logo
The Hypocrisy of the West, Laid Bare in Gaza

The Hypocrisy of the West, Laid Bare in Gaza

The Wirea day ago
Israel has killed more than 240 journalists in Gaza, but the West has remained silent. There is no 'Je Suis Anas.'
Over the last several months, I, like millions others, have struggled to come to terms with Israel's genocidal campaign in Palestine.
In the most recent instance, Israel killed Al Jazeera journalist Anas al Sharif while he was in a journalist tent outside Gaza's Al Shifa hospital.
Israel did not even deny targeting Anas. In fact, the Israeli Defence Forces posted a celebratory '🎯' bingo and called Anas 'head of a Hamas cell' without presenting any credible proof.
The strike that killed Anas also killed three other Al Jazeera journalists who were in the same tent. Israel has not even attempted to provide a justification for their killing.
That is the level of impunity that Israel knows the world will allow it to operate with.
It has killed more than 240 journalists since October 7, 2023. But world leaders have said very little. The condemnation, if any, has been subtle and conditional.
Contrast this with 10 years ago when Algerian Muslim terrorists targeted journalists of a magazine, Charlie Hebdo. The magazine had published cartoons that allegedly mocked Prophet Mohammed. The terrorists opened fire in the offices, killing 12 people.
World leaders were quick to condemn. Paris saw one of its largest ever street mobilisations with an estimated two million people protesting the killing.
At the head of the Paris 'Unity March' walked dozens of heads of state and government – François Hollande, Angela Merkel, David Cameron, Matteo Renzi and even Benjamin Netanyahu, among others. They walked arm in arm and said that any assault on journalists would meet a united, unequivocal response and declared ' Je suis Charlie ( I am Charlie)".
Fast forward to Gaza. There is studied silence on the targeted killing of journalists by Israel. No world leaders have walked arm in arm. There are no viral hashtags. The very same Netanyahu who marched for 'press freedom' is the commander-in-chief ordering the killing of journalists.
There is no ' Je suis Anas'.
In the past two years, the hypocrisy of the West has not been hard to miss. Two major wars have dominated headlines, Ukraine and Gaza. In both, civilians have been bombed, journalists killed and international law repeatedly violated. Yet the West has taken opposite positions. What it condemns Russia for in Ukraine, it excuses – and enables – when done by Israel in Gaza.
India stands out as Israel's only major non-Western ally. In fact, when it comes to both Ukraine and Gaza, India may be the only country more closely aligned with the aggressor in each case.
As for the West, one continues to be surprised, as one should, that it isn't standing in solidarity with the Palestinians. But, how can the West stand in solidarity with Palestinians? It is not a neutral bystander. It is an active enabler and a belligerent in this genocidal campaign.
Also read: Why the IDF Chief of Staff Cannot Stop the Killing of Gazans Seeking Food
Arming Israel
The United States has approved at least $30 billion in arms sales to Israel over 19 months. This includes laser guided missiles, F-15 jets, 2,000 pound bombs, 500 pound bombs. Much of this was approved not by Donald Trump but by Joe Biden.
There is also evidence that shows US-made bombs have been used to target civilians. This New York Times story shows visual proof that US manufactured GBU-39 bombs were used to kill at least 50 Palestinians living in a camp for displaced people in Rafah.
Biden also used special legal mechanisms to protect Israel from US human rights laws and to continue sending arms to Israel.
Germany has been the second largest supplier of arms to Israel. Between October 2023 and May this year, it provided export licenses worth $564 million.
The United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Australia and Canada have all provided significant military support to Israel, either through direct sales, dual-use components or military intelligence.
Notably, among Israel's arms suppliers, India is the only major non-Western country. It has exported rocket engines, explosives and drone components — 'returning the favour,' as some officials have put it, for the weapons Israel supplied during the 1999 Kargil war with Pakistan.
Also read: May This Image Be the Last: Praying for, and With, Anas al-Sharif
Diplomatic support
India, under its current right wing regime, has broken away from its historical position on Palestine. It has repeatedly abstained from United Nations General Assembly votes calling for ceasefires and humanitarian truces.
Once the first non-Arab country to recognise the Palestinian state, India has now become Israel's main non-Western ally. This shift owes much to the ideological affinity between Hindu nationalism and Zionism — but that's a story for another time.
The US has been by far the biggest diplomatic iron shield for Israel. It has vetoed five UN Security Council draft resolutions demanding a humanitarian cease fire.
Europe has supplied its own brand of cover. Any attempt by Brussels to issue a common demand for a cease-fire has been stymied by Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic.
Then there is the issue of refusing to comply with international law and arresting Netanyahu, who is wanted for war crimes.
On November 21, 2024, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and defence minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity and war crimes. Rather than pledge cooperation, Washington retaliated: in February 2025 the White House imposed economic sanctions and visa bans on four ICC judges and senior staff, arguing the court had 'no jurisdiction' over Israel.
France announced that 'immunities apply' to Netanyahu because Israel is not an ICC member.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz went even further, saying that he would 'find ways' for Netanyahu to visit Germany without being arrested, effectively signalling that Berlin would not enforce the warrant either.
Ironically, Berlin now finds itself aligned with Budapest — a government it usually clashes with over rule of law and LGBTIQ rights. When Hungary banned the 2025 Budapest Pride march, German officials condemned the move. German citizens organised protests, and some even travelled to Budapest to defy the ban. Yet when it comes to offering safe passage to an ally wanted for war crimes, Germany and Hungary stand firmly on the same side.
Germany has also moved aggressively to clamp down on Palestinian solidarity on its streets. Authorities have banned several pro-Palestine organisations and imposed temporary bans on demonstrations.
Four activists received deportation notices for having attended a sit-in protest at the 'Free' University in Berlin.
A stamp issued India in 1981.
So, of course, these nations are not going to condemn the killing of journalists because they are complicit in it.
An Israeli might have ordered the strike on Anas, but weapon transfers by the US, Germany, India made it possible. The repeated vetoes and the refusal to demand a ceasefire made it possible. The brazen flouting of international law by finding ways to not arrest Netanyahu made it possible.
It wasn't Israel alone who killed Anas.
The West has long lectured the Global South about 'press freedom', 'rule of law', 'civilised norms', the sanctity of 'rules based international order' and position themselves as the moral compass of the world. But it has done as much to damage belief in these ideas as any 'banana republic' or Islamic regime.
Gaza has stripped that illusion bare.
The truth is that for the West, rules apply only until one of their own breaks them. When an ally is accused, the law is suspended, the court is punished, and the victims are forgotten.
Also read: Mourning a Friend Killed by the Israeli Occupation
Now, as the horrors of starvation and mass killings in Palestine, become inescapable for the citizens of these nations and as the public mood has begun to shift ever so slightly, these countries, except the US and India, are beginning to give the appearance of doing something.
Germany has said it has halted arms transfers. Several European countries have said they will recognise the state of Palestine. But it's too little and it's too late.
Of the 193 UN member countries, 147 already recognise the state of Palestine. The so-called western liberal democracies are in a minority who don't.
Plus this bureaucratic recognition will do little to avert the immediate and existential crisis that people in Palestine are facing.
The fate of nearly four million Palestinians now rests in the hands of Netanyahu. He made that painfully clear when he said:
'If we had wanted to commit genocide, it would have taken exactly one afternoon.'
He has clearly thought about it.
Kabir Agarwal is a journalist covering political economy, climate change and food security.
This article was originally published in the author's newsletter, 'Unequal'.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Advertisement
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What are the challenges of a new Palestine state?
What are the challenges of a new Palestine state?

First Post

time10 minutes ago

  • First Post

What are the challenges of a new Palestine state?

Australia is set to recognise the Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly this year, joining the UK, Canada and France. While recognising a Palestinian state is symbolic, the formation of a future Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem is far more difficult to achieve. Here's why Palestinians see East Jerusalem as an indispensable part of any future state. File image/AP Australia will recognise a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly meeting in September, joining the United Kingdom, Canada and France in taking the historic step. Recognising a Palestinian state is, at one level, symbolic – it signals a growing global consensus behind the rights of Palestinians to have their own state. In the short term, it won't impact the situation on the ground in Gaza. Practically speaking, the formation of a future Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem is far more difficult to achieve. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Israeli government has ruled out a two-state solution and reacted with fury to the moves by the four G20 members to recognise Palestine. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the decision ' shameful'. So, what are the political issues that need to be resolved before a Palestinian state becomes a reality? And what is the point of recognition if it doesn't overcome these seemingly intractable obstacles? Settlements have exploded The first problem is what to do about Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which the International Court of Justice has declared are illegal. Since 1967, Israel has constructed these settlements with two goals in mind: to prevent any future division of Jerusalem and expropriate sufficient territory to make a Palestinian state impossible. There are now more than 500,000 settlers in the West Bank and 233,000 in East Jerusalem. Palestinians see East Jerusalem as an indispensable part of any future state. They will never countenance a state without it as their capital. In May, the Israeli government announced it would also build 22 new settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem – the largest settler expansion in decades. Defence Minister Israel Katz described this as a 'strategic move that prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel'. The Israeli government has also moved closer to fully annexing the West Bank in recent months. Geographical complexities of a future state Second is the issue of a future border between a Palestinian state and Israel. The demarcations of the Gaza Strip, West Bank and East Jerusalem are not internationally recognised borders. Rather, they are the ceasefire lines, known as the 'Green Line', from the 1948 War that saw the creation of Israel. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD However, in the Six-Day War of 1967, Israel captured and occupied the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, Egypt's Sinai Peninsula (since returned), and Syria's Golan Heights. And successive Israeli governments have used the construction of settlements in the occupied territories, alongside expansive infrastructure, to create new 'facts on the ground'. Israel solidifies its hold on this territory by designating it as ' state land', meaning it no longer recognises Palestinian ownership, further inhibiting the possibility of a future Palestinian state. For example, according to research by Israeli professor Neve Gordon, Jerusalem's municipal boundaries covered approximately seven square kilometres before 1967. Since then, Israeli settlement construction has expanded its eastern boundaries, so it now covers about 70 square km. Israel also uses its Separation Wall or Barrier, which runs for around 700km through the West Bank and East Jerusalem, to further expropriate Palestinian territory. According to a 2013 book by researchers Ariella Azoulay and Adi Ophir, the wall is part of the Israeli government's policy of cleansing Israeli space of any Palestinian presence. It breaks up contiguous Palestinian urban and rural spaces, cutting off some 150 Palestinian communities from their farmland and pastureland. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The barrier is reinforced by other methods of separation, such as checkpoints, earth mounds, roadblocks, trenches, road gates and barriers, and earth walls. Then there is the complex geography of Israel's occupation in the West Bank. Under the Oslo Accords of the 1990s, the West Bank was divided into three areas, labelled Area A, Area B and Area C. In Area A, which consists of 18 per cent of the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority exercises majority control. Area B is under joint Israeli-Palestinian authority. Area C, which comprises 60 per cent of the West Bank, is under full Israeli control. Administrative control was meant to be gradually transferred to Palestinian control under the Oslo Accords, but this never happened. Areas A and B are today separated into many small divisions that remain isolated from one another due to Israeli control over Area C. This deliberate ghettoisation creates separate rules, laws and norms in the West Bank that are intended to prevent freedom of movement between the Palestinian zones and inhibit the realisation of a Palestinian state. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Who will govern a future state? Finally, there are the conditions that Western governments have placed on recognition of a Palestinian state, which rob Palestinians of their agency. Chief among these is the stipulation that Hamas will not play a role in the governance of a future Palestinian state. This has been backed by the Arab League, which has also called for Hamas to disarm and relinquish power in Gaza. Fatah and Hamas are currently the only two movements in Palestinian politics capable of forming a government. In a May poll, 32 per cent of respondents in both Gaza and the West Bank said they preferred Hamas, compared with 21 per cent support for Fatah. One-third did not support either or had no opinion. Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority, is deeply unpopular, with 80 per cent of Palestinians wanting him to resign. A 'reformed' Palestinian Authority is the West's preferred option to govern a future Palestinian state. But if Western powers deny Palestinians the opportunity to elect a government of their choosing by dictating who can participate, the new government would likely be seen as illegitimate. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This risks repeating the mistakes of Western attempts to install governments of their choosing in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also plays into the hands of Hamas hardliners, who mistrust democracy and see it as a tool to impose puppet governments in Palestine, as well as Israel's narrative that Palestinians are incapable of governing themselves. Redressing these issues and the myriad others will take time, money and considerable effort. The question is, how much political capital are the leaders of France, the UK, Canada and Australia (and others) willing to expend to ensure their recognition of Palestine results in an actual state? What if Israel refuses to dismantle its settlements and the Separation Wall, and moves ahead with annexing the West Bank? What are these Western leaders willing or able to do? In the past, they have been unwilling to do more than issue strongly worded statements in the face of Israeli refusals to advance the two-state solution. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Given these doubts around the political will and actual power of Western states to compel Israel to agree to the two-state solution, it begs the question: what and who is recognition for? Martin Kear, Sessional Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Hamas rejects Israel's Gaza relocation plan
Hamas rejects Israel's Gaza relocation plan

Indian Express

time40 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

Hamas rejects Israel's Gaza relocation plan

Palestinian militant group Hamas said on Sunday that Israel's plan to relocate residents from Gaza City constitutes a 'new wave of genocide and displacement' for hundreds of thousands of residents in the area. The group said the planned deployment of tents and other shelter equipment by Israel into southern Gaza was a 'blatant deception'. The Israeli military has said it is preparing to provide tents and other equipment starting from Sunday ahead of its plan to relocate residents from combat zones to the south of the enclave 'to ensure their safety'. Hamas said in a statement that the deployment of tents under the guise of humanitarian purposes is a blatant deception intended to 'cover up a brutal crime that the occupation forces prepare to execute'. Israel said earlier this month that it intended to launch a new offensive to seize control of northern Gaza City, the enclave's largest urban centre. The plan has raised international alarm over the fate of the demolished strip, which is home to about 2.2 million people. The war began when Hamas attacked southern Israel on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli authorities. About 20 of the remaining 50 hostages in Gaza are believed to be still alive. Israel's subsequent military assault against Hamas has killed over 61,000 Palestinians, Gaza's health ministry says. It has also caused a hunger crisis, internally displaced most of Gaza's population and left much of the enclave in ruins.

Russia-Ukraine war: Trump backs plan for Kyiv to give up Donbas to Russia; European leaders insist 'borders must not be changed by force'
Russia-Ukraine war: Trump backs plan for Kyiv to give up Donbas to Russia; European leaders insist 'borders must not be changed by force'

Time of India

timean hour ago

  • Time of India

Russia-Ukraine war: Trump backs plan for Kyiv to give up Donbas to Russia; European leaders insist 'borders must not be changed by force'

US President Donald Trump (Image credits: AP) In a move that could reshape the course of the war in Ukraine, US President Donald Trump has backed a proposal for Kyiv to give up the Donbas region to Russia in return for a peace settlement. The plan, discussed with European leaders, departs sharply from the position of Ukraine and its Western allies, who insist no territory should be ceded by force. Zelenskyy is expected in Washington on Monday for talks with Trump. Ahead of that meeting, European leaders including Macron, Merz and Starmer are due to speak with him by video call on Sunday. Trump told leaders he believed a peace deal could be reached if Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy agreed to cede Donbas. The region, made up of Donetsk and Luhansk, has been the focus of fighting for more than three years, reported The Guardian citing the New York Times . Russian president Vladimir Putin has demanded Ukraine withdraw from Donbas as a condition for ending the war. In return, he offered to freeze the frontline in the southern regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, where Russian forces occupy large areas. Luhansk is almost entirely under Russian control, but Ukraine continues to defend key parts of Donetsk, including the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. These strongholds, along with heavily fortified positions, have cost tens of thousands of lives to hold. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like TV providers are furious: this gadget gives you access to all channels Techno Mag Learn More Undo Donbas is also rich in coal and iron ore. Trump has argued that it is better to move directly to a peace agreement rather than negotiate a ceasefire. 'Often times [ceasefires] do not hold up,' he wrote on social media Saturday. He has also threatened economic penalties on countries buying Russian oil if Moscow refuses a deal and ordered US bombers to fly over Putin as he arrived in Alaska. The plan represents a sharp break with Ukraine and European allies, who reject ceding territory. European leaders warned that skipping a ceasefire would hand Moscow an advantage in talks. German chancellor Friedrich Merz said the US was prepared to take part in security guarantees for Ukraine, reported The Guardian. A joint statement by European leaders said, 'It will be up to Ukraine to make decisions on its territory. International borders must not be changed by force.' The declaration, signed by Ursula von der Leyen, Emmanuel Macron, Giorgia Meloni, Friedrich Merz, Keir Starmer, Alexander Stubb, Donald Tusk and António Costa, added that they 'welcomed President Trump's efforts to stop the killing in Ukraine, end Russia's war of aggression, and achieve just and lasting peace. ' Zelenskyy responded that any peace deal must be 'lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions.' He called for the release of Ukrainian prisoners and civilians, as well as the return of children taken by Russia. In a post later on X, he warned that bypassing a ceasefire 'complicates the situation,' adding, 'If Moscow lacks the will to carry out a simple order to stop the strikes, it may take a lot of effort to get Russia to have the will to implement far greater – peaceful coexistence with its neighbors for decades.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store