US rhetoric and international support for Israel's colonialism

While the EU parliament decided to postpone a vote on Palestinian statehood following pressure from Israeli diplomats, Israel’s colonial rule was being defended at the UN General Assembly by US Ambassador Samantha Power. She described the resolutions that were issued this year condemning Israel as “repetitive and disproportionate”.

“All parties to the conflict have direct responsibilities for ending it,” said Power, “and we are disappointed that UN members continually single out Israel without acknowledging the responsibilities and difficult steps that must be taken on all sides.” The resolutions, she claimed, “damage the institutional credibility of the United Nations.”

Power’s statement is an example of the hypocrisy of both the US and the UN, rendering detached criticism of the imperialist organisation impossible. Both entities support a two-state compromise; they thus share the ambition to retain a functioning colonial power, ensuring Palestinian subjugation. Departing from the premise that “peace”, in terms of international rhetoric and within this context, is a euphemism for supporting colonial domination, the ineffective resolutions condemning Israel are a veneer for allowing the historic violations in Palestine to continue unabated. In doing so, they use treacherous, tried and tested methods of the kind employed by imperialist countries in their quest for permanent violence and unrest.

The focus on settlement expansion as a contemporary phenomenon, evoked constantly by the US and the UN, provides a consistent platform through which Israel can be both berated and supported. Power’s discourse condemning settlements while rejecting UN resolutions regarding settlements, provides an insight into the dynamics sustaining both Israel and the international umbrella body. Assertions that UN resolutions are “repetitive and disproportionate” can also be interpreted from within the existing perspective of human rights violations committed by Israel and supported by the UN. Israel’s sustained cycle of abuse elicits constant condemnation, yet the so-called disproportionate resolutions must be interpreted through the narrative of the colonised. This is an ineffective and repetitive system that prioritises Israel’s rhetoric while claiming to support Palestinian rights to self-determination.

Despite rigorous quoting of clauses and charters, resolutions allegedly in favour of Palestinians depart from an imperialist consensus to safeguard Israel’s colonial process, reflecting the basis of constant human rights violations through international law. This is a system designed by perpetrators in which legitimacy can only be claimed by the oppressed through acquiescence; they who are expected to navigate the terrain of “equality” through measures that preserve colonial domination and concessions by the colonised.

Dependence upon resolutions, diplomatic discourse and the quest for international legitimacy has proved to be ineffective in decolonisation and the reclamation of all Palestinian territory. Apart from symbolism, the Palestinian struggle has been isolated from the internationalist struggle while amalgamated perpetually to the humanitarian crisis. This has added another dimension that, while necessary, assists in the dissemination of additional false premises already perpetrated by Israel and the US, about divesting the political ramifications for the more visible, albeit tangible plight. For Palestine to emerge from the cycle of human rights violations condoned through the manipulation of international law, legitimate armed struggle derived from within the Palestinian narrative must be made a priority.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.