As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict takes center stage in global politics, the complex issue of the right to self-defense too has come to the fore. While international law recognizes the right of nations to protect themselves, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East has highlighted what many perceive as a glaring hypocrisy in the application of this right.
The United States, long considered a bastion of support for self-determination and human rights, has often been a vocal advocate for Israel’s right to self-defense. However, the handling of this right in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has raised eyebrows and drawn criticism from various corners.
Take, for instance, the stance of some prominent American progressive politicians. Figures like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, known for championing marginalized and occupied communities globally, surprised many by expressing support for Israel’s right to self-defense. While acknowledging this right, they called for “humanitarian pauses” and the immediate release of hostages. The careful choice of words, stopping short of demanding a ceasefire, has spurred debates and was seen as an insufficient response to the crisis.
Moreover, the unanimous adoption of a resolution by the US Senate condemning pro-Palestine student protesters as “in solidarity with Hamas” and anti-Semitic further underlined the West’s approach to the conflict. It symbolized a near-unanimous support for Israel that transcended the liberal-conservative political spectrum.
This seemingly unified Western support for Israel’s actions in the face of the October 7 Hamas attack has puzzled many observers. British Labour leader Keir Starmer, typically associated with progressive politics, lent unequivocal support to Israel, emphasizing its right to self-defense. The contrast between Starmer’s stance and that of Jeremy Corbyn, who has been forthright in his support for Palestinians, illustrates the deep divisions even within the same political party.
Though West has traditionally supported Israel, over the past two decades, the stance on Israel had modulated a bit over the past two decades. Factors like the growth of the Democratic Socialists of America, the influence of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, have contributed to this change. The result was a more critical approach to Israel’s actions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
As the Israeli ground invasion in Gaza continues and global atrocities mount, turning public opinion further against Tel Aviv, Western governments have not reconsidered their positions. It is true, the right to self-defense is a fundamental principle in international law, but its application in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has raised valid concerns about hypocrisy. The ongoing conflict has become a litmus test for the consistency and moral clarity of nations and leaders on the global stage.
Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now
Be Part of Quality Journalism |
Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast. |
| ACT NOW |
| MONTHLY | Rs 100 |  |
| YEARLY | Rs 1000 | |
| LIFETIME | Rs 10000 | |
