This dissonance raises questions about the sincerity of the U.S. commitment to ending the Gaza conflict and achieving a just resolution for all parties involved. The international community continues to scrutinize and condemn these conflicting positions, highlighting the need for a more coherent and effective approach to address the ongoing crisis in Gaza
Emmanuel Ukudolo I Wednesday, March 06, 2024
LAGOS, Nigeria – The ongoing conflict in Gaza has been marked by a staggering loss of life, widespread destruction, and a dire humanitarian crisis. With over 31,000 Palestinians killed, 71,000 injured, and 300,000 homes destroyed, the situation is reaching a critical point.
Amidst this tragedy, the international community, particularly the United States, has faced accusations of hypocrisy regarding its stance on a ceasefire and its exercise of veto power at the United Nations.
The scale of the crisis in Gaza is undeniably severe, with the Jordanian Air Force, the United States, and others attempting airdrops of essential supplies to alleviate the suffering. However, these efforts have proven to be inadequate, given the extent of the blockade imposed by Israeli forces, hindering the flow of humanitarian aid to the region. The result is an impending famine and epidemic that could devastate the already vulnerable population of Gaza.
Antonio Guterres, the United Nations Secretary-General, has warned of a looming catastrophe, emphasizing the urgent need to end the conflict. However, the path to a permanent ceasefire and a two-state solution has been obstructed by the repeated use of veto power by the United States within the UN Security Council. The U.S. has vetoed at least three resolutions aimed at bringing about a halt to hostilities in Gaza, further fueling international criticism.
China’s envoy to the UN, Zhang Jun, expressed strong dissatisfaction with the U.S., stating that the veto sends a wrong message and exacerbates the dangerous situation in Gaza. He likened the objection to a ceasefire as giving the green light to the continued slaughter, emphasizing that only by ending the war can the region avoid further escalation.
Russia’s Ambassador to the UN, Vasily Nebenzia, accused the U.S. of playing for time to allow Israel to complete what he referred to as “inhumane plans” for Gaza, including the forced displacement of Palestinians. The Palestinian President’s office condemned the U.S. veto, asserting that it defied the international community and granted Israel additional approval to continue its aggression.
Amid growing criticism and repercussions for the U.S.’s global image, Vice President Kamala Harris unexpectedly called for a 40-day ceasefire before the holy month of Ramadan, coupled with the release of captives held by Hamas. However, this shift in stance has been perceived as hypocritical by experts, who argue that a temporary ceasefire may serve to assist Israel’s objectives while prolonging the conflict that urgently needs resolution.
Osama Hamdan, the leader of Hamas, has declared that negotiations will not commence until the withdrawal of occupation forces from Gaza, the establishment of a permanent ceasefire, and the return of Palestinians taken away forcefully since October 7, 2023.
The hypocrisy in the U.S. call for a ceasefire and its use of veto powers at the UN lies in the apparent contradiction between diplomatic statements and actions on the ground. While advocating for a temporary halt to hostilities, the U.S. has consistently blocked resolutions that could lead to a lasting solution.
This dissonance raises questions about the sincerity of the U.S. commitment to ending the Gaza conflict and achieving a just resolution for all parties involved. The international community continues to scrutinize and condemn these conflicting positions, highlighting the need for a more coherent and effective approach to address the ongoing crisis in Gaza.
