Question 2: Why is the UN ineffective in controlling the Israel-Hamas conflict?

Founded in 1945, the United Nations was meant to be an international organization tasked with preventing war, promoting peace and ensuring global prosperity. However, in case of the Israel-Hamas conflict, its role has not gone beyond announcements that keep falling on deaf ears. Why? Not completely but partially, the fault lies within the UN’s own design.

A scream no louder than a whisper

Amongst the 193 UN member states, only 147 recognize Palestine as a sovereign state. It’s limited recognition notwithstanding, the State of Palestine is but a “permanent observer state”. It is simply present. With no voice and no vote. Even this status was granted to Palestine in 2012. Twenty-four years after the establishment of the State of Palestine and forty years after Israel had become a voting member state (mere months after Israel announced its independence).  Even if it screams, Palestine’s voice won’t be louder than a whisper.

Friends in high places

Israel on the other hand is a full fledged member. It was mostly thanks to its influential  allies. Close ties with the US did pay off. An ally with VETO power does come in handy in the UN. The paradox of VETO is in fact what keeps peace from reach. It was designed to prevent unilateral domination. Or was it simply to convince the superpowers to join the UN? Who knows? On numerous  occasions, the US shielded Israel from binding resolutions by using its VETO power. It has paralyzed the UN in responding more effectively to Israel’s unstoppable military campaign in the region.

Ineffective alliances

On the other side, Palestine has no significant allies. Iran, a state under more than 3,000 international sanctions. Considered as a priah by much of the West, Iran’s support for Palestine does not go far. Its other advocates are no better, if not worse. Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Both are designated as terrorist groups by much of the world. Such allies could not offer much diplomatic leverage . Their endorsements could even undermine Palestine’s diplomatic credibility. They may be loud, but their voices cannot push votes in favor of Palestine. They may even push votes away from it.

All bark and no bite

One might think of the iconic Blue Helmets. Just like the case of Congo, their presence might be just the push needed to force Israel to take a step back. However, they can only be deployed under two non-negotiable conditions. One, member states must be willing to offer their forces. Two, the UN Security Council must approve their deployment. The council where the US could simply VETO such initiatives. The International Criminal Court is the same. It might hold sessions and even find Netanyahu guilty of war crimes. But, enforcing such verdicts require international cooperation and recognition. Something Israel does not give. So, “International Law” becomes no more than a slogan.

In many articles, social media posts, and broadcasts about the Israel-Hamas conflict, phrases like “illegal occupation”, “war crimes”, “genocide”, and “international law” are used quite frivolously. However, international law is in fact a set of treaties and resolutions that UN member states have agreed to uphold. That being said, not all the states have agreed to all the treaties. Nor all the states follow these treaties all the time. Not to mention the five permanent members of the UNSC that VETO whatever they don’t find aligned with their national and international interests.