Camps of Death, Terror: Syrian Survivors Face Long Road To Recovery

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Crime & Justice, Democracy, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, Middle East & North Africa, Peace, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Human Rights

The people walk to Saydnaya prison to search for the detainees. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

The people walk to Saydnaya prison to search for the detainees. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

IDLIB, Syria, Dec 16 2024 (IPS) – Detained without trial for over three years for trial for allegedly treating “terrorists” (as opponents of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad were deemed), Alaa al-Khalil, a 33-year-old nurse from the Syrian city of Hama, recounts the agony of her time in a prison cell she shared with at least 35 women.


She was released from Aydnaya prison on December 8 after the fall of the Assad regime.

Following the fall of Assad’s regime and his escape to Moscow on December 8, armed opposition factions managed to open the doors of prisons, freeing hundreds of detainees who had endured the most horrific forms of torture for opposing Assad’s rule and demanding his removal from power. Many lost their lives within the prisons and were buried in mass graves, while the families of the detainees continue to search for their missing loved ones in the prisons of tyranny.

Years of Torture

“I was arrested at a security checkpoint belonging to the former Syrian regime and transferred to the Political Security Branch in Damascus—my hands were cuffed, and my eyes were blindfolded. In prison, we were 35 women in a small, cramped room with the toilet in the same room, without any privacy,” Khalil told IPS. “The marks of severe torture were clearly visible on some of the women. As for sleep, we would lie on the floor and take turns sleeping due to the very small size of the room. The most painful thing was that there were many pregnant women who gave birth to children who grew up inside the prison.”

The search for survivors in Sednaya prison. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

The search for survivors in Sednaya prison. Credit: Abdul Karem al-Mohammad/IPS

During that time, she said the prisoners suffered from “hunger, cold, and all forms of torture, including beatings, burning with cigarettes, and nail pulling.”

Many of the female detainees were raped and exposed to sexual violence as a form of punishment. After midnight, the guards would come to the detainees’ room to select the most beautiful girls to take them to the officers’ rooms.

“We preferred torture and even death to rape. When a girl refused to have sex or confess to the charges against her during interrogation, she would be killed by the guards or interrogators, and her body would be thrown into the salt room, which was prepared in advance to preserve the bodies of the dead for as long as possible,” she said, tearfully remembering the daily trauma.

Khalil confirms that prisoners were not allowed to look at the guards, talk, or make any noise, even during torture. They were punished by being deprived of water or forced to sleep naked without covers in the freezing cold. The meals consisted of a few bites of spoilt food, and many people contracted serious infections, diseases, and mental disorders.

Now released, Khalil hopes to enjoy safety, stability, and peace in this country after years of oppression and injustice.

Adnan al-Ibrahim, 46, from the southern Syrian city of Daraa, was also released a few days ago from Adra prison on the outskirts of Damascus after spending over 10 years there on charges of defecting from Bashar al-Assad’s army and seeking asylum in Lebanon.

“I feel like I’m dreaming after being released from prison. They accused me of terrorism, subjected me to torture, and I was never brought before a court during my imprisonment. I’m still traumatized by what I endured,” Ibrahim says.

“We were subjected to the worst treatment imaginable in prisons. All we want now is the right to live a decent life, far from injustice, arbitrary arrests, and the ongoing killing in Syria.”

He is now emaciated and weak—his weight drastically reduced due to malnutrition and poor diet. Most of his fellow inmates suffered from life-threatening illnesses as a result of the torture they endured. Many inmates lost their memory due to being beaten on the head during interrogations, and the bodies of the dead remained for long periods before being removed. Many of these bodies were disposed of by burning.

Burdened by Psychological Prauma

Samah Barakat, a 33-year-old mental health specialist, says the survivors of Syrian detention centres will need help to overcome their traumas.

‘The experience of imprisonment and torture in prisons is painful and traumatic for survivors. Imprisonment is not limited to physical torture; the mental state is also affected. Prisoners were subjected to various forms of torture and oppression, leading to a significant deterioration in their mental health. These effects include a range of psychological disorders such as psychosis, memory loss, and speech impediments, in addition to the spread of diseases due to their deprivation of basic medical care.”

Barakat confirms that some detainees are likely to suffer from physical, psychological, and behavioural effects, accompanied by constant anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal.

She explains that survivors of detention need psychological support, which varies depending on the impact of the detention experience. Some need psychological counseling or therapy sessions with specialists, while others require medication prescribed by a psychiatrist due to depression or other mental illnesses.

An Unknown Fate

For some, the uncertainty of the fates of their loved ones means the trauma of the Asad regime lives on.

Alaa al-Omar, 52, from the northern Syrian city of Idlib, went to Saydnaya prison and the Palestine Branch in Damascus after the fall of the Assad regime, hoping to find his son, who had disappeared in the prison’s depths.

“I went to the prison with great longing, but I found no trace of my son. I think he died as a result of torture.”

Omar affirms that his son was arrested by the Assad regime forces in 2015 while studying at a university in Aleppo, accused of participating in demonstrations, carrying weapons, and joining the opposition factions.

Omar indicates he heard nothing from his son or about his son since his arrest, and his fate remains unknown even now.

Human Rights Violations

Human rights activist Salim Al-Najjar (41), from Aleppo, speaks about the suffering of survivors of detention and told IPS that the history of building prisons and expanding detention centers in Syria dated back to the rule of Hafez al-Assad, whose regime in the 1980s exercised excessive force against its opponents, turning the country into a “large slaughterhouse.”

“In the regime’s prisons, lives are as equal as stones in the hands of a sculptor, killed and discarded without regard or importance. In them, a person becomes a mere number, with their history, feelings, and even dreams that haunted them until the last moment of their lives ignored,” Najjar says.

Al-Najjar confirms the existence of many prisons in Syria, but the Saydnaya prison, located north of the Syrian capital Damascus, is known as the most prominent political detention center in Syria and was notorious for its horrific reputation as a site of torture and mass executions, especially after the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in 2011. Saydnaya prison was where Assad’s detained opponents or defectors from his army or those who rejected his “killing policy.”

He points out that few detainees were released through family connections or bribes, while the detainees were left to die from their untreated wounds and diseases in “dirty, overcrowded” cells.

He notes that many detainees emerged from behind bars suffering from a loss of their mental faculties, unable to remember their names or identify themselves, and due to the severe changes caused by malnutrition and brutal torture, their features had changed to the point that their families did not recognize them at first.

Najjar hopes to achieve justice for the victims by presenting evidence and documents to international courts and holding Assad and all perpetrators of violations in Syria accountable.

The Syrian Network for Human Rights said in a statement on December 11 that Assad is accused of killing at least 202,000 Syrian civilians, including 15,000 killed under torture, the disappearance of 96,000 others, and the forced displacement of nearly 13 million Syrian citizens, as well as other heinous violations, including the use of chemical weapons.

“Syrian detention centers and torture chambers symbolize the agony, oppression, and suffering that Syrians have endured for decades. Survivors of detention continue to heal their wounds and strive to return to their normal lives and reintegrate into society. Sadly, a significant number of them have perished under torture.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Now it’s Officially the Israeli-American Genocide in Gaza

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Democracy, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands. Credit: ICC
 
ICC issues arrest warrants for Israel, Hamas leadership: what happens next?

ATLANTA, USA, Nov 27 2024 (IPS) – As of last week, in the wake of the Nov. 21 issuance by the International Criminal Court (ICC) of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former IDF Defense chief Yoav Gallant, all eyes turned to Washington to see the what the response of Israel’s main backer would be.


The charges were for “Crimes Against Humanity” and “War Crimes” for using starvation as a method of warfare in Gaza, something is explicitly forbidden in international law. A HAMAS operative, Muhammad Deif, who may already be dead, was also charged. One would think that the US should find it easy to agree. But what was the message from the Biden White House?

Press spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre said that the United States of America “Rejects the ICC ruling,” as if the International Criminal Court were just an off-beat punk yelling his head off in Lafayette Park just across from the presidential residence. But the prestigious court in the Hague has no option. It is bound to rule according to the law. It’s actions are neither political nor enacted on a whim.

The international law that created the treaty was endorsed by a host of national governments around the world—except for a few, Israel and the United States being the most prominent.

The US is not a State Party (signatory) to the ICC, even though 124 countries have signed the Rome Statute that created the ICC in 2002. Presidents Clinton and Obama tried to get ratification from the US Senate but failed. George W. Bush and the Neo-Cons flatly rejected the idea of endorsing the statute, not wanting any restrictions on their disastrous plan to attack Iraq.

Just the day before at the United Nations, the Security Council voted overwhelmingly 14-1 to demand a cease-fire in Gaza. But the US, by a single vote –because it has veto power under the rules set up in the wake of WW II—blocked the resolution.

The argument that a cease fire would help bring the hostages home, not hinder their release, was urged by the council but fell on deaf ears.

In a shameful action that will be long remembered throughout the world, the US representative, Deputy Ambassador Robert Wood, raised his hand to block the resolution. These two actions in the same week—flat out rejection of the ICC warrants and blocking a Security Council cease fire resolution intended to relieve massive human suffering, when taken together, mean not only that the United States is fully on board with the endless slaughter of civilians in Gaza under continuous Israeli bombing, but it now supports starving women and children too.

This is a stain that will not go away. Protestors in the streets and on university campuses have long been chanting, “Genocide Joe has got to go!” How out of touch is the near-senile President Biden? How corrupt, misguided, and inhumane do you have to be to make that decision, condemning the United States to be forever labeled as contributing to war crimes?

It’s true that Washington has long supplied arms to Israel, including during this conflict, but to support continued starvation and bombing of civilians as a matter of policy is much worse—either deliberately evil or insanity. No fancy negotiating tricks are allowed when innocent lives are at stake.

And where does the recent Democratic nominee for President, Vice President Kamala Harris, stand on all this? Does she have a voice within the Administration? She pledged repeatedly if elected to increase, not decrease, humanitarian aid to Gaza.

What’s wrong with advocating a cease fire after 13 months of massive, one-sided bloodletting that has killed and wounded nearly 150,000 people among the unfortunate citizens of Gaza?

Let’s define terms: A war is when both sides shoot at each other. A Turkey Shoot is different—the Turkey doesn’t have a chance, and sharpshooters just keep shooting to see who has the best aim. A slaughterhouse is when only one side has all the power and just keeps killing on a massive scale.

Israel’s troops have guns and bombs supplied by the United States, Germany, and the UK, and continues to shoot and bomb people in Gaza long after the other side has ceased firing. If the operation is a manhunt, call it a manhunt. If a reprisal, call it a reprisal. If ethnic cleansing, call it that. If the term “Warsaw Ghetto” is fitting, call it that. But don’t call it a righteous battle if the atrocities keep piling up on just one side with no sign of stopping.

Does anybody know how long it has been since HAMAS has fired rockets, or even machine guns at Israeli troops? You would think that if that were the case the slick Israeli lie machine would trumpet that information. So why not cease firing today, not tomorrow?

Why doesn’t the esteemed American President, “Genocide Joe,” just decide for once to do the right thing?

James E. Jennings, PhD is President of Conscience International, an aid organization that has worked in Gaza over many years.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

‘AI-powered Weapons Depersonalise the Violence, Making It Easier for the Military to Approve More Destruction’

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, TerraViva United Nations

Nov 22 2024 (IPS) –  
CIVICUS discusses the dangers arising from military uses of artificial intelligence (AI) with Sophia Goodfriend, Post-Doctoral Fellow at Harvard Kennedy School’s Middle East Initiative.


The global rise of AI has raised concerns about its impact on human rights, particularly for excluded groups, with controversial uses ranging from domestic policing and surveillance to ‘kill lists’ such as those used by Israel to identify targets for missile strikes. Digital rights groups are calling for the development of an AI governance framework that prioritises human rights and bans the most dangerous uses of AI. While recent United Nations (UN) resolutions recognise the human rights risks of AI, more decisive action is needed.

Sophia Goodfriend

Why should we be concerned about AI and its current and potential uses?

AI is being rapidly integrated into military operations around the world, particularly in weapons systems, intelligence gathering and decision-making. Its increasing autonomy reduces human oversight, raising serious concerns and sci-fi fears of machines making life-and-death decisions without meaningful human intervention.

AI-based technologies such as drones, automated weapons and advanced targeting systems are now part of military arsenals. The military’s increasing reliance on these systems raises significant concerns, as they are largely unregulated under international law. The level of surveillance these technologies rely on violates privacy protections under international law and many national civil rights laws.

The rapid development and deployment of these technologies is outpacing regulation, leaving the public largely unaware of their implications. Without proper oversight, AI could be misused in ways that cause widespread harm and evade accountability. We urgently need to regulate the military use of AI and ensure it is consistent with international law and humanitarian principles.

In addition, faulty or biased data can lead to devastating mistakes, raising serious ethical and legal questions. And the decisions made by these systems can undermine the principles of proportionality and distinction in warfare, putting civilian lives at risk.

What’s an example of how AI is currently being used?

The Israeli military is using AI-assisted targeting systems to identify and strike targets in Gaza. These systems analyse huge amounts of data collected through drones, satellites, surveillance cameras, social media and phone hacks to identify potential targets, locate them and decide where and when people should be killed.

AI-generated ‘kill lists’ raise serious concerns. Flawed or biased data has already led to devastating mistakes, with journalists and humanitarian workers killed in strikes. There have also been allegations that the military has expanded its definition of who or what constitutes a valid target, allowing attacks on people or places that may not meet the standards set by international law.

These systems operate at an unprecedented speed and scale, creating a huge number of targets. They have the potential to cause widespread destruction without thorough oversight. Soldiers operating in Gaza have as little as 20 seconds to approve targets that include Hamas militants, but also people who wouldn’t be considered valid military targets under international laws of war and human rights standards.

What does this mean for moral responsibility over the damage caused?

AI-assisted targeting technologies such as the Lavender system are not fully autonomous. They still require human oversight. This is a critical point because these technologies are only as destructive as the people in charge. It all depends on the decisions made by military leaders, and these decisions can either comply with or violate international human rights law.

At the same time, the use of machines to target and destroy can depersonalise violence, making it easier for military personnel to authorise more destruction. By outsourcing decision-making to AI, there’s a risk of abdicating moral responsibility. This technological approach makes military action seem more efficient and rational, which can help justify each bombing with a seemingly logical rationale, but it also dehumanises the civilian casualties and widespread devastation that follow.

Are current AI governance frameworks sufficient to protect human rights?

The short answer is no: current AI governance frameworks fall short in protecting human rights, particularly in military applications. While most states agree that AI-driven weapons – from fully autonomous to AI-assisted ones – should comply with international human rights law, there’s no global framework to ensure this happens.

This has led to calls for more comprehensive and enforceable rules, and there have been some positive steps. For example, civil society groups and researchers successfully pushed for a ban on fully autonomous weapons in the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, which was supported by over 100 states. As a result, the UN Secretary-General has called for a legally binding treaty to be adopted in 2026 to completely ban fully autonomous weapons, which are powered by AI but have no human oversight of their operations.

The European Union (EU) has also taken action, banning some military AI applications such as social scoring systems – which give people ratings based on their social behaviour – as part of its AI Act. However, the EU still lacks specific rules for military AI.

Organisations such as the Future of Life Institute, Human Rights Watch and Stop Killer Robots have been instrumental in pushing for change. But they’re facing growing challenges as Silicon Valley tech CEOs and venture capitalists push for faster AI development with fewer regulations. This is worrying, as these powerful figures will now have more influence over AI policy under a new Trump administration.

What role should AI companies play in ensuring compliance with human rights principles?

Companies have a critical role to play. In recent years, many of the leading companies, such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft and OpenAI, have made public statements about their commitment to human rights. OpenAI, for example, has called for the creation of a watchdog similar to the International Atomic Energy Agency, and its founders have pledged not to allow their technology to be used for military purposes. Amazon, Google and Microsoft also have fair use policies, which they claim ensure their technologies are used in accordance with human rights principles.

But in practice, these policies often fall short, particularly when it comes to military applications. Despite their claims, many of these companies have sold their technologies to military forces, and the extent of their involvement in military AI development is often unclear. Just a few weeks ago, The Intercept reported that the US military’s Africa Command had purchased OpenAI software through Microsoft. We also know the Israeli military used Google cloud services to target bombs in Gaza and Amazon web services to store classified surveillance data on civilians in the Palestinian territories.

This has sparked protests within the companies involved, with workers staging walkouts and demanding greater transparency and accountability. While these protests are important, AI companies can ultimately only do so much to ensure their technologies are used ethically. We need stronger, more comprehensive international laws on the military use of AI, and governments must take responsibility for ensuring these laws are enforced at the national level.

At the same time, many tech CEOs, such as Elon Musk, have moved away from their previous commitment to human rights and are more aligned with right-wing political leaders like Trump. Some CEOs, such as Peter Thiel of PayPal and Alex Karp of Palantir Technologies, argue that private companies need to work closely with the military to maintain US technological superiority. This has created tensions between human rights advocates and tech giants, highlighting the need for stronger regulatory frameworks to hold these companies accountable and prevent AI being used in ways that undermine human rights.

GET IN TOUCH
Website
LinkedIn
Twitter

SEE ALSO
Human rights take a backseat in AI regulation CIVICUS Lens 16.Jan.2024
AI: ‘The biggest challenges are the biases and lack of transparency of algorithms’ Interview with Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team 24.Aug.2023
AI regulation: ‘There must be a balance between promoting innovation and protecting rights’ Interview with Nadia Benaissa 25.Jul.2023

  Source

Middle East: Ceasefires are the Only Answer

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

A family collecting hygiene kits from Maliha, in Eastern Ghouta, Rural Damascus, Syria. The distribution provided essential items to mostly Syrian and Lebanese families who had fled from the south of Lebanon. Credit: Norwegian Refugee Council

OSLO, Norway, Nov 13 2024 (IPS) – “The shockwaves from Israel’s ongoing and indiscriminate warfare on Gaza and Lebanon are reverberating across this entire region. Neither the horrific assault on Israeli civilians on 7 October 2023, nor the indiscriminate missiles launched by militant groups from Lebanon, can justify the degree of destruction on civilian lives and infrastructure in the region that I have witnessed in recent days.


We cannot wait another day for an end to this senseless violence. For the sake of children across the entire region, diplomacy must result in a sustainable ceasefire.

The people I have met in recent days–from those in Gaza City, to the displaced in eastern Lebanon, to those crossing into Syria–longed for peace so they could return home. Children spoke of how much they missed school and their friends, and parents wished for an end to the precarity and suffering that displacement has brought. The suffering of millions cannot begin to end until those in power push for peace and take action to end the violence.

What I witnessed in Gaza was a society shattered by advanced weaponry, with ongoing military strikes relentlessly impacting the civilian population. War has rules, and it is clear that the Israeli campaign has been conducted with utter disregard for international humanitarian law.

As Gaza has been reduced to rubble, Western leaders have largely stood by unwilling to apply the necessary pressure on the stronger party, Israel, to stop starving the population that they are besieging and bombarding.

In Lebanon, I met people who in just a couple of weeks have lost their homes, jobs and everything in between. They are now staying in almost bare shelters that offer neither protection nor privacy, in fear that the worst is yet to come. The temperature has dropped substantially. People are ill-prepared for what promises to be the coldest winter season for the hundreds of thousands displaced.

Travelling into Syria from Lebanon via the Masnaa border crossing, I saw the huge challenges facing those fleeing violence in Lebanon, exacerbated by vast craters in the road caused by Israeli strikes. Displaced people must be provided with safe passage, shelter, and services.

Those fleeing into Syria arrive in a country with deep, pre-existing economic and humanitarian crises. NRC is providing support to those arriving in Syria, people who took the impossible decision to leave their homes while facing bombardment, and left with only what they could carry.

The aid we and others are currently able to provide is totally insufficient for the needs our staff are seeing. We must be given the right to independently monitor how those who flee from Lebanon to Syria are treated. There must be robust international support to meet people forced to flee, and there must be a genuine, re-energised diplomatic effort from all sides, to halt violence against civilians.

My visit started in Gaza, continued in Lebanon, and finished in Syria, tracing the fallout of this now regional conflict. At each point, the people I met said they wished for only one thing: peace.

Jan Egeland is Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC). This article follows his visit to Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria.

NRC teams are operating across Gaza, Lebanon and Syria providing essential services to displaced people. This includes items such as mattresses, blankets and hygiene kits as well as cash. We are also providing clean water and sanitation facilities as well as education to children.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Scorched Earth Colonizing of Gaza is a Horrible Idea

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Democracy, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: UNRWA

ATLANTA, USA, Nov 11 2024 (IPS) – For religious, humanitarian, and scientific reasons, Israel’s increasingly apparent plan for the de facto colonization of the Northern Gaza Strip is a bad idea. When that program was rejected recently by Israel’s own Defense Minister Yoav Galant, he was summarily fired by Prime Minister Netanyahu.


However, the founding document of the worldwide Jewish community, the Torah, and especially the Decalogue, states plainly, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife…or anything that is thy neighbors.” If religion still means anything to people in the modern nation of Israel, it should be clear that whatever belongs to others should be left alone and neither coveted nor stolen.

For obvious humanitarian reasons the one-sided bombing of Gaza must stop. After more than a year of an ongoing holocaust in Gaza, Israel’s relentless bombing has produced casualties totaling nearly 150,000 dead and wounded people, mostly civilians.

Now with UN sources reporting that starvation is setting in, people everywhere must demand that this racist, inhumane bloodshed stop immediately. Otherwise, international law has no force and the word “humane” has no meaning.

In scientific terms, the contamination of the water, soil, and air in northern Gaza from explosive dust, including Depleted Uranium, will clearly persist for decades, if not generations. That is neither good for the inhabitants if they manage to return to their homes, nor for the Jewish colonists if they should return to their previous colonies in the strip.

US bombing of Iraq two decades ago, especially in and around Basra, as much scientific and eyewitness testimony—including my own on the scene report—proves, has produced a plethora of birth defects.

The idea of some capitalists that Gaza will become a future Dubai—a wealthy trade zone that will be a veritable Las Vegas on the Mediterranean shore—is actually a good one. Geographically and commercially, Gaza is a potential Hong Kong.

The only thing wrong with the plan is the question of who will control this mighty future entrepot, the Palestinians, investors from the Gulf States and the West, or Israel? Answering that will take another century of bloodletting.

Far better that the United States, NATO, the United Nations, the International Court of Justice in the Hague or somebody other than HAMAS or the extreme right wing and increasingly bloodthirsty Likud government now in power in Jerusalem should deal with that issue and guarantee justice.

The ICJ/International Court of Justice, responsible governments everywhere, and especially the campus protesters and those on the streets of cities around the world, must keep chanting, “NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!” “NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!”

James E. Jennings, PhD is President of Conscience International and Executive Director of US Academics for Peace

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

UN Arms Embargo on Israel: Dead on Arrival

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Featured, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

In Khan Younis, thousands of people are fleeing for their lives again. Credit: UNRWA

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 8 2024 (IPS) – When the United Nations imposes sanctions or penalizes a member state – be it the General Assembly or the Human Rights Council – the resolutions are “non-binding” and often remain unimplemented.

But the Security Council resolutions are “binding” – and still openly violated by countries such as North Korea—because all these UN bodies have no means of implementing these resolutions, nor a standing army to forcibly enforce them. But they only carry moral weight.


The Council can also impose its own sanctions, mostly in economic, financial and trade sectors, against violators of its decisions.

And last week there was a move to impose arms sanctions against Israel – and rightly so, judging by the 43,000 plus, mostly Palestinian civilians, killed in Gaza largely with US-supplied weapons since October last year.

But how effective will this be since the strongest opposition will come from the US, an unyielding supporter of Israel, which will unhesitatingly use its veto power if the resolution comes before the Security Council?

Ambassador Anwarul K. Chowdhury, a former UN Under-Secretary-General and one-time Permanent Representative of Bangladesh to the United Nations, told IPS anything short of a real, permanent ceasefire would not create a pathway to end the perpetration of the ongoing genocidal aggression by Israel.

In this context, he said, the joint letter calling on all countries to stop the sale of arms and ammunition to Israel, signed by 52 countries and two UN-recognized multilateral organizations, is meaningfully forward-looking, and contains a purposeful objective of contributing to that “pathway”.

In fact, the Foreign Minister of Turkiye, whose country initiated the letter, asserted that “We must repeat at every opportunity that selling arms to Israel means participating in its genocide.”

“It would be argued rightfully that the United Nations and its apex body, the General Assembly have no powers to enforce such an arms embargo. The Security Council, the sole UN entity which can authorize an arms embargo and obligate the arms suppliers desist from sending arms to the areas of conflict, also becomes powerless if one of the P-5 uses the notorious veto”.

“However, I strongly believe that a General Assembly resolution following the call for the arms embargo to Israel would have a moral value which has its own merit. Despite the politics and power-play which is destroying the UN’s credibility and marginalizing its operational capacity to resolve conflicts, the arms embargo would highlight the principled position taken by the UN,” said Ambassador Chowdhury.

In a way, he pointed out, that would strengthen the Secretary-General’s efforts to promote the much-needed ceasefire.

In the aftermath of Israel’s declaration of the Secretary General as persona non-grata (PNG) and its extension of the attacks on UNIFIL in Lebanon, the General Assembly needs to show that its moral and normative role as envisaged in the UN Charter has not been cowed down by the politics of the frequently-used threat of veto, he declared.

Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, who has written extensively on the politics of the Security Council, told IPS: “This initiative reflects the view of the vast majority of the world’s governments and peoples and is consistent with imperatives of international humanitarian law, but given that the major arms supplier of Israel is a veto-wielding permanent member of the Security Council, it is unlikely to have much of an impact.”

Also problematic, he pointed out, is that some of the countries sponsoring the initiative, such as Russia and Saudi Arabia, have been guilty not only of similarly providing weapons to those engaging in war crimes but engaging in war crimes themselves.

Turkiye’s foreign minister Hakan Fidan said last week his country had submitted a letter to the United Nations, signed by 52 countries and two inter-governmental organizations, calling for a halt in arms deliveries to Israel.

“We have written a joint letter calling on all countries to stop the sale of arms and ammunition to Israel. We delivered this letter, which has 54 signatories, to the UN on November 1,” said Fidan, according to the Times of Israel.

“We must repeat at every opportunity that selling arms to Israel means participating in its genocide,” said Fidan, adding that the letter is “an initiative launched by Turkiye.”

Among the signatories were Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Algeria, China, Iran and Russia, plus the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC),

Elaborating further, Ambassador Chowdhury said the UN should not forget that the UN’s International Court of Justice which determined that Israel’s occupation of the Gaza Strip and West Bank is illegal under international law. The judgment was followed by a General Assembly resolution last September, demanding Israel leave the occupied territories within a year.

“I am encouraged by the UN’s own 45 Human Rights Experts and Special Rapporteurs, who, driven by their conscience, forcefully called for a ‘permanent ceasefire, … an ‘arms embargo on all warring parties,’ and ‘the deployment of an international protective presence in the occupied Palestinian territory under the supervision of the UN.’ All these well-thought-out measures would only promote dialogue and diplomacy over death and destruction”.

The UN Secretary-General needs to endorse and welcome this call by his in-house experts and recommend to the General Assembly to do the same without any delay, he declared.

Back in April 2024, in a resolution adopted by 28 votes in favour, six against and 13 abstentions, the 47-member Human Rights Council backed a call “to cease the sale, transfer and diversion of arms, munitions and other military equipment to Israel, the occupying Power…to prevent further violations of international humanitarian law and violations and abuses of human rights”.

Presented by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, delegates heard that the resolution had also been motivated by the need to stop “egregious” human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Co-sponsors of the text included Bolivia, Cuba and the State of Palestine, ahead of the vote which saw support from more than two dozen countries including Brazil, China, Luxembourg, Malaysia and South Africa, according to UN News.

Unlike the UN Security Council, Human Rights Council resolutions are not legally binding on States but carry significant moral weight, and in this instance is intended to increase diplomatic pressure on Israel as well as potentially influence national policy decisions.

Israel’s two largest arms sources, the United States and Germany, have resisted calls for an embargo on Israel, though each has been accused of withholding certain arms during the war.

In an October 2024 report, the Stockholm International Peace Institute (SIPRI) said in the past decade, Israel has greatly increased its imports of arms. SIPRI estimates that in the five-year period 2019–23, Israel was the world’s 15th largest importer of major arms, accounting for 2.1 per cent of global arms imports in the period. In 2009–13 it ranked only 47th.

Although only three countries supplied major arms to Israel in 2019–23, the United States, Germany and Italy, many others supplied military components, ammunition or services. The three other global major arms exporters among the top 10: the United Kingdom, France and Spain.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source