Featured
The Appalling State of Muslims in post-colonial India
Published
2 years agoon
By
Naira Mir
																								
												
												
											South Asia is home to one-third of the world’s Muslim population. Contrary to the popular belief there are more Muslims in South Asia than there are in middle-east which is popularly known to be the heart-land of Islam. After Indonesia, India is the second country in the world with the largest Muslim population. India is anciently known to be the hub of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. So, when and how did a country largely consisting of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains become so densely populated by Muslims? How did Islam emerge in pre-colonial India? As much as there is a controversy around this inquisition, there is also a lack of historical, geographical and political awareness related to it. The most important aspect to this bone of contention is the appalling state of the Muslims in post-colonial India, and how is it different from that of the Muslim diasporas in the rest of the world, in specie the West. Albeit there have been events of religious violence in pre-colonial and British India, the post-colonial period has seen an enormous increase in riots and hate crimes against Muslims in India.
Also read, India Ranks 161st in Terms of Journalistic Freedom- RSF
The Image of Muslims in the West
The image of Muslims in the west has been in question lately more than ever in the world in general. The rise of hate crimes against Muslims usually chalk up to the 9/11 attack against the United States which was allegedly carried out by a religious extremist organization Al-Qa’ida. Having said that there have been some crucial conspiracy theories that called for a new investigation into the attacks, because they asserted that there was evidence of individuals from within the US government being either responsible for or knowingly having conspired in the attacks as a means for America of justifying the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, majority of the general public held the opinion that Al-Qai’da had orchestrated the attack. Because the members of the Al-Qai’da were people who proclaimed to be the adherents of the religion of Islam, this gave rise to a sense of bigotry and intolerance in the west towards the entire Muslim community.
The widely accepted notion among the broad commonality incriminated the Muslims of effectuating the attack. Non-Muslims started generalizing Muslims and started viewing them as people who endorsed terrorism, which led to a common prejudice against them in the western society. From their customs and religious practices, including their eating habits, to their appearance and clothing, Muslim men and Women were looked down upon and stereotyped as radical and fundamentalists. This generalization and stereotyping of Muslims gradually turned violent in nature and this turn of events gave rise to a series of hate crimes resulting in abuse and even unfortunate deaths of many Muslims. Howbeit, even before the 9/11 attack, many bookmen and laypeople alike had accepted a prior perception that religious terrorism had become the most common form of terrorism, particularly with regard to Islam. This suggests that Islamophobia was a common practice even before 2001.
Read here, “The Kerela Story” Controversy in India
Islamophobia before 9/11
People have associated Islamophobia with various manifestations. While some people reckon the phenomena with the increasing population of Muslims in the United States and Europe, others deem it to be retaliation for an ostensible anticipation of the emergence of a global Muslim identity. Yet many others identify Islamophobia with xenophobia and racism. Another less talked about reason for Islamophobia is the media’s double standards while reporting terrorism. A recent study has found out that terror attacks by “muslims” receive 357% more press attention. This was University of Alabama researcher’s newly study which was published in Justice Quarterly (academic journal covering criminology and criminal justice) authored by Dr. Erin Kearns, UA assistant professor of criminology and criminal justice. Still and all the causes of Islamophobia have always been and till date are debatable.
In the spate of attacks on Muslims in the western countries including the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Switzerland and New Zealand, it should be noted that the occurrence of such deplorable crimes in the West have one regularity. They are all driven by Islamophobia, the impetus of which is the bigotry for Muslims, a sequence to the specious notion that Muslims endorse Terrorism.
Also, read Muslim OBC Reservation scrapped by BJP government of Karnataka
Appalling State of Muslims in post-colonial India- Partition
Talking about Islam and Muslims, then like in West the appalling state of Muslims is much the same in parts of South Asia explicitly in India, but for wholly different reasons. Though there have been incidents of religious violence in pre-colonial and British India, the history of modern India has seen a compelling surge in the estimate of both subjective and objective violence. But what accounts for this rise of violence against Muslims in independent India? Is it Islamophobia that drives this hatred, just like it does in the West.
Inasmuch these crimes are a result of anti-Muslim sentiments in both the West and in India, the causes of these crimes are primitively much different. Benchmarking the nature of these crimes and the disparity in the claims of the perpetrators, one finds out that there is significantly a historical aspect to the nature of violence against Muslims in India. The partition of British India into two different countries, now called India and Pakistan, was originally borne out of a religious divide amongst Hindus and Muslims. As history claims, different people were for and against partition, as each had a different vision in mind.
There are many theories that explain the reasons for the establishment of Pakistan. One of the most agreed upon consensus of the pro-partition leaders for the formation of Pakistan was the subject of safety of the Muslim minority in the otherwise Hindu majority India. The earlier incidents of religious violence in India had taken a toll on both the Hindus and Muslims. The Muslims being the minority were now more insecure about their safety while living amongst Hindus. Because the safety of Muslims had been in question, ultimately the demand for a separate country for Muslims by the pro-partition leaders was unanimously supported by most Muslims. The Muslims who were not able to migrate then to the land given to Pakistan were left in India, and thus were even less in number, making them an even smaller minority than before.
Read here, India- The Killing of Gangster-Turned-Politician Atiq Ahmad
Commencement of the Appalling State of Muslims in post-colonial India
What marked the commencement of the violence against Muslims in Independent India was the demolition of Babri Masjid, a 430 year old mosque in Ayodhya by extremist Hindus and members of Vishwa Hindu Parishad(VHP) and Bajrang Dal. What followed was a sequel of incidents feuled by the religious animosity stirred between Hindus and Muslims. There has been a continuing rise in the manifestation of hate crimes and incidents of religious prejudice against Muslims in India ever since. However, with the emergence of the current government in India, the last few years have seen an enormous and noticeable amount of hate driven crimes including rape, public flogging and lynching. The motives of the perpetrators for committing such heinous crimes are as bizarre as they are abominable. Concepts like cow vigilantism and theories like “Ghar Wapsi” have been doing rounds in the air and have accounted for most of these crimes if not all.
Also, read UN Defender Demands End to Crackdown on Kashmiri Activists
The idea of “Ghar Wapsi” in the appalling state of Muslims in post-colonial India
The idea of “Ghar Wapsi” has also been endorsed and publicized by the right-wing extremists in India, including the leaders of the current government. It is a concept that propagates religious conservation of non-hindus to Hinduism. The reason behind the ideology of these people is their belief that all the people living in pre-colonial and ancient India were originally Hindus. They believe that the emergence and presence of non-hindus in India is only because of the forced conversions by missionaries and invaders that came to India from outside, who were by and large Muslims. This ideology is linked to the pre-colonial past of India. It refers to the period when Islam first emerged in India in 711, when Mohammad Bin Qasim, who was a general in the Umayyad -empire conquered the area of the Southern Pakistan. This was the initial interaction of Islam with South Asia.
Afterwards in the 13th century, the Mongol Invasion uprooted a large number of Persian Turks from Iran and Central-Asia driving them to India where they settled in. And so gradually the tradition and practices of these people started to blend in the syncretic culture of India. Subsequently in the late 13th century with the establishment of the Empire of Timur, began the era of the rise Muslim rulers in India.
Later on in 1526, Babur, a direct descendant of Timur, founded the Mughal Empire, which then ruled almost all of the Indian subcontinent for more than 200 years. During the growth of the Mughal Empire under Babar’s son Akbar (1526-1605) there was an essential blending of Hindu-Muslim cultures. Akbar married a Hindu princess of a pure Hindu Rajput blood-line. This made Akbar’s son Jehangir half Rajput and half-Hindu. After Akbar, his son also married a Hindu woman, and therefore Jehangir’s son Shahjahan was three-quarters Rajput. With the rise of the Mughal Empire, biologically each successor of the dynasty became less and less Turkic and more and more Indian. They adapted the culture of India and also the Indian culture was insinuated by the Islamic traditions, resulting in the concoction of two separate cultures and religions.
Read here, Festival turns bloody after Hindutva Mob Burnt Centennial Mosque
Historic Bias as a reason for the Appalling State of Muslims in Post-Colonial India
These religious and cultural adaptations are, however, still seen as unethical and blameworthy by many Hindus in India, as they see Islam as a threat to their own culture and identity, as a foreign concept brought to India from outside. They consider the presence of Muslims in India as a result of the historic invasions and forceful conversions by Muslim outlanders and conquerors, and not the gradual amalgamation of two different cultures and religions over the course of time. Crimes like lunching and theories like “ghar wapsi” are not mere co-incidents but are borne out of such historic beliefs. They are a corollary of a historic hurt that these people carry. The violence in the west or bread out of islamophobia is sporadic in nature and often spontaneous while in India violence is structured. Unlike the west, the primeval and ever-growing intolerance towards the practices and culture of Muslims in modern day India is not because of the nature of these practices. On the contrary, in India Islam as a religion is not seen as much of a threat but Muslims are.
Also, read Dehumanizing Representation of Tribals and Muslims in the Oscar fame RRR
You may like
- 
							                				
									
																	The War No One Sees: What Will it Take to End Gaza’s Humanitarian Crisis
 - 
							                				
									
																	Muslims have more reasons to hate the US than the other way around
 - 
							                				
									
																	Muhammed: The Greatest Man to walk on Earth
 - 
							                				
									
																	India: Rise in Police Encounters in UP Under Yogi Adityanath’s Leadership
 - 
							                				
									
																	Manipur Violence Sparks Debate in Indian Parliament
 - 
							                				
									
																	Communal Clashes in Haryana: Gurugram Mosque Set Ablaze, Four Killed in Nuh
 
Featured
The 20-Point Gaza Plan: A Blueprint for Dispossession?
Published
2 days agoon
October 6, 2025
														As Gaza’s hospitals ran out of oxygen and children continued to die of hunger, a new “Peace Plan” emerged from Washington. The US President Donald Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan was announced recently in late September 2025. It has promised to rebuild Gaza and bring “a new era of stability.” However, to many Palestinians and observers across the world, it sounded like something else: a blueprint to erase what remains of Gaza’s sovereignty. What was initially discussed with the Arab states as a cooperative humanitarian initiative was, by the time of its release, cleverly reshaped. It is rewritten to preserve occupation under a new label.
From Arab Consensus to American Control
Early drafts of a postwar Gaza plan were reportedly framed through consultations among Arab and Muslim nations. They emphasized three principles: Palestinian self-rule, unrestricted humanitarian access, and reconstruction without foreign trusteeship. Yet as negotiations evolved, the plan was absorbed by U.S. diplomacy and redrafted in a way that aligned with Israeli conditions rather than Arab consensus. Several diplomats confirmed that Washington’s version quietly removed any reference to Palestinian sovereignty, replacing it with phrases like “transitional governance” and “security oversight.”
Even before it was officially unveiled, Reuters reported growing unease among Arab delegations, who complained that the new text ignored their agreed-upon points and reflected Israel’s security agenda. Pakistan’s foreign minister stated openly that “Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan is not our plan.” The shift marked more than a diplomatic re-edit as it exposed the power imbalance shaping Gaza’s future.
The 20 Points: Promises and Omissions
Publicly, Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan claims to rest on four pillars: ceasefire, hostage release, reconstruction, and demilitarization, yet its deeper clauses reveal troubling gaps. There is no guarantee of Palestinian sovereignty, no timeline for Israeli withdrawal, and no provision for international accountability. Instead, it envisions Gaza’s future under external trusteeship, with reconstruction funds controlled by a multinational board led by Washington and oversight committees dominated by Israel and allied states.
Several points speak of creating “safe redevelopment corridors” and “security zones,” terms human rights experts warn could mask forced relocations and demographic engineering. The plan further ties aid to behavior clauses, conditions governance on foreign approval, and places border control under “temporary supervision,” a phrase that critics fear means indefinite control. Amnesty International cautioned that “reconstruction must not become a pretext for displacement or collective punishment.”
In essence, while the plan’s language of peace and rebuilding appeals to diplomacy, its structure embeds dependency and control. To rebuild Gaza without granting it freedom is, as one Palestinian analyst put it, “to rebuild the prison walls, just higher and cleaner.”
The Human Cost Hidden Behind Diplomacy
Behind every clause of this plan lies a humanitarian catastrophe. The World Health Organization confirms that more than half a million people in Gaza face famine-level hunger, and over 360 have already died from malnutrition. The UN’s humanitarian office says 80% of Gaza’s population now depends on aid that Israel continues to restrict. In this reality, talk of “redevelopment corridors” rings hollow. Gaza does not need trusteeship—it needs food, medicine, and an end to the siege.
On the streets of Rafah and Deir al-Balah, survivors of months of bombardment heard the plan’s announcement with disbelief. “They speak of building new homes,” one displaced teacher told a reporter, “but they won’t even let cement cross the border.” Another woman asked, “Who gives them the right to plan our lives while we bury our dead?” These voices reveal the heart of Gaza’s objection: no document signed abroad can substitute for the will of its people.
Resistance and Rejection
Hamas’s initial response to the plan was mixed. The group welcomed references to reconstruction and aid delivery but rejected disarmament and external trusteeship. “No peace built on surrender will last,” its spokesman said. Across Palestinian civil society, activists dismissed the plan as “occupation repackaged.” Hashtags like #NoTrusteeship and #GazaIsNotForSale flooded social media, uniting Gazans and diaspora voices in digital defiance.
Former U.S. diplomat Robert Malley, writing for Le Monde, described the plan as “a maze of ambiguities and potential pitfalls.” His analysis noted that the proposal’s vagueness is deliberate—creating space for powerful states to interpret its clauses to their advantage. It is a familiar strategy: promise reconstruction while ensuring dependency.
Reactions among Arab and Muslim nations were cautious and divided. The Arab League issued a restrained statement calling for further review, while countries like Algeria, Iran, and Pakistan warned that any plan lacking Palestinian representation was unacceptable. Meanwhile, Western governments praised the proposal as a “bold step toward stability.” For Gazans, these words offered little comfort. They have seen such language before in the Oslo Accords, the Road Map, and countless other documents that delivered control, not liberation.
International law offers a clear measure. The plan’s idea of trusteeship contradicts the principle of self-determination guaranteed by the UN Charter and multiple General Assembly resolutions. Legal scholars argue that placing Gaza under external administration without consent would constitute a new form of occupation. The International Court of Justice’s 2024 advisory opinion warned that “peace agreements cannot validate the continuation of unlawful control.” Trump’s plan, critics say, does precisely that.
What True Peace Would Look Like
A genuine peace framework would begin not with political engineering but with justice. It would:
- End the blockade entirely, allowing Gaza to trade and rebuild freely.
 - Place reconstruction under Palestinian-led management, not foreign trusteeship.
 - Hold accountable those responsible for war crimes and the starvation policy.
 - Guarantee the right of return and compensation for the displaced.
 - Empower Gaza’s people to elect their own representatives without external approval.
 
Anything less is not peace but an administrative occupation.
The Moral and Legal Test for the World
The 20-Point Plan is not a diplomatic breakthrough but a moral test. To accept it as written would mean endorsing a future where Gaza remains controlled by the same forces that destroyed it. It would normalize collective punishment under the banner of reform. And it would bury the core demand that Palestinians have made for decades: the right to decide their destiny.
Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and UN experts have all warned that Gaza’s crisis cannot be resolved through imposed governance. The path forward must restore dignity, not dependency. Yet, while the world debates corridors and committees, Gaza’s hospitals run without light, and its children die nameless in the dark.
The Bottom Line
Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan may speak the language of peace, but its structure carries the logic of control. For Gaza, peace cannot be built by those who silence its voice. True reconstruction will not come from Washington or Tel Aviv, but it will rise from the streets of Khan Yunis and the refugee camps that still believe in freedom.
The people of Gaza do not reject peace but subjugation disguised as diplomacy. Their message to the world remains clear: “We will rebuild, but on our own terms.” And until that right is honored, no plan, however polished, can claim the name of peace.
Featured
Global Sumud Flotilla Intercepted: Israel’s Naval Siege, Famine and Resistance
Published
2 days agoon
October 6, 2025
														The Mediterranean dawn on 2nd October, 2025, was meant to carry a different story. For hundreds of activists aboard the Global Sumud Flotilla, including doctors, artists, parliamentarians, and volunteers from over 37 countries, it was a mission of a lifetime. Their ships carried medical supplies, food packets, and a message written in humanity’s oldest language: solidarity. However, as Israeli naval vessels surrounded them 40 nautical miles from the Gaza Strip, that message was silenced most brutally. Within hours, the flotilla had been seized, its passengers zip-tied and blindfolded, and its aid confiscated.
Israel’s interception of the Global Sumud Flotilla is not just a naval incident but another chapter in the long story of Gaza’s suffocation. In a land already starved by siege, famine, and bombardment, this act tightened the blockade around two million civilians who had endured what human rights organizations now recognize as a continuing genocide.
Gaza in Famine: A Manufactured Catastrophe
According to the World Health Organization, over half a million Palestinians are now living under confirmed famine conditions. Malnutrition has become a silent killer, claiming the lives of more than 360 Palestinians, including 130 children. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) places Gaza in Phase 5, which is the highest possible level of hunger emergency, categorized as Catastrophic. Gaza’s farms, bakeries, and water networks have been systematically destroyed, leaving families with little more than contaminated water and animal feed to survive.
The famine is not a natural consequence of war but a lethal weapon. Amnesty International has repeatedly stated that Israel is using starvation as a method of warfare, an act that meets the legal threshold for genocide.As per a report of Amnesty International published in October,
“Israel’s deliberate starvation of civilians is a war crime.”
Each blockade, each denied aid truck, and now each seized ship deepens this crime against humanity.
What is the Global Sumud Flotilla?
The flotilla, meaning steadfastness in Arabic, embodied the principle of Sumud, which means unshakable resistance. It consisted of more than 40 vessels and 500 international participants from 37 countries. Departing from ports across Europe and North Africa, it aimed to reach Gaza’s coast peacefully and symbolically challenge Israel’s naval siege. Among those on board were parliamentarians, humanitarian doctors, and activists, including climate advocate Greta Thunberg, united under one flag: human conscience.
Their mission was not to wage war, but to deliver aid and visibility. Yet as their ships neared Gaza, Israeli drones shadowed them, communications were jammed, and warning messages filled the airwaves. Finally came the interception.
The Interception: How the Siege Struck at Sea
Around midnight, Israeli commandos surrounded the final ship, Marinette, approximately 42.5 nautical miles off Gaza’s shore. Activists reported being forced to kneel for hours, zip-tied and beaten, as soldiers confiscated cameras and personal belongings. All contact was cut as the ships were redirected to Ashdod Port inside Israel. The Israeli military justified the action by claiming the flotilla violated a lawful blockade and that “no humanitarian aid was found aboard,” which is a statement disputed by multiple international witnesses.
More than 450 activists were detained, among them citizens of Spain, Italy, Turkey, South Africa, and the United States. Many were held without immediate consular access, with reports of inhumane treatment emerging within days. Amnesty International condemned the detentions as “an unlawful act of aggression” and a “deliberate effort to enforce collective punishment through starvation.”
Before communications were cut, Irish activist Tadhg Hickey recorded a final message: “We sail not just for Gaza’s survival, but for our own humanity. If silence is complicity, then to sail is resistance.” His words have since circulated across social media, embodying the flotilla’s spirit of nonviolent defiance.
Survivors deported to Turkey later described their ordeal. “We were treated like criminals for carrying food,” one volunteer said. “They zip-tied our wrists until they bled, but we’d do it again because Gaza is worth every risk.” Their testimonies echo the voices of thousands protesting globally after the interception, from London to Kuala Lumpur, demanding accountability and an end to the siege.
Law, Morality, and the Machinery of Blockade
The Israeli blockade, in place since 2007, has been condemned as illegal under international humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention forbids the collective punishment of civilians, and maritime law recognizes the right to deliver humanitarian aid in the face of mass suffering. Yet Israel continues to act with impunity, supported by global silence and diplomatic paralysis.
The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has warned that the blockade constitutes “a form of apartheid and starvation-based warfare.” Meanwhile, the UNRWA reports that 80% of Gaza’s population now depends on humanitarian aid for survival—aid that often never arrives.
Each intercepted vessel, carries a moral weight beyond its cargo. The Global Sumud Flotilla is more than a convoy; it was a reminder that humanity refuses to abandon Gaza to darkness. To criminalize compassion is to declare war on conscience itself.
Global Reactions and Outrage
Governments across the world have expressed alarm. Switzerland, Spain, and South Africa lodged formal protests, demanding explanations for the detention of their citizens. Turkish authorities arranged emergency flights to repatriate deported activists. Protests erupted in Paris, Istanbul, and Jakarta, as demonstrators carried placards reading, “Feeding Gaza is not a crime.”
Yet, in the corridors of power, condemnation remains cautious. Western governments have largely avoided direct criticism, framing the interception as a “security matter.” Meanwhile, humanitarian organizations, from Amnesty International to Human Rights Watch, have demanded that the blockade be lifted immediately and that the international community recognize the ongoing genocide.
The Broader Picture: Gaza’s Siege as Global Failure
The interception of the flotilla is not an isolated act, but the symptom of a global collapse of moral responsibility. While Gaza’s hospitals run without anesthesia and its children starve in makeshift tents, world leaders debate terminology instead of stopping the crime. Every intercepted aid convoy, every silenced activist, marks another day when humanity looked away.
The sea that once connected civilizations now separates the starving from salvation. Israel’s naval blockade is not a shield but a weapon. It starves, isolates, and erases. And yet, every time someone dares to sail toward Gaza, the truth resurfaces: even in the face of warships, the human spirit remains unsinkable.
However, the Global Sumud Flotilla did not fail, but it exposed the blockade for what it truly is: an act of cruelty sustained by silence. It reminded the world that solidarity still sails, that compassion still defies orders, and that Gaza’s struggle is humanity’s test.
Every intercepted ship tells the same story: that courage is contagious, that empathy is rebellion, and that the people of Gaza are not forgotten. The world may build walls of steel and propaganda, but the sea remembers those who dared to cross it—for justice, for life, and for Gaza.
Featured
If Law Still Means Anything: What the UN Genocide Finding Demands Next
Published
1 week agoon
September 28, 2025
														A mother in Gaza scrolls past a headline on a cracked smartphone: “UN inquiry finds genocide.” The generator coughs once and dies. In the quiet that follows, the question is small and sharp: If law still means anything, what happens now?
What does the Finding Mean?
The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry (CoI) concluded that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. It has created conditions meant to destroy life. This is not a social media label but a formal UN investigation using the standard of “reasonable grounds to conclude.” It is not a criminal verdict that belongs to courts, but it triggers duties for states and institutions that signed up to prevent and punish genocide.
The findings sit alongside the International Court of Justice (ICJ) provisional measures from January, March, and May 2024 ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts while enabling humanitarian aid. These orders are legally binding and not just a piece of advice.
What States Must Do Now?
The Genocide Convention creates a duty for every state to prevent and punish genocide wherever there is a serious risk. After a UN genocide finding, the excuses thin out. Here is what action looks like in the real world:
1) Stop Feeding the Fire
Suspend weapons transfers, ammunition, and dual-use items that risk enabling unlawful attacks. Close loopholes in export licenses and re-exports. This applies first to Israel’s closest backers, including the United States and European states. Continuing diplomatic cover, like the sixth U.S. veto of a ceasefire, does not erase responsibility, but it deepens it.
2) Force Open the Lifelines
Use leverage so that aid, fuel, and medical supplies may move now, especially to the north. De politicize access and back neutral monitoring. Protect UNRWA shelters that have been hit again and again.
3) Back the Courts
Cooperate with the ICJ as a state responsibility and the International Criminal Court as an individual responsibility. Preserve and share evidence. If arrest warrants are issued, assist rather than obstruct.
4) Tell the Truth at Home
Launch transparent parliamentary reviews of your government’s role. Publish what was sold, licensed, trained, or shared during this war, and what will stop today.
What Must Change on the Ground?
Law only matters if it touches the day, and in Gaza, that day looks like this:
A Ceasefire that actually holds. Not a pause or a window but a complete halt to bombing that lets ambulances move, families sleep, and aid surge without fear. Moreover, reopening and securing corridors, including the northern ones, where hunger is worst, is a must-have. Restore fuel for hospitals, bakeries, water desalination, and sewage pumps. End the ritual of “approved” lists that starve clinics of surgical kits.
Protect people where they stand by stopping demolitions that erase neighborhoods and block return. Demine unexploded ordnance so children can walk to water without losing limbs. Shield health care from such attacks. Let families find the missing and bury the dead while supporting DNA identification, power labs, and safe access to cemeteries.
“Human dignity is not a luxury.”
The Ledgers that Don’t Lie
Numbers are not feelings, but they make denial harder. The ICJ told Israel to prevent genocidal acts and enable aid, which was a binding order as discussed earlier. It should have been taken seriously. UNRWA also reported multiple shelters struck within days in mid-September, killing and injuring people who fled for safety.
Satellite analysis for the UN found roughly three-quarters of structures in Gaza damaged or destroyed by now, with Gaza City suffering fresh tower demolitions later in the month. We do not list numbers to numb you, but rather to document a few so that history cannot pretend it did not know.
Accountability that Counts
Real accountability is a sequence and not just a slogan. It is the responsibility of states to enforce existing orders of the ICJ. If the Security Council blocks action, take the case to the UN General Assembly under the Uniting for Peace resolution to recommend collective measures, including the suspension of arms, guarantees of aid access, and reliable monitoring.
When it comes to individual accountability as per the ICC rulings, one should support investigations into war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Share satellite imagery, export records, and military-aid timelines. Do not host or welcome officials under credible suspicion and prepare to act on arrest warrants when they come.
Application of universal jurisdiction is compulsory, including travel bans and asset freezes on specific officials and entities tied to unlawful attacks. Ensure reparations and return while documenting destroyed homes, clinics, and schools. The right to safe, voluntary return cannot be bombed out of existence.
So, if law still means anything, it means ceasefire, access, protection, and true justice. It means the phones in Gaza do more than carry bad news. When the law works, a generator coughs back to life, a surgeon’s lamp stays on, and a shelter door stays standing through the night.
Trending
- 
																	
										
																			Featured2 years agoWorld passively watching as Israel perpetrates open-ended massacre in Gaza
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured3 years agoArgentina wins the World Cup; are there any other winners?
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured2 years agoIsrael is Hiding Crucial Demographic Facts About Palestinians
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured4 years agoHistory of the Ottoman Empire
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured3 years agoChristian militia infiltrate Lebanon
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured5 years ago“Do Not Waste Water Even If You Were at a Running Stream” Prophet Muhammad
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured2 years agoMuhammed: The Greatest Man to walk on Earth
 - 
																	
										
																			Featured3 years agoWorld Leaders Remain Silent Over Human Rights Violations in the UAE
 
