maaxx.ca

Jakarta (ANTARA) – A year ago, the United States isolated Russia. Now it is the United States that seems isolated.

This is the irony of the events of Thursday, October 26, when the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution of “truce” or humanitarian pause in the Gaza Strip, which has suffered heavy Israeli attacks since October 7 after that the Hamas resistance group infiltrated Israeli territory to kill more than a thousand people and take thousands hostage.

The Indonesian equates “truce” and “ceasefire”, even if they are not the same thing.

“Truce” is more of an informal ceasefire that is not binding on the disputing parties, while “ceasefire” is a ceasefire agreed to by the disputing parties, so they are bound to comply with it.

Before the vote on the resolution on the humanitarian pause in Gaza, Jordan, which submitted the resolution, refined its initial draft so that it could be supported by 2/3 of the total members of the General Assembly of the Nations United. The way to achieve this is to replace the call for a “ceasefire” with a lasting “humanitarian truce.”

Jordan also added the phrase “the release of Israelis and foreigners detained by Hamas must be carried out without conditions.”

However, Canada considers that the measures taken by Jordan are insufficient, because Hamas is not mentioned by name.

The Jordanian draft also does not refer to Israelis held by Hamas as “hostages,” but instead uses the phrase “they are being held illegally as prisoners.”

Canada, like the United States, considers that the reluctance to mention the name of Hamas amounts to Hamas self-aggrandizement.

Canada later amended Jordan’s draft to include the name Hamas and refer to those held by Hamas as hostages.

The Canadian version of the draft resolution was supported by 88 countries, but 55 countries opposed it, including Indonesia, while 23 others abstained.

Because the provisions of the United Nations General Assembly require that two-thirds of the total membership support a draft resolution for it to be adopted as a resolution, Canada’s draft failed to become a resolution.

Like it or not, members of the General Assembly will have to choose between supporting the Jordanian project which calls for a humanitarian pause without mentioning Hamas by name, or opposing this project, or abstaining.

It turned out that Jordan’s plan was supported by 120 members, including Indonesia, and opposed by 14 countries, while 45 countries abstained. The project was adopted in the form of a resolution because it was supported by 2/3 of the members of the UN.

Unlike Security Council resolutions which are binding, General Assembly resolutions are not binding, so Israel can ignore the resolution. But General Assembly resolutions are a mirror of world opinion, describing most countries’ views on a conflict.

Double standards

The dynamic last Friday was similar to that of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine a year ago.

Just like today, the Security Council failed to pass a resolution due to Russia’s veto, but the General Assembly passed a resolution condemning Russia, meaning most of the world opposed Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

Today, the United States is experiencing a similar situation. World opinion shows that the world is at odds with the United States and that global trust in the United States is even eroding.

A year ago, the United States managed to rally support from around the world to isolate Russia. Now it’s their turn to be isolated.

In fact, its allies, such as France, Portugal, Spain, Belgium and Norway, supported Jordan’s plans.

It’s a slap in the face for the United States, especially after Britain, which almost always follows the United States and Germany, chose to abstain, as did most of the European Union .

Only four European countries have the same attitude as the United States. Half of the 14 countries opposed to the Gaza humanitarian pause resolution are small South Pacific countries. This is proof that the United States is isolated, like Russia a year ago.

The American government is not unaware of this reality, but it has chosen to defend Israel, regardless of the circumstances.

However, the tone of unconditional support for Israel is gradually softening. The protests against Israel’s indiscriminate attacks on Gaza have also changed the tone of President Joe Biden’s government towards Israel.

Biden may not care about the pro-Palestinian protests in Europe and other regions, but he cannot ignore the voices of his own people who criticize Israel and the US government’s position in Gaza, especially that these voices are expressed in big cities, like New York. York.City.

Prominent American figures, such as former President Barack Obama, whom Biden greatly respects, have also called on the United States not to blindly support Israel.

Obama fears that such an attitude could backfire on the United States when it needs a global coalition and collaboration to confront global threats, particularly Russia in Ukraine.

More fundamentally, the United States’ global credibility could be eroded as the label of double standards increasingly attaches to it, even on sensitive issues, such as human rights.

In fact, as in the case of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is also linked to human rights, which have become an important ornament in all American political maneuvers around the world.

The “South” is becoming more and more cautious

The fact that many Palestinian children and innocent citizens have become victims of Israeli reprisals in Gaza makes American claims about human rights less relevant, if not hypocritical.

This became increasingly hypocritical when the United States remained silent on Israel’s total blockade of Gaza, which was causing Palestinians to suffer without water, electricity and fuel, until the King of Jordan says Israel was imposing collective punishment on Palestinians because of the actions of a handful of people. parties.

A number of countries, including Indonesia, have described the situation in Gaza as a crime against humanity. Some even called it ethnic cleansing, especially after Israel ordered residents of Gaza City to move to the southern part of the city in preparation for a ground attack that some saw as forced displacement prohibited by law. international.

“If American and Western governments want to convince the world that they take human rights and the laws of war seriously, as they do for Russia’s crimes in Ukraine and Hamas’s crimes in Israel “The same goes for Israel’s brutal behavior in civilian life in Gaza,” Human Rights Watch director Louis Charbonneu was quoted as saying by the Washington Post.

Current U.S. behavior is causing much of the world, particularly developing countries or the “global South,” to become increasingly cautious about siding with the West, including in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.

In fact, Western society itself exerts pressure for its governments to behave consistently.

“What we say about Ukraine must be applied to Gaza. Otherwise we will lose our credibility,” a Western diplomat from a G7 member told the Financial Times.

If the West is inconsistent, the diplomat said, countries in the South, such as Brazil, South Africa and Indonesia, will think: “Should we believe what you say about human rights?”

A number of Western media outlets have attempted to introspect on the crisis in Gaza, including Le Monde.

“Now, the governments of Western countries must bear the consequences of their inability to find, or even find, a solution to the Palestinian problem,” writes this French daily.

U.S. and Western attitudes toward Israel also undermine their efforts to convince the South that international security is threatened by Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

“All the efforts we made towards the countries of the South regarding Ukraine are now in vain. Forget the rules, forget the world order. They will never listen to us again,” a Western diplomat told the Financial Times.

Are the United States and the West prepared to let the damage to their global image and credibility become permanent? I don’t think so, because it is impossible for them to want to lose the title of “guardian of world morality.”

The world itself does not expect grandiose things from the United States. The world cannot ask the United States to stay away from Israel. They only asked for an end to double standards in the face of crimes against humanity committed by their ally Israel.