One Year After the Al-Aqsa Storm: Israel's Erosion of Global Accountability
By: A. Mahdavi
As we commemorate the one-year anniversary of the Operation Al-Aqsa Storm in the occupied territories Israel’s conduct in addressing the aftermath has reached a critical juncture rendering its egregious and horrific transgressions impossible to obfuscate. Despite the robust international support it garners the Israeli government swiftly brands any dissent as the mark of an “undesirable element.”
If You Oppose Us You Are an Undesirable Element!
In the past year the Israeli regime has audaciously discarded the pretense of victimhood unveiling its true nature to the global community. The regime’s leadership displays an utter intolerance for any form of critique leveraging both the historical narrative of Jewish suffering and their extensive lobbying apparatus across nations to systematically delegitimize any criticism. Yet their endeavors extend far beyond mere media manipulation and political lobbying; they increasingly exploit domestic legal mechanisms to intimidate and coerce dissenting voices.
In a recent and particularly alarming move the Israeli Foreign Minister branded the Secretary-General of the United Nations as an undesirable element in response to his comments regarding the Gaza conflict. This act represents yet another transgression crossing established boundaries of legal and diplomatic decorum within the international system. The unambiguous message emanating from Israeli leaders to the global populace is thus: should you oppose us—even if you hold the esteemed office of Secretary-General of the UN—you will be deemed an undesirable.
This is not an isolated incident; previously Israeli officials similarly labeled the President of Brazil as an undesirable and obstructed Mr. Borrell's visit to the occupied territories evidently displeased by their statements.
An Expectation of Unconditional Endorsement
It appears that the Israeli leadership harbors an expectation for a blank check from the international community authorizing them to engage in any action or act of violence they deem necessary. However the emergence of a united front opposing Israeli transgressions has compelled them to act with a degree of recklessness previously unseen. Their prior confidence in unwavering Western support is now undermined by South Africa’s legal proceedings against them in the International Court of Justice thereby placing Israel under considerable scrutiny from the global public.
Such conduct has transgressed the accepted norms of international behavior to such an extent that even the United Nations Security Council has condemned Israel’s audacious designation of the Secretary-General as undesirable. It is anticipated that this action will elicit widespread condemnation from political leaders across the globe. In a particularly incisive remark Mr. Medvedev quipped “What a novel idea! All heads of unfriendly states and international organizations should be declared undesirable; in that case there would be no need for meetings as such matters would resolve themselves.” This observation poignantly highlights that if Israel persists in its belligerent approach it will inevitably encounter difficulties even with its allies. The actions of the Israeli regime may well serve as a dire warning to its supporting leaders: should they fail to rein in Israel they may find themselves bearing the repercussions of the obliteration of established red lines within their own borders—an experience that Europe has encountered regarding immigration issues. It is perhaps time for these leaders to reflect on historical precedents and derive lessons from them.
The Imperative for Enhanced Political and Diplomatic Support
Furthermore it is evident that Israel requires augmented political and diplomatic backing to counter the mounting legal pressures emanating from the international system as well as the intensifying public scrutiny. The postponement of court proceedings or delays in executing arrest warrants against Netanyahu can be interpreted within this broader context. Nonetheless the Security Council’s condemnation of this regime conveys a crucial imperative: Israel must adhere to at least the most basic standards of international conduct. Although Israel has demonstrated a flagrant disregard for international denunciations and expressions of condemnation favoring military might and financial resources—generously dispensed by the West—it is glaringly apparent that Israel’s stance remains unequivocal: you are considered a friend if you conform yet should you dissent you are branded an undesirable element regardless of any previous support. In essence Israel has emphatically illustrated that its singular priority is the maintenance of unconditional support in all circumstances; otherwise you are rendered entirely superfluous to their interests.
