Two limbs is just as bad as 4 limbs, so I choose 4 limbs!”
You do realize that there is more than one election? Like every four years there is an election. Treating every election like it is the only one and never looking past the immediate effects for the next year is what brought this mess in the first place.
This is also why this comparison is bad. You can not only loose at this election, but the next one and the one after that amd the one after that. In fact one could argue Americans have been loosong every election to the neoliberals since a few decades. And why? Because you never made a point of getting one party to stop being neoliberals.
This election made me realize that political affiliation in the states for a lot of people is like being in a cult. Rather than accepting that your side has issues and needs a change, people just try to justify it by pointing how bad the other side can be worse. Like 90% of lemmy democrats don’t get that I’m not motivated to vote for being waist-deep in shit vs chest-deep in shit. Yes, one is worse than another, but I prefer to vote so I don’t have to be in shit at all. But all they will say back is hurr durr trump bad.
I feel like we need to normalize that demanding more from representatives is OK and necessary for a functioning democracy. The party needs to respond to the demands of those they are supposed to represent. This election made it clear that they only care about the demands of the donors and that needs to change
Like 90% of lemmy democrats don’t get that I’m not motivated to vote for being waist-deep in shit vs chest-deep in shit. Yes, one is worse than another, but I prefer to vote so I don’t have to be in shit at all.
The reason people keep trying to say the same thing over and over is because your vote to “not be in shit at all” results in all of us being chest-deep. I want the Dems to change too but it isn’t going to happen as a result of folks withholding their votes while we’re in a two party system with FPTP voting. So since I would rather be knee deep than chest deep, I voted knee deep.
I’m not going to shame anyone for their voting choices, but let’s not try to deny - not voting results in chest deep shit, not no shit, and we’ll all get an object lesson in this every single day for about (at least) four years starting in January.
If you are going to proudly stand by your principled choice (which I support), at least be honest about the effects.
Like every four years there is an election.
So far.
You have this perspective that “we can show them” if we just let the Republicans win, but there’s no evidence to support that. Every time the Republicans have won, the Democrats have moved to the right, not the left.
If you want a third party to emerge, you can advocate for that, but a truly leftist third party isn’t possible if we lose all our limbs.
EVEN NOW they are blaming progressives, not her nonsensical attempt to woo Republicans while moving right so fast it left vapor trails behind her after announcing her candidacy.
I thought this was going to be a great article. The title made me think it was going to be all about getting tough with Republicans and actually fighting.
https://www.salon.com/2024/11/19/how-democrats-can-move-past-low-dominance-messaging/
SURELY, Salon of all places will rightly criticize her for deciding to run as a Republican. BUT NO:
Harris also failed to bear down on her hard-edged prosecutor-versus-felon narrative, which figured prominently during the early, effective stages of her campaign. Maybe she yielded to the far left, which admonished her for stigmatizing felons. That’s what she did in her bid for the Democratic nomination in 2019-2020, which helps explain why her first campaign folded before she could even get it off the ground.
YIELDED to the far left? With Cheneys on stage at the DNC, more talk about her glock than about climate, no movement on palestine, and not even a willingness to let a pro-Palestine speaker have 30 secs of podium time at the event?
In what fucking way did she “Yield” to the far left with a campaign very clearly and transparently designed to woo Republicans into voting Democrat?
M. Steven Fish is a professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley.
I have to question your grip on reality, Professor Steven Fish of UC Berkeley, if you think what you saw in recent months was Kamala “yielding” a damn thing to the left.
Not for nothing, but where is this two limb option? All I see is four limb options except one is grinning and clapping the other is just wearing a false look of commiseration.
Me: why orphan crushing machine?
You: because other orphan crushing machine driven by Nazies.
Me: but why don’t we destroy orphan crushing machine?
You: because orphan crushing machine go burrrrrrrrr
Me:…
Come back when there is an option that actually destroys the orphan crushing machines. Otherwise your just pouring more fuel into it and making it work faster.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
The right thing is to enact a ceasefire in exchange for the immediate release of all Isreali hostages.
The US was right to veto this unenforceable, performative UN bullshit on the grounds that it didn’t call for the immediate release of the hostages.
It’s a fucking genocide. Stop the killing sort the hostages after.
sort the hostages after.
“Sort” the hostages “after” what?
So in your imagination Israel unilaterally stops fighting against Hamas while (a) Hamas continues to hold civilians hostage, doing all manners of physical and psychological torture to people who only happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and (b) Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and tribal gangs continue to wage attacks against Israel? And then (and only then), Israel comes back to the negotiating table with Hamas once again for yet another round of negotiations to try to free the hostages, only for Hamas to decide to move the goalposts?
Is this really the type of illogical nonsense people here believe in?
No wonder this shit has been going on for decades… Y’all have lost your damn minds if you think that the world works this way.
Stop the genocide. Stop the killing of innocent civilians. Now.
Then, reach a deal for the hostages, like the ones Netanyahu has repeatedly shot down.
Then, end the occupation: get Israel the fuck out of Gaza, the fuck out of the West Bank, the fuck out of East Jerusalem, back to their 1967 borders.
Or, if you don’t think this is realistic (and it isn’t because with almost a million settlers, the Israeli right has destroyed the material conditions required for the 2 state solution) prefer cleaner solutions, end Jewish supremacy in Greater Israel (Israel+West Bank+Gaza+Golan+Shebaa). One state, one democracy, equal rights for everyone.
Persecute all war criminals, Israeli and Palestinian. Then run a truth and reconciliation process, with reparations.
Justice, right? Crazy, I know. Illogical shit.
Here’s the catch: without justice there will be no peace. Enjoy your endless cycle of violence.
There is no “justice” in any circumstances in which the hostages are not immediately returned.
Then, reach a deal for the hostages, like the ones Netanyahu has repeatedly shot down.
So you’re literally just confirming this:
So in your imagination Israel unilaterally stops fighting against Hamas while (a) Hamas continues to hold civilians hostage, doing all manners of physical and psychological torture to people who only happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and (b) Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and tribal gangs continue to wage attacks against Israel? And then (and only then), Israel comes back to the negotiating table with Hamas once again for yet another round of negotiations to try to free the hostages, only for Hamas to decide to move the goalposts?
You must have read “Art of the Deal”.
Yes this totally all makes a genocide completely reasonable and acceptable. Genociding the local population, that’s true justice innit?
If you could argue against what I said you wouldn’t resort to putting words in my mouth, mate.
And if you could read you would know that both Israelies and Palestinians are the “local population” with somewhat dubious historic claims over the land spanning back >3000 years.
Need I remind you that it was the British that drew the maps that have lead us to where we are today?
Explain why Israeli lives matter more than Palestinian lives. Like, be precise.
Who said they are? Only you so far.
You should be more precise with your weird, non sequitur questions.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I hate to break it to you but any hostages are most likely dead. Probably killed by the IDF themselves. The people of Gaza are also starving to death. You think POW’s are getting first dibs? They won’t agree to release them because there aren’t any alive.
I could be wrong but there’s my 2 cents.
Return the bodies then.
Frankly I hope that they are dead, because the idea of living in a dungeon under Gaza being raped and tortured every day for 13 months is horrific.
And if Hamas has lost track of even the hostages bodies then I don’t envy them, because it seems that they’ve lost what little bargaining position they once had. Uh oh for them.
Removed by mod
The second paragraph reads:
The draft resolution was aimed at calling for an “immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire” in Gaza and the release of all hostages held by Palestinian groups in the enclave.
Removed by mod
What absolute pieces of shit. Can’t even bother to do the right thing when it doesn’t even matter anymore.
Why is it wrong to call for the immediate release of the Israeli hostages in Gaza in exchange for a ceasefire? How does the prolonged suffering of the hostages and their families help the people of Gaza in any way? Is a unilateral ceasefire that doesn’t guarantee the immediate return of the hostages “doing the right thing” to you?
Not that it never mattered anyway. The UN doesn’t control whether a ceasefire happens or not, only the Israelis and Palestinians can decide when to lay down their weapons and release the hostages–and that should have happened a fucking year ago.
Stop putting words in other people’s mouths.
The ceasefire is about widescale collective punishment of a population that is half children resulting in famine and genocide. My point is the Biden administration could do the right thing for once instead of enabling it until the bitter end.
I’m not putting words in your mouth…
The US’s stated reason for rejecting the [toothless, unenforceable, bureaucratic, performative] UN ceasefire proposal was that it did not call for the “immediate release of Israeli hostages from Gaza”.
To that end, you said that they “can’t even bother to do the right thing when it doesn’t even matter anymore”, which to me very clearly shows that you believe that it is wrong (or, not right) to reject an agreement that fails to call for the immediate release of the hostages.
In my view, the right thing to do is very, very simple–as simple as it has been for over 13 months: agree to a ceasefire in exchange for the immediate release of all Israeli hostages in Gaza (dead or alive). A unilateral ceasefire that doesn’t guarantee the immediate return of hostages doesn’t make any sense to me, how about you?
It was also “collective punishment” for Hamas to go on a rampage on October 6th, 2023, raping, murdering and kidnapping innocent Israeli civilians, including men, women, children and seniors. Some of these hostages, if they are even still alive, have been held in what kind of horrific conditions for more than a year… Kept in a dungeon, repeatedly tortured, never having seen the light of day for over a fucking year… Something tells me you wouldn’t be so quick to agree to a unilateral ceasefire if someone you loved was held captive for 13 months, now would you?
The US was right to reject this performative political UN bullshit.
You’re so right, a terrorist organization kidnapped civilians after launching a single day invasion via hang glider.
Better not hold the nation state with jet powered aircraft and tanks waging a 400 day invasion to a higher standard than the common terrorist.
Now who’s putting words in other people’s mouths? 😂
If you had a leg to stand on in this discussion you wouldn’t resort to pathetic non sequitur.
Hamas was [supposedly] the legitimately elected government of the Gaza Strip. To think that they could go on a murderous rampage (in which they killed more people in a single day than the Israelis have in any day since then, by the way), take hostages back into Gaza, hide behind innocent women and children like the worthless pathetic Islamist terrorist cowards that they are, and not face the direct consequences of their actions, is a joke.
I guess when you worship a pedophile who spread his ideology through violent genocide (including in historical Gaza), logic and consequence isn’t your strong point.
Still, I don’t understand why you are so dramatically opposed to the idea of releasing the hostages? What’s in it for you that these people are needlessly tortured? Do you think it helps offset the harm against the innocent Gazans?
I’m not opposed to the release of hostages, I think it’s a stupid reason to veto a ceasefire meant to end famine.
The second paragraph in the article:
The draft resolution was aimed at calling for an “immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire” in Gaza and the release of all hostages held by Palestinian groups in the enclave.
Braindead take right here. The US has blocked UN peacekeeping forces from curtailing Israeli war crimes since this conflict began.
Anyone who can’t see America’s true colours by now is simply refusing to look
Wtf is wrong with these people. I only voted for them bcz the alternative is a fascist piece of shit. I fucking hate this country.
Is it so wrong to demand the immediate release of Israeli hostages in Gaza in exchange for an immediate ceasefire?
That seems like a reasonable agreement to me. The innocent people of Gaza have derived absolutely no benefit from having Israeli civilians being taken captive, maimed, raped and tortured for over 13 months. Release the damn hostages and end the bloodshed.
Removed by mod
And so every third party voter is vindicated.
Why are they even allowed to vote over their own war? Oh I meant Israel’s. My bad.
I’m not a US citizen, but I can understand why some people didn’t wanna vote this time.
Even though Trump might be worse than Biden when it comes to this conflict, how can anyone vote for Kamala knowing that the death of more innocents will be on their conscience?
it’s like the trolley problem. would you rather have more people die or a smaller but still sizable amount of people die? unfortunately in America there are only 2 viable candidates.
Removed by mod
So that “Ceasefire” talk under Harris was bullshit eh?
No way to know, she never will be president, nor have had say in any of it.
She is literally vice president, and also had Q&As with the population saying she is in full support of Israel.
The Vice President does have a powerful voice, but except for very specific situations they don’t have any power. So while Harris may have more or less supported Israel’s war, as a Vice President she can’t do anything about it. She also won’t become the president so this whole discussion is mute.
Is there any future where the Security Council is abolished?
Like, where everyone gets tired of this shit from the U.S, Russia, and China, and Europe uses their weight to end it?
The thing about the UN generally, and the Security Council in particular, that people don’t understand it that its principal isn’t to end war globally, but to end global war.
The Permanent 5 members of the security Council and their veto power are a huge part of why it’s been sucessful. The veto prevents the UN from engaging in military actions against the interests of a nation that can withstand an extended military conflict with the rest of the world.
And it has worked remarkably well so far. While military conflict and imperialism are still around, the scale of conflicts have significantly decreased. The superpowers no longer engage in direct military conflicts that kill 50 million people, and when one gets uppity the rest of the world.engages in economic and diplomatic isolation instead of war.
The UN has had nothing to do with contributing to the trend you have described. As unpleasant as it is, that is almost entirely a result of nuclear deterrence.
Seriously, you guys need to enforce initiative & referendum rights somehow.
This is so odd, I was told only Trump was bad for Palestine, and that he would give Israel a free pass to do whatever it wants.
Nobody has said only Trump would be bad.
The second part is true though.
No more true than the free pass the Dems are giving Israel already. Nothing changes for Palestinians when the Dems are just as complacent and enabling as shown here and many times previously.
I had some commentor reply to me saying Republicans would bring about “accelerated genocide” as the reasoning why Republicans are worse for Palestine than Democrats. It’s weird doublespeak that harkened back to Bush and his “enhanced interrogation” terminology. Apparently “genocide” is fine but “accelerated genocide” is something to fear. To the victims, I’m sure it all looks exactly the same.
Let’s revisit this conversation in 1 year, shall we?
Why because you’d rather waste a year waiting to see whose going to genocide harder instead of demanding it end now?
Nobody ever told you that “only” Trump was bad for Palestine.
If you need to lie to promote your viewpoint, then your viewpoint is shit.
No one ever told you that, so don’t worry yourself over it.
Nobody said that. But now we get Israel with more of a free pass (yes, it can get worse) and “Dr. Oz” running Medicare.
Awesome right? Hope Democrats learned a lesson at least! Or something…
It does not get worse, a free pass is a free pass.
Hopefully Democrats learn a lesson, but they seem incapable of that and would rather blame minorities for their loss rather than their policies.
It can always get worse. Have you not seen history?
Didn’t you hear? Gaza is SAVED now! YAY! 🤡
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
As somebody actually living in “Israel” what the hell are you talking about? Bibi and other far right politicians want to occupy Palestine and genocide every Palestinian. I wonder what would happen if the “good” Israeli soldiers stopped massacring civilians or if Bibi offered the Palestinian people anything other then oppression.
The Palestinian resistance will never stop until they get all the land
Except they have already agreed to a two state solution.
Yeah when they started killing civilians in an effort to tank the Oslo Accords
What does “Palestine will be free from the river to the sea” mean to you?
Any agreement from the Israelis or Palestinians isn’t worth its weight in shit.
The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. The Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966 maybe, but he’s not Palestinian.
It doesn’t matter who it was started by or whether the resultant state was democratic or secular, as it is an open proclamation of an intent to wipe Israel off the map. It doesn’t take a geography expert to point out that all of Israel exists between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, does it?
You cannot claim to be anti-genocide if you support wiping Israel off the map.
You cannot claim to support a two-state solution if you support wiping Israel off the map.
Any one-state solution amounts to genocide of the other state, fucking duh.
A two state solution is impossible due to the settlements in the West Bank. Only a One-State Solution with equal rights for both Israelis and Palestinians is possible now
Netanyahu is the one who has explicitly said that ‘from the river to the sea there shall be only Israeli sovereignty’. A direct reference to the ethnic cleansing of all Palestinians.
Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
Removed by mod
It means unless Israel agrees to a two state solution Palestinians will resist to recapture their stolen land.
I wonder if you actually read that article?
jk, it’s clear you didn’t
I wonder if you actually read that article?
jk, it’s clear you didn’t
What makes it their land in the first place, some British mandate written by the same people who created the state of Israel?
100 years ago the entire area was part of the Ottoman Empire, both nations of Israel and Palestine are fabrications.
The fact that they were living there, as their families have been for generations and generations. What gives Zionists the right to ethnically cleanse and forcibly displace them from their homes?
So, if you’re living in “Israel” aren’t you actively part of the “genocide” that you’re describing?
The Palestinians are just as responsible for putting shitheads like Sinwar in power as the Israelis are responsible for putting shitheads like Netanyahu in power. Both groups of people have empowered the genocidal extremist warmongers at every opportunity, and y’all want to blame American politicians for the sad state of the nations that were handed to you on a silver platter by the League of Nations after the fall of the Ottoman Empire?
As someone actually living in “The United States of America”, I’m sick and tired of my democracy and tax dollars being held hostage because of your problems, and I ain’t the only one.
As an American, aren’t you actively part of Trumps attacks on minorities?
Can I blame you for the “war on terror” and every other American crime against humanity?
If no, why is this person to blame for Israel? If yes, well at least you’re consistent.
It was a rhetorical question.
IF one believes that Israel has no right to exist as a nation (anti-zionists) and that the land was stolen from the Palestinians (which, historically speaking isn’t even true, because there was never a unified Palestinian nation until the Mandate for Palestine), then logic simply follows that by living in that “occupied Palestinian land” you are “an occupier”, does it not?
Your specific analogies to that are bad, because you can live in America without participating in Trump’s policies or the “war on terror”.
A better American analogy would be to say that everyone who lives in America is complicit in benefiting from the genocide of the Native Americans, whose historically inhabited these lands. And in that case, yes, we Americans are just as guilty as benefiting from the actual genocide of the Native Americans to the hypothetical “genocide” of the Palestinians.
In other words, IF one believes that Americans are unjustly living on occupied Native American lands, then I am guilty of that, just as all Americans are. That’s not a political statement, it’s a logical one.
And yet, you don’t hear anyone sane calling for the entirety of the United States to be returned to the Native Americans, because history doesn’t work that way. The best Americans and Native Americans can hope for today is peaceful coexistence, equal treatment under the law, and a mutually beneficial society that acknowledges the wrongs of the past while working towards a better shared future.
Personally I believe in a peaceful two-state solution in which both Israel and Palestine can not just exist, but thrive harmoniously as neighbors destined to live in the same culturally and religiously significant slice of land. But unfortunately the people currently in charge, like Netanyahu and Hamas, do not think that way, and under Trump I believe there will be an unmitigated, scorched earth, full-fat genocide of Gaza Strip and probably the West Bank too.
There have always been pathways to peace, but they rely on the good faith actions of Israel and Palestine far more than anyone else.
When did I mention America? I said Israeli politicians suck and in addition I’m actively trying to leave (not easy)
No.
This isn’t about Hamas or the hostages - it’s about the Israeli hard right’s desire to utterly destroy the Palestinians and rule over all the land from the river to the sea, and Netanyahu’s need to maintain enough support to stay in office and out of prison.
You say that as if the Palestinians don’t have an equal desire to utterly destroy the Israelis and rule over all of the land from the river to the sea.
If I remember correctly it was the pro-Palestinian groups all over the world who were chanting “Palestine shall be free from the river to the sea”, was it not?
At any rate, this is 100% about the hostages, as the US’s reason for voting against this gesture was because it did nothing to call for the immediate release of all Israeli hostages in the Gaza Strip. Why is it wrong to demand that the hostages be freed?
the terrorists should definitely hold onto the israeli hostages then, since as we’ve seen, that’s working out so great for the people of gaza they say they’re fighting for, every single day it’s working out great. the israeli government is fine with this. great plan.
Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
This isnt about the hostages, this is Israel engaging in Genocide to eradicate and forcibly displace the Palestinian people. Gaza has never stopped being under Israeli occupation since 1967. Hamas only exists because of the Apartheid Occupation of Israel and the daily violence that has subjected Palestinians to for generations. Israel has always been the obstacle for peace, and has been the one preventing a ceasefire.
De-development via the Gaza Occupation
Between July 1971 and February 1972, Sharon enjoyed considerable success. During this time, the entire Strip (apart from the Rafah area) was sealed off by a ring of security fences 53 miles in length, with few entrypoints. Today, their effects live on: there are only three points of entry to Gaza—Erez, Nahal Oz, and Rafah.
Perhaps the most dramatic and painful aspect of Sharon’s campaign was the widening of roads in the refugee camps to facilitate military access. Israel built nearly 200 miles of security roads and destroyed thousands of refugee dwellings as part of the widening process.’ In August 1971, for example, the Israeli army destroyed 7,729 rooms (approximately 2,000 houses) in three vola- tile camps, displacing 15,855 refugees: 7,217 from Jabalya, 4,836 from Shati, and 3,802 from Rafah.
- Page 105
Through 1993 Israel imposed a one-way system of tariffs and duties on the importation of goods through its borders; leaving Israel for Gaza, however, no tariffs or other regulations applied. Thus, for Israeli exports to Gaza, the Strip was treated as part of Israel; but for Gazan exports to Israel, the Strip was treated as a foreign entity subject to various “non-tariff barriers.” This placed Israel at a distinct advantage for trading and limited Gaza’s access to Israeli and foreign markets. Gazans had no recourse against such policies, being totally unable to protect themselves with tariffs or exchange rate controls. Thus, they had to pay more for highly protected Israeli products than they would if they had some control over their own economy. Such policies deprived the occupied territories of significant customs revenue, estimated at $118-$176 million in 1986.
- page 240
In a report released in May 2015, the World Bank revealed that as a result of Israel’s blockade and OPE, Gaza’s manufacturing sector shrank by as much as 60% over eight years while real per capita income is 31 percent lower than it was 20 years ago. The report also stated that the blockade alone is responsible for a 50% decrease in Gaza’s GDP since 2007. Furthermore, OPE (combined with the tunnel closure) exacerbated an already grave situation by reducing Gaza’s economy by an additional $460 million.
-
Page 402
-
The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development - Third Edition by Sara M. Roy
Blockade, including Aid
Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.
After the ‘disengagement’ in 2007, this turned into a full blockade; where Israel has had control over the airspace, borders, and sea. Under the guise of ‘dual-use’ Israel has restricted food, allocating a minimum supply leading to over half of Gaza being food insecure; construction materials, medical supplies, and other basic necessities have also been restricted.
The blockade and Israel’s repeated military offensives have had a heavy toll on Gaza’s essential infrastructure and further debilitated its health system and economy, leaving the area in a state of perpetual humanitarian crisis. Indeed, Israel’s collective punishment of Gaza’s civilian population, the majority of whom are children, has created conditions inimical to human life due to shortages of housing, potable water and electricity, and lack of access to essential medicines and medical care, food, educational equipment and building materials.
- Amnesty International Report pg 26-27
Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
Human Shields
Hamas:
Intentionally utilizing the presence of civilians or other protected persons to render certain areas immune from military attack is prohibited under international law. Amnesty International was not able to establish whether or not the fighters’ presence in the camps was intended to shield themselves from military attacks. However, under international humanitarian law, even if one party uses “human shields”, or is otherwise unlawfully endangering civilians, this does not absolve the opposing party from complying with its obligations to distinguish between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, to refrain from carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, and to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and civilian objects.
Israel:
Additionally, there is extensive independent verification of Israel using Palestinians as Human Shields:
-
Including Children (2013 Report)
-
Israel “Systematically” Uses Gaza Children as Human Shields, Rights Group Finds 2024
-
Breaking The Silence - Testimonies from IDF Veterans
Deliberate Attacks on Civilians
Israel deliberately targets civilian areas. From in general with the Dahiya Doctrine to multiple systems deployed in Gaza to do so:
-
The Dahiya Doctrine & Israel’s Use of Disproportionate Force
-
‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.
As long as Israel is occupying Palestine they will never be completely be safe.
The United States on Wednesday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding an immediate cease-fire in the war in Gaza because it was not linked to an immediate release of hostages taken captive by Hamas militants in Israel in October 2023. [Source: https://apnews.com/article/un-gaza-resolution-veto-hamas-israel-hostages-b5281432fc2acdc1860adb3015392c0b]
Despite the knee-jerk reaction from uninformed people here, they were absolutely right to veto it.
Any ceasefire deal should obviously demand the immediate release of every remaining Israeli hostage.
There is simply no justification for the withholding of these hostages who have been tortured and raped in Palestinian captivity for >13 months. The civilians of Gaza do NOT benefit from the continued torture of Israeli civilian hostages, so what is the rationale for not calling for their immediate release? Release the damn hostages, and only then can we have a meaningful path towards a ceasefire.
The resolution that was put to a vote “demands an immediate, unconditional and permanent cease-fire to be respected by all parties, and further reiterates its demand for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.”
The release of all the hostages has always been a part of the ceasefire negotiations, that has never changed. Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
We’ve had mixed reports of treatment of Israeli hostages by Hamas (1, 2, 3) We know of at least one instance of sexual assault and rape, multiple accounts of abuse, how widespread it is we won’t know until all the hostages are released, which Israel has been preventing.
Israel does torture, rape, and kill Palestinians (including children), and has been for decades.
Palestinian Prisoners in Israeli Prisons
Palestinians are jailed without charge, forced into false confessions, routinely tortured, raped, denied medical attention, and some killed as a result. This includes hundreds of children.
Palestinians denied civil rights (HRW) including Military Court (B’TSelem)
Palestinian Prisoners in Israel (wiki)
Children are jailed and abused in Israeli prisons (Save The Children)
Torture and Abuse in Interrogations (B’TSelem)
Thousands of Palestinians are held without charge under Israeli detention policy (NPR)
This isnt about the hostages to the Israeli Government, this is Israel engaging in Genocide to eradicate and forcibly displace the Palestinian people. Gaza has never stopped being under Israeli occupation since 1967. Hamas only exists because of the Apartheid Occupation of Israel and the daily violence that has subjected Palestinians to for generations. Israel has always been the obstacle for peace, and has been the one preventing a ceasefire.
Human Shields
Hamas:
Intentionally utilizing the presence of civilians or other protected persons to render certain areas immune from military attack is prohibited under international law. Amnesty International was not able to establish whether or not the fighters’ presence in the camps was intended to shield themselves from military attacks. However, under international humanitarian law, even if one party uses “human shields”, or is otherwise unlawfully endangering civilians, this does not absolve the opposing party from complying with its obligations to distinguish between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, to refrain from carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, and to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and civilian objects.
Israel:
Additionally, there is extensive independent verification of Israel using Palestinians as Human Shields:
-
Including Children (2013 Report)
-
Israel “Systematically” Uses Gaza Children as Human Shields, Rights Group Finds 2024
-
Breaking The Silence - Testimonies from IDF Veterans
Deliberate Attacks on Civilians
Israel deliberately targets civilian areas. From in general with the Dahiya Doctrine to multiple systems deployed in Gaza to do so:
-
The Dahiya Doctrine & Israel’s Use of Disproportionate Force
-
‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.
Netenyahu refused the release of all hostages multiple times
The OP did a quality reply already where he cites the article you’ve linked to debunk your own claims. But you could also have done with reading the OP’s article until the second paragraph.
The draft resolution was aimed at calling for an “immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire” in Gaza and the release of all hostages held by Palestinian groups in the enclave.
At this point unquestionably spouting the official lies of the U.S. or Israeli governments is spouting genocidal propaganda and can only be seen as either hopelessly ignorant or bad faith.
