On October 18 of 2023, 11 days after the start of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the U.S., who is supporting Israel, vetoed a resolution of ceasefire and humanitarian aid. United States' ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas Greenfield, said this afterward: "The United States is disappointed that this resolution made no mention of Israel's rights of self-defense." Following this, Gilan Erdan, Israel's ambassador to the U.N., made the following statement to the council: "You are not focused on what needs to be done to free Gaza from Hamas, and ensure that the oppression of the Gazan people by their tyrants ends, instead the council is only focused on humanitarian corridors and aid ….such steps will not eradicate the cancer that is Hamas, humanitarian corridors will not prevent the next atrocity, the only thing that will end it is the utter obliteration of this satanic entity ." (The Associated Press, 2023, October 19). Finally, on November 15, 2023, more than two months after the start of the conflict, a resolution was passed in the United Nations Security Council. During the two months spent in discussion and deliberation, the war waged on and claimed countless lives. However, even the adoption of this resolution did not make much difference in the situation.
According to the UN Charter, the purpose of establishing the United Nations is "To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace "(UN Charter) .The U.N. has been failing in this mission. In the past four years, it has failed to prevent three crises: the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, the Russia-Ukraine war, and the Israel and Palestine conflict. This inability to achieve global peace and security stems from the inability of the United Nations Security Council to arrive at a consensus on the questions of 'what is security?' in terms of the referent object, the threat object, and the means to securitize. Moreover, the unfair power distribution in the council. There is a dominance of the mainstream "Western" understanding of security in global politics that ensures that whatever resolution is passed is biased towards one side and is thus ineffective in tempering down conflicts.
Speech act and the power to define security
Those who have the power to bring topics in the domain of security can define security for the world. According to the Copenhagen School of Security, security is a speech act. A problem becomes a security issue when the power holders define it as one. (Waiver Ole, 1995, Securitization and Desecuritization ) . In order to make decisions on issues of international security, it is necessary to establish a consensus on what is classified as a security issue. Organizations like the U.N. provide the United Nations Security Council as a platform to establish a consensus. However, the power to define security is with the West, particularly the United States. This is visible in how the current Israel -Palestine conflict is being addressed in the council.
Roots of terrorism
The remarks that Israel's ambassador to the U.N. made in the U.N.S.C. represent the Western understanding of the issue, which is flawed in many ways. According to them, the people of Palestine need protection from the terrorist organization Hamas, which is a threat to civilians and the state of Israel. They fail to understand that the reason why organizations like Hamas adopt terrorism is because they lack the resources to fight for sovereignty. (Barkawi T, 2004, Pedagogy of small wars ) . Years of alienation and exploitation at the hands of the erstwhile colonies have made them turn to violence to make themselves heard. Their aim is not to spread terrorism but to claim sovereignty that has been denied to them, but Israel and the United States do not recognize the struggle of Palestine as a struggle for sovereignty.
State Security as a referent object and a securitizing agent
Palestine not only lacks the resources to protect itself, but it also lacks representation on global platforms. A drawback of the mainstream understanding of security is that it sees security issues from the lens of the state, so how do problems faced by areas that are not recognized as states make it to the conversation of security? This lack of representation and recognition takes away the power needed to securitize and curtails them from being a securitizing actor. Hansen Lene defines securitizing actors as those who can successfully securitize by getting a sufficient acceptance of the threat in question from the relevant audience.(Lene H , 2000, The little mermaid: silent security dilemma and lack of feminism in Copenhagen school ). Entities like Palestine lack this power.
Utopianism of Western civilizations
Another problem is what has been defined by John Gray as the perception of recurring Utopianism of Western Civilizations, which leads to the narrative of Palestine needing saving and the West having the responsibility to save it (Barkawi T 2004 On the Pedagogy of Small Wars ) . President Bush said “the world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values because stable and free nations do not breed ideologies of murder” , (Bush on Iraq, 2003, February ). This depicts that the West views those who are different from them in terms of political ideology and economic development as "them" and believes that all problems that arise are because countries are not civilized, so they make these countries their "civilizing missions" in conclusion the mainstream ideology of International Relations discourse is based on alienation and estrangement between a "civilized" West and a dangerous, incomprehensible, and barbaric "rest." (Krishna S, 2001, race amnesia and I.R.) . The West believes in forcefully establishing Western structures of democracy in these countries, such as the Karzai regime in Afghanistan . These methods often fail, as is evident from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Barkawi best summarizes this problem: Western illusions primarily about ourselves, our past, our present role in the world deny us and our leaders the clarity of vision to understand these conflicts "(Barkawi T, 2004, Pedagogy of small wars ). This is why the world is unable to understand the conflict at hand and take adequate measures to deal with it.
Colonialism
The most critical issue, however, is the ignorance of the colonial roots of this problem. This ignorance has led to the perception that the Israel -Palestine conflict started on October 7 whereas it started long ago with the colonial partition of the Ottoman realm and the Balfour declaration in 1917. The West has also chosen to ignore the effects of neo-colonialism in countries that were erstwhile colonies. The root causes of the current situation lie in the long-term histories of Western expansion, and their dynamic interaction with the world (Barkawi T, 2004, Pedagogy of Small wars ). The colonial intervention led to 'small wars,' which occurred as a result of intervention in and conquest of non-European countries; these small wars have now become more significant wars, such as the war between Israel and Palestine, that threaten world peace and security.
Solution
If we are to find solutions to arising problems in the security domain through organizations such as the United Nations, understanding security needs to be more inclusive of different actors. Only then can we establish a united stance on security issues. The world needs to give the power to securitize to other actors apart from the West by recognizing them as relevant and recognizing their issues in the ambit of security. This will help us understand why specific security issues have come up. Understanding the reason will help shed new light on issues, giving them different perspectives and hence giving rise to new solutions that will be effective in dealing with issues better. It is only through the incorporation of such changes in the understanding of security that will enable organizations like the United Nations to fulfill the goals that they were created to achieve.
Bibliography : -
Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and Desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz (Ed.), On Security (pp. 46-87). Columbia University Press.
Barkawi, Tarak. (2004). On the pedagogy of 'small wars'. International Affairs.
Krishna, S. (2001). Race, Amnesia, and the education of international relations.
Hansen, L. (2000). The Little Mermaid's Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School. Millenium, (vol. 29, no. 2), 285-306.
This article was quite insightful, great efforts! The solutions that you mentioned were quite on point. I loved how you have also included the solutions part in the article as not a lot of people have done that in their topics.
Great article Naisha! By contextualizing groups like Hamas within a historical framework of colonialism and socio-political marginalization, you have provided a nuanced understanding of their actions. This underscores the importance of addressing root causes rather than merely condemning manifestations of violence, an understanding which is truly rare to come across.
Thank you for your insightful post on the Israel-Palestine conflict and the limitations of the Western understanding of security. I appreciate your emphasis on the need for a more inclusive understanding of security that recognizes different actors and perspectives, and your exploration of the colonial roots of the conflict and the impact of neo-colonialism. A deeper understanding of the historical context and the long-term effects of Western expansion is crucial for finding effective solutions.
Thank you for offering a comprehensive analysis of the Israel-Palestine conflict, highlighting the flaws in the Western understanding of security and its implications on conflict resolution efforts. The exploration of the roots of terrorism and colonialism in the Israel-Palestine conflict was eye-opening. It's crucial to acknowledge historical injustices and their ongoing impacts on contemporary security dynamics.