Young Haitians are calling for peace and stability in the troubled Caribbean nation.
NEW YORK, Jan 27 2025 (IPS) – As we commemorated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Day on January 20, 2025—a day that also marked America welcoming its newly elected president—we honor the legacy of this civil rights leader by reflecting on his powerful words: “We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now.”
These words resonate deeply as we grapple with the ongoing struggle to sustain hope in Haiti and reclaim our pride as the first Black republic to achieve freedom, won through the sacrifice and blood of our ancestors in their fight against colonialism.
How ironic it is that today, we—descendants of those who fought for liberty—are mocked in a land that proclaims itself the “Land of the Free.” We live in fear of deportation, our only crime being forced out of our homeland by unbearable circumstances. These circumstances have been shaped, in large part, by decades of misguided foreign interventions and interference.
Since the much-acclaimed U.S. military intervention in 1994, which was intended to uphold democracy, we have instead seen the dismantling of Haiti’s military and a reversal of order in our country. For the past 30 years, we have endured chaos and anarchy fueled by ineffective Haitian leadership, propped up under American tutelage.
Unless Haiti is allowed to chart its own course, the much-touted “assistance” provided in the name of empathy will only perpetuate the root causes of our problems, dooming yet another generation of young Haitians.
Recent statements by Senator Rubio, during his confirmation hearing as Secretary of State, praising the increased deployment of troops from Kenya and El Salvador, do not inspire hope for meaningful change. These actions appear to perpetuate the same failed policies that prioritize foreign-led solutions over empowering Haitians to reclaim control of their future.
Despite this, we take a moment to extend our prayers and best wishes to Mr. Trump as he assumes the role of leader of the free world. While his previous rhetoric may have reflected misgivings about us, we remain hopeful that he will prioritize the shared interests of our two nations.
We fervently wish that his administration will support The Future We Want embodied in the Ayiti 2030 Agenda Initiative as a path toward immediate order and stability in our country.
A Call to Action
We urge all members of the Haitian community and their friends to contact their elected representatives and advocate for support of The Future We Want: The Ayiti 2030 Agenda Initiative.
The Future We Want:
1. A United Haiti – Achieved through a transitional government authority that unites all factions and the nation without foreign interference. 2. A Country of Institutions – Guided by a transitional government committed to electoral reforms, ensuring that future elections reflect the true will of the people and inspire confidence among all stakeholders, rather than devolving into superficial popularity contests. 3. A Country of Jobs – Spearheaded by a transitional government that mobilizes resources from Haitians abroad to launch a massive, community-led relief effort focused on humanitarian intervention—not foreign armed intervention—paving the way for dynamic economic innovation.
The world must know that, as a people who have cherished freedom as deeply as Americans have, we are fully capable of rebuilding our nation without divisive foreign interference.
Haiti will rise again.
Haiti shall overcome!
Harvey Dupiton is Head of United Nations Association, Haiti, and Member of the NGO Community at the United Nations
UN Staff Honour Colleagues Fallen in Gaza. Credit: UN Photo
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 16 2025 (IPS) – As the United Nations plans to commemorate its 80th anniversary later this year, it is “reflecting on the steps taken to advance implementation of the Secretary-General’s Strategic Action Plan for addressing racism in the UN Secretariat.
The UN’s Anti-Racism Office, which was created in 2023, has hosted several online events that reached over 13,500 participants and generated 2,000 comments, and welcomed 2,700 visitors to its iSeek page (accessible only by staffers)—possibly a reflection of the rising complaints and concerns of UN staffers.
In a circular to staffers, the Office claims it has “collaborated closely with other UN entities and a growing global network of Anti-Racism Advocates, to foster a workplace that is safe, inclusive and equitable for all UN personnel, regardless of their race”
Together with the Office of Human Resources (OHR) and the Department of Operational Support (DOS), the Anti-Racism Office has been working on increasing fairness in recruitment processes through projects such as strengthening “blind hiring” practices and requiring diversity on hiring panels, which will be fully implemented in 2025.
Ian Richards, former President of the Coordination Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA), representing over 60,000 UN staffers, told IPS some of the practices being proposed, such as “blind hiring” and “mixed panels”, make sense. The unions have been requesting this for years. Although defining racial diversity in a legal manner may prove challenging.
At the same time, he pointed out, there are many competing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, (DEI) initiatives right now: Anti-racism, gender parity, disability inclusion, LGBTQIA, regional diversity, age diversity.
Each has their own office, coordinator, focal point network, action plan, policy, task force, ICSC agenda item, quota system or communication strategy. And each response to a legitimate grievance, said Richards, an economist specializing in digital business environments at the Geneva-based UNCTAD.
However, some of these conflict with each other, and HR officers and staff in general are finding it a bit hard to keep up.
“For any of this to be really effective, there needs to be some consolidation and prioritisation. Hopefully the SG can have a strategic think about this so we have the best outcome for all”, he declared.
A survey by the UN Staff Union in New York in 2021 was equally revealing.
According to the findings, 59% of the respondents said “they don’t feel the UN effectively addresses racial justice in the workplace, while every second respondent noted they don’t feel comfortable talking about racial discrimination at work”.
Meanwhile, the UN Secretariat in New York, faltered ingloriously, as it abruptly withdrew its own online survey on racism, in which it asked staffers to identify themselves either as “black, brown, white., mixed/multi-racial, and any other”.
But the most offensive of the categories listed in the survey was “yellow” – a longstanding Western racist description of Asians, including Japanese, Chinese and Koreans.
Meanwhile the UN Special Adviser for Addressing Racism in the Workplace, Mojankunyane Gumbi of South Africa, has been “actively visiting different UN duty stations worldwide, holding town hall meetings with staff and leadership from various departments to discuss and address issues related to racism within the organization”.
The Special Adviser, who as appointed January 2023, has been providing “strategic advice to the Secretary-General on addressing racism and racial discrimination, as well as oversee the implementation of the long-term Strategic Action Plan adopted by the Organization in 2022 to address racism in the workplace.
Following the adoption of the Strategic Action Plan, every Secretariat entity was asked to develop and implement its own action plan, while an Implementation Steering Group under the leadership and stewardship of the Special Adviser will monitor and guide corporate-level actions to implement the Strategic Action Plan.
An Anti-Racism Team has been established to support the Special Adviser.
Dr Palitha Kohona, a former Chief of the UN Treaty Section, told IPS the Secretary-General’s Strategic Action Plan is a welcome initiative.
The UN has always prided itself of its inclusive approach to hiring but, in reality, many staff harbour, often publicly unexpressed but privately discussed, reservations that race and gender influence hiring and promotions, he said.
“Unfortunately, it is widely felt that political considerations influence recruitment and promotions. Some countries have made lobbying a fine art, said Dr Kohona a former Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN, and until recently Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China
Some of those who were responsible for staff management, he pointed out, tended to be influenced by considerations that were not necessarily consistent with the clearly stated principles of the United Nations, especially in sensitive areas, often conceding to external pressures.
“While equitable geographical distribution must be a guiding principle, staff recruitment, promotions and placements must be done transparently and with due emphasis on merit. Today, this is not too difficult a goal to achieve given the ready availability of talent from most countries of the world. In fact, the steady flow of talent from developing countries to the developed world is an acknowledged reality.”
The goals of the Organisation will be best served if recruitment, placements and promotions occur transparently and relevant information is disseminated as widely as possible through the media, in particular, the social media, he pointed out.
Vacancies, he said, should be advertised in the languages widely used/accessed by applicants around the world. The offices processing applications should also be constituted by geagraphically representative officers.
“The UN must also proactively address the concern that the recruitment of General Staff tends to be biased in favour of certain nationalities,” he declared.
Speaking strictly off-the-record, a senior UN staffer told IPS the official statement outlines the Anti-Racism Office’s efforts within the UN Secretariat, but it lacks a critical examination of the concrete impact of these initiatives.
While the creation of the office and its collaboration with other UN entities is a positive step, there is limited transparency regarding the actual outcomes of these actions. The implementation of “blind hiring” and diversity on hiring panels are mentioned as key initiatives, however, the statement does not provide any data, including status quo, or specific examples showing how these changes have improved or will improve fairness or representation within the Secretariat, he said.
“To effectively evaluate progress, it is essential to highlight measurable results and ongoing challenges in these areas together with the baseline data.
Additionally, while the Special Adviser’s visits and town halls with staff are commendable, the statement fails to address whether the concerns raised during these engagements by staff have led to substantive changes or policy adjustments”.
The numbers of participants and visitors to online events and iSeek are notable, but without demonstrating how these interactions have directly influenced policy changes, decision-making or led to tangible outcomes, the impact remains unclear, he noted.
“It would be more effective to provide specific examples of changes that have resulted from the efforts by the Anti-Racism Office such as improve hiring diversity, more inclusive workplace policies, or shifts in organizational culture, in particular, how the mandate of the Anti-Racism Office has impacted in addressing racism and racial discrimination within the UN”.
To truly advance its mission of fostering an inclusive and equitable workplace, he said, the Anti-Racism Office must go beyond activity metrics such as the number of participants to its virtual events, but focus on outcomes in order to achieve the goals and objectives set in the Secretary-General’s Strategic Action Plan, that was launched four years ago in 2021.
In a circular to UN staffers, Catherine Pollard Under-Secretary-General for Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance Chair of the Task Force on Addressing Racism and Promoting Dignity for All in the United Nations Secretariat, said “the Secretary-General has called upon us to condemn racism wherever we see it, without reservation, hesitation or qualification”.
“This includes looking into our own hearts and minds. The global outcry in 2020 caused us all to look inward and recognize that, in order to fight racism, we have to be proactively anti-racist.”
“As an organization, we were founded on the principles of the dignity and worth of the human person, proclaiming the right of everyone to enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms, without distinctions of race, colour or national origin. We have always recognized the prevalence of racism and racial discrimination in society and played a key role in supporting Member States in the development of legal instruments to address this scourge”.
“I want to urge all personnel, of every race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin, to come together in the spirit of human decency and collegiality to educate ourselves on how racism may operate in society and in the workplaces of the Organization. I encourage all of you to participate in the ongoing dialogue and awareness campaigns to gain insight into how racism manifests at the workplace and how we can prevent it and support those who experience such behaviour.”
Ultimately, progress in addressing racism and racial discrimination will require unwavering commitment from senior leaders and the full participation of United Nations personnel to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to participate in the work of the Organization and is treated with respect and dignity. Let us stand in solidarity against racism, she declared.
ATLANTA, Georgia, Jan 3 2025 (IPS) – The fireplace in the State Dining Room of the White House that says, “May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof.” President John Adams wrote that in a letter to his wife Abigail in 1800.
Jimmy Carter was by all accounts a wise, just, and decent man—a man of deep religious faith, who was also circumspect—some may say old fashioned—about his rhetoric.
He was refreshingly candid in using the country-boy phrase “I’ll whip his ass!” against Democratic primary opponent Sen. Edward Kennedy. Most reporters in that era considered it too harsh or nearly obscene, so instead, they wrote, “I’ll whip his donkey!”
Carter was honest. When asked by a reporter amid stories of the Kennedy brothers’ sexual indulgences, if he had ever had lust in his heart, he responded straightforwardly, “Yes.” That’s something no other politician would ever do. But it was easy for Carter to admit because he followed the Christian and Calvinist doctrine that “We are all sinners.”
Historians view his administration as a watershed in the civil rights struggle, especially in the South. As president he negotiated the first ever peace agreement between Israel and the Arabs. In his post-presidential years, he made a worldwide impact as a humanitarian.
Civic virtue must be faithful to the original concept of American nationhood—favoring citizens ahead of government. Liberty and justice are the watchwords of democracy, not blind obedience to politicians.
George Washington said, “There exists an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness.” Lincoln advised “Malice toward none…charity for all…firmness in the right.” Carter followed these sentiments at his inauguration with a pledge from the Biblical Prophet Micah: “Do justly, love mercy, walk humbly.”
There are two ways of recognizing people as honest and wise—by their words and by their deeds. Carter told the truth straight out—even if it was inconvenient or might hurt him. His policies were based on simple fairness, especially in his efforts to overcome the endemic racism of the Old South.
By contrast, President-elect Trump is famous for the lies and invective-filled slander constantly dripping from his lips: “When somebody hurts you, just go after them as viciously and as violently as you can…. When somebody screws you, screw them back in spades.” Trump’s brand, he said, means, “Power is the only true value.”
We teach our kids differently. “Be nice,” we always say. Sesame Street TV and First Grade teachers call out children for “Courtesy Lacking.” Why can’t we demand as much from our leaders?
Trump is a symptom of the ills of our society, not the cause. Today most of us tolerate curses and obscenities that would have scandalized our grandmothers. Trump is simply riding the crest of a flood of indecency that already exists among the public.
Let’s bring back civic virtue. Jimmy Carter may be the best example of personal rectitude among US leaders in our lifetimes. Let him be your model—not the empty, sleazy suit that is soon to be the next occupant of the White House.
James E. Jennings PhD is President of Conscience International.
Carter was a man of decency and integrity who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy. Credit: Courtesy Kul Chandra Gautam
Former US President Jimmy Carter, a leader of impeccable integrity and decency who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy worldwide. I recall his contribution to the peace process in Nepal and his leadership in combatting deadly diseases in Africa.
Jimmy Carter enthusiastically supported the child survival campaign led by UNICEF. He had nominated Jim Grant to be the Executive Director of UNICEF and said that it was one of the most important decisions of his presidency.
KATHMANDU, Nepal, Jan 2 2025 (IPS) – Former American President Jimmy Carter was a man of peace and principles. He presided over a tumultuous period in American history from 1977 to 1981, working hard to restore trust in government after the Watergate scandal and the divisive era of the Vietnam War. He brokered a landmark peace deal between Israel and Egypt and negotiated a historic treaty to hand over the Panama Canal to Panama.
Carter, a champion of human rights both in the US and around the world, passed away at 100 on December 29, 2024.
More than any recent American president, Carter pressed gently but firmly on autocratic regimes worldwide to respect human rights and the rule of law. When he led the country with immense moral authority, it encouraged many human rights advocates, while dictators worried about the US sanctions.
At home, Carter got many progressive legislations passed in areas of consumer protection, welfare reforms and the appointment of women and minorities in America’s judiciary. However, he had difficulties managing the US economy, the Iran hostage crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And in the 1980 Presidential election, when he lost his bid to Ronald Reagan, his active political career came to an end.
Kul Chandra Gautam
But he didn’t retire to a comfortable life, rather, he embarked on a noble mission as one of the world’s highly respected elder statesmen, deeply committed to promoting democracy and human rights. He founded the Carter Center with a motto of “Waging Peace, Fighting Disease and Building Hope”.
With his team, he worked tirelessly to help resolve conflicts, monitor elections and improve human health through campaigns to eliminate several neglected diseases afflicting the poorest people worldwide, particularly in Africa.
“For his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights and to promote economic and social development,” Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.
Links with UNICEF and Nepal
Carter greatly admired UNICEF Executive Director James Grant and strongly supported the UNICEF-led global child survival and development campaign. Further, the organisation was a key partner in the Carter-led global campaign to eradicate a debilitating disease called dracunculiasis or Guinea-worm disease.
My first substantive meeting with Carter took place on August 3, 1995, at an event in Washington, DC, organised jointly by the Carter Center, USAID, WHO and UNICEF to mark the 95 percent reduction in Guinea worm cases worldwide and to recommit to its total eradication. I had a long and fruitful discussion with Carter on strengthening our collaboration in the global campaign to eradicate Guinea-worm disease.
In February 2004, I joined President Carter and WHO Director-General JW Lee on a 3-day field visit to observe and advocate for Guinea-worm eradication in Ghana. I learned about Carter’s humble personality, deep commitment to many worthy causes and impressive advocacy skills.
In our informal interactions, we often talked about Nepal.
Carter’s involvement in Nepal
Carter visited Nepal twice to observe Nepal’s Constituent Assembly Elections. He advised Nepali leaders, including the Election Commission, based on his worldwide experience and credibility in observing elections and conflict resolution. Over the years, the Carter Center produced several reports on Nepal dealing with issues related to the peace process, challenges in drafting Nepal’s Constitution and other important issues of social justice and equity.
I instinctively supported Carter’s noble efforts to promote peace, democracy and development. However, like everybody else, Carter was human and fallible, and some aspects of the Carter Center’s reports on Nepal were flawed.
In particular, Carter’s hasty verdict that Nepal’s first Constituent Assembly election was free, fair and peaceful ignored the fact that there was an unusually high degree of intimidation in many rural constituencies. The non-Maoist parties’ candidates were prevented from campaigning, and voters were threatened with physical violence for weeks preceding the actual voting.
There were well-intentioned but inaccurate analyses of Nepal’s socio-political dynamics by the Carter Center, the International Crisis Group, and even the United Nations. In their effort to appear “balanced and even-handed”, they gave the undue benefit of the doubt to the progressive-sounding rhetoric of the Maoists, ignoring their violent and corrupt practices.
Carter witnessed the insincerity and duplicity of the Maoists when they initially welcomed the 2013 election for the second Constituent Assembly but then denounced it as rigged and unfair when the results showed that they had suffered a humiliating loss.
Unlike during the first CA election, Carter took the necessary time to analyse the second CA election better. He left somewhat sobered by a deeper understanding of the Maoists’ opportunistic and undemocratic nature.
A man of faith and integrity
Jimmy Carter was a deeply religious and spiritual man who often turned to his faith during his political career. But as a progressive man and defender of human rights and gender equality, he found himself at odds with his Southern Baptist Church when it opposed gender equality, citing a few selected verses from the Bible that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and must not be allowed to serve as priests.
Carter protested and took a painful decision to sever ties with his Baptist Church, saying that parts of its rigid doctrine violated the basic premises of his Christian faith. He wrote to his fellow Baptists and published an op-ed article “Losing my religion for equality”.
Carter had a philosophical and spiritual perspective on death. As he suffered from multiple bouts of cancer treatment, he remarked, “I didn’t ask God to let me live, but I just asked God to give me a proper attitude toward death. I found that I was absolutely and completely at ease with death”.
May Carter’s noble soul rest in eternal peace.
Source: Kathmandu Post, Nepal
Kul Chandra Gautam is a distinguished diplomat, development professional, and a former senior official of the United Nations. Currently, he serves on the Boards of several international and national organizations, charitable foundations and public-private partnerships. Previously, he served in senior managerial and leadership positions with the UN in several countries and continents in a career spanning over three decades. As a former Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF and Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, he has extensive experience in international diplomacy, development cooperation and humanitarian assistance.
WASHINGTON DC, Dec 12 2024 (IPS) – Violent crime and insecurity have a disproportionate impact on Latin America and the Caribbean, with severe consequences for socioeconomic development.
Despite representing just 8% of the world’s population, the region accounts for nearly one-third of global homicides. This as well as other alarming statistics highlight the urgent need for comprehensive strategies to address the far-reaching effects of crime and violence.
New research by the IDB and IMF highlights how crime, insecurity and low growth reinforce each other in a vicious cycle that stifles investment, reduces tourism, and accelerates emigration.
Macroeconomic instability—recessions, inflation spikes, and rising inequality—is associated with increased violence. Easily available firearms and organized crime amplify these effects, undermining institutions and the rule of law.
Quantifying the Costs of Crime
A recent IDB paper quantifies the direct losses, estimating that crime and violence cost the region 3.4 percent of GDP annually. These costs stem from productivity losses due to lives lost, injuries, and imprisonment; private-sector expenditures on security; and public spending on police, justice, and prisons.
This is equivalent to 80 percent of the region’s public education budgets and double its social assistance spending. But the impact of crime doesn’t end there. It discourages investment, reduces tourism, and drives emigration, further weakening economic resilience and constraining the region’s future growth.
IMF research reveals that crime hampers innovation and reduces firm productivity, compounding economic stagnation over time. Leveraging geo-localized data on nightlights, the study finds that halving homicide rates in violent municipalities could increase their economic output by up to 30 percent.
At the regional level, as shown in last year’s IMF research, reducing homicide rates to the global average could boost Latin America and the Caribbean’s annual GDP growth by 0.5 percentage points.
Conversely, macroeconomic instability often fuels spikes in violence: a recession in LAC is associated with a 6 percent increase in homicides the following year, while inflation spikes above 10 percent are linked to a 10 percent rise in homicides the year after. Growing inequality further exacerbates the link between economic stagnation and crime.
How can policymakers help break the cycle?
Breaking this vicious circle requires a deeper understanding of its root causes and impacts. Rigorous research and better data are essential for designing public policies that effectively reduce crime. Institutions like the IDB and IMF can generate evidence, monitor crime dynamics, advise member countries, and facilitate discussions.
As the topic has become macro critical in the region, the institutions brought together experts and policymakers in a joint conference a few weeks back.
First, sound economic policy plays a preventive role. Stability, low inflation, robust social safety nets, and opportunities that reduce inequality and expand access to education and employment are critical to breaking the cycle of violence and stagnation.
Financial authorities are also uniquely positioned to weaken criminal networks by addressing illicit markets, curtailing financial flows, and tackling money laundering—cutting off resources that sustain organized crime.
Second, because the impact of crime extends far beyond direct economic costs, economic policymakers must adopt a broader role by targeting high-risk groups, improving crime monitoring, and enhancing interagency coordination.
Effective interventions can deliver transformative results. With IMF support, Jamaica implemented reforms that protected public investment and social spending while successfully halving debt between 2012 and 2022. Community-based interventions supported by the IDB reduced gang violence in 68% of affected neighborhoods.
In Rosario province, Argentina implemented a comprehensive strategy to combat crime, including territorial control of high-risk neighborhoods by the Federal Police, stricter prison systems for high-profile offenders, and collective prosecution of criminal groups under new legislation like the anti-mafia law.
These efforts, alongside progress on a juvenile penal code to deter drug traffickers from recruiting minors, have led to 65% reduction homicides in 11 months. In Honduras, strategic security reforms contributed to a 14% decline in the homicide rate and an 8% increase in public confidence in law enforcement.
Policymakers must prioritize using resources effectively, given the scope of the challenge. Public spending on security in the region is already high—around 1.9 percent of GDP, or 7.4 percent of total public expenditure—and may be even greater where the military and subnational governments are involved.
Finance ministers and fiscal authorities need a full understanding of these costs, covering police, courts, prisons, and related institutions, to ensure funds are allocated efficiently to areas with the highest impact. They also need to monitor them in the same way they surveil other large spending tickets, evaluating their impact and pressing for results.
Transnational Crime Demands Regional Cooperation
Tackling crime solely at the national level isn’t sufficient. Criminal groups operate across borders, making isolated responses ineffective and fragmented. To address this shared challenge, countries must collaborate more closely to develop stronger, more coordinated solutions.
Recognizing the transnational nature of crime, the IDB’s Alliance for Security, Justice, and Development seeks to unite governments, civil society, and private-sector actors. This alliance not only aims to strengthen institutions and enhance cooperation but also supports public policies and mobilizes resources to implement evidence-based solutions that effectively combat organized crime and violence.
Regional collaboration is crucial for disrupting the sophisticated, interconnected networks of organized crime that undermine the rule of law and economic stability. By fostering unified efforts, institutions like the IMF and IDB alongside governments and civil society, have a critical role to play in this effort.
With people’s lives on the line, the true impact of these efforts must be felt on the ground—by creating safer streets, restoring hope in communities, and offering individuals a real chance to thrive economically in a future free from violence.
Ilan Goldfajn was elected president of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) on November 20, 2022, and took office on December 19, 2022. He previously served as director of the Western Hemisphere Department at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2022, where he supported countries in implementing IMF programs and contributed to climate change policy dialogue. Earlier, he was an economist at the IMF from 1996 to 1999.
Rodrigo Valdés, a national of Chile, is director of the Western Hemisphere Department since May 2023. Prior to this, Rodrigo was a professor of economics in the School of Government at the Catholic University of Chile. He also held the position of Chile’s Minister of Finance from 2015 to 2017. At the IMF, he also was a deputy director of the IMF European and WHD departments.
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.
