Connect with us

Featured

India: School Principal Booked After Students Recite Iqbal’s Poem- What Makes Muhammad Iqbal a Contentious Figure in India?

School Principal booked after students recite Iqbal’s Poem- What makes Muhammad Iqbal a Contentious figure in India?

Published

on

After the great poet Muhammad Iqbal’s poem “Lab Pe Aati Hai Dua” was recited by students during the morning assembly, a video of the event went viral, leading to the arrest of the principal of a government school and a Shiksha Mitra in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. The Education Department has also placed Shiksha Mitra Wazeeruddi under investigation and suspended the school’s principal, Nahid Siddiqui. “Lab Pe Aati Hai Dua”, also known as “Bachche Ki Dua” (A child’s prayer), is an Urdu language dua, or prayer, in verse form authored by Muhammad Iqbal in 1902. The poem has been set to music and sung in morning school assemblies in Pakistan as well as India.

While far-right groups have been using this and similar incidents in order to demonize Iqbal for quite some time, Muhammad Iqbal has become a contentious figure in India for many more reasons. Muhammad Iqbal is also known for writing the most popular patriotic song of India “Saare Jahan se acha Hindustan humara” (Better than the entire world, is our Hindustan), which he also called “Tarana-e-Hind” (Song of India).

Also, read The Crises of Multiculturalism In Europe And The Question Of The Muslim Immigration

School Principal booked in UP

A First Information Report was filed against Siddiqui and Wazeeruddin at the Fareedpur police station in response to a complaint made by Sompal Singh Rathore, a local Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) official, who claimed that a “religious prayer” was recited at the public school in an effort to convert the children. He also alleged that the principal “made” the students recite the Islamic prayer with the purpose of offending Hindu sensibilities. Police have filed the FIR against the two instructors under sections 298 (deliberate intention to wound religious sentiments) and 153(provocation with intent to cause riot) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) after taking notice of the complaint.

The complaint was lodged by Sompal Singh Rathore, a local leader of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), an Indian right-wing Hindu organization based on Hindu nationalism. According to Rathore, students should be made to recite the Indian national anthem and “Saraswati Vandana” (a Hindu mantra for goddess Saraswati that is recited for music, knowledge, and wisdom). Instead, they were forced to chant “Mere Allah Burai Se Bachana Mujhko” (O Allah, protect me from evil) by the headmaster.

Read here, The Scope of inter-religious pluralism within Islam

Controversy over Iqbal- The Second Incident in Four Years

This is not the first time that a school head has been terminated because of a prayer. This is the second time in four years that a local VHP worker filed this type of complaint. Three years ago, in October 2019 a VHP worker alleged that the headmaster of a government primary school in the Bisalpur neighborhood of Pilibhit had forced students to recite a religious prayer that is typically recited in madrasas. As a result, the headmaster was subsequently suspended. The students also recited “Lab Pe Aati Hai Dua” by Allama Iqbal in that instance. Later, the headmaster was reinstated but moved to a different institution.

Soon after the complaint was lodged and the incident made it to the news, BJP spokespersons took to social media to support the FIR. Anyone who called out the absurdity of the complaint started to get trolled by BJP spokespersons and supporters who called these people anti-nationalists and supporters of a communal leader like Iqbal. Right-wing groups started demonizing Iqbal by calling him a bigot and father of the two-nation theory and a staunch advocate for the creation of Pakistan.

When a popular Indian journalist Rajdeep Sardesai took to his Twitter handle to express his disappointment with the incident, he was severely trolled. One BJP supporter and journalist even wrote an article dedicated to “demystifying” the myth of Iqbal’s pedestalization by the Indian left and Indian Muslims.

“While the nation and especially those advocating secularism know Iqbal only for writing ‘Sare Jaha Se Accha, Hindustan Hamara’, there’s much more to him that they conveniently sweep under the rug, which includes Tarana-e-Milli and the formation of Pakistan . . . The Islamic fundamentalist nature of Muhammad Iqbal became entirely evident as he wrote, ‘Cīn o-ʿArab hamārā, Hindūstāṉ hamārā, Muslim haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai sārā jahāṉ hamārā’ ”, the article mentioned.

Read here, Israeli Filmmaker Nadav Lapid Sparks Outrage in India after calling <em>The Kashmir Files</em> “Vulgar Propaganda”

Who is Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938) ?

Iqbal, one of the most prominent figures in Urdu literature during the first three decades of the 20th century, transitioned from writing about subjects that were specifically Indian and reflective of pluralism and multiculturalism to using worldwide realities to arouse, stimulate, and encouraging the imagination of Indian Muslims. Through his stirring poetry, he was one of the first to teach socialism and the socialist movement to young people in India. In addition, he added contemporary philosophical ideas that he had learned about while studying in Europe and greatly expanded the range of the educated Muslim intellectual discourse while keeping it bound to their essentially Islamic roots. He advocated “socialism” cloaked in Islam in his fiery rallies against the powers of capitalism and imperialism.

Poems like “Masjide-e-Qartaba” (The Mosque at Cordoba) and “O Ghafil Afghan” (O Heedless Afghan), written by a celebrated and lauded poet like Muhammad Iqbal, fueled a rising fear that a “grave disaster” was waiting to strike the Muslims of the sub-continent. Iqbal was one of the first to notice the struggles that the Indian Muslims were experiencing on account of their religion, and to include it in his poetry. The fate of his fellow Muslims in various colonized lands seemed to foretell even worse things for Muslims in India, who were a minority in a colonized Hindu majority population.  

Upon the formation of Pakistan, he was honored as its national poet, as well as earning the titlesMufakkir-e-Pakistan’ (thinker of Pakistan), Hakeem-ul-Ummat (sage of the Ummah), and Shayar-e-Mashriq (poet of the east).

Also, read How Practical is the Secular Democracy of India? Curbing of Religious Freedom in Kashmir

The Vilification of Muhammad Iqbal

The most well-known of Iqbal’s many works is the timeless “Saare jahan se achcha Hindustan hamara,” which he wrote in 1904 and which became one of the songs that propelled Indian independence fighters against British authority. The right-wing groups vilifying Iqbal keep reinforcing that after writing “Tarana-e-Hind” (song of India) in 19004 he went on to write “Tarana-e-Milli” (song of the community) in 1910. They use this example to display the contradiction between the India-loving patriot that he is thought of instead of the Muslim bigot and the father of the two-nation theory that he turned out to be.

The Tarana-e-Hind and the Tarana-e-Milli show the progression from “Hindi hain hum watan hai Hindustan hamara” (We are the people of Hind and Hindustan is our homeland) to “Muslim hain hum watan hai sara jahan hamara” (We are Muslim the whole world is our homeland). However, it might be worthwhile to consider his body of work as a whole to try and understand the movement in his poetic thought. Iqbal’s history and poetic career can be split into three phases. The first one is his patriotic poetry dedicated to the Indian nation and patriotism from 1901 to 1905, after which he did philosophical poetry from 1905 to 1908, and eventually, his work and poetry focused on the Muslim community from 1908 to 1938.

Iqbal is considered to have given the vision for the creation of Pakistan, whereas Jinnah is considered to be the one who shaped this vision. 

While Iqbal’s “Tarana-e-Milli” is a poem that talks about the notions of Islamic universalism, it has no offensive hints at the Hindu community. Therefore, using this poem to call Iqbal a Muslim bigot seems absolutely absurd.

Read here, The BJP Enforcing Patriotism By Instilling Fear- “Har Ghar Tiranga” Campaign in Kashmir and Other Schemes

Hindu Right Wing Group’s blind hatred for Muhammad Iqbal

Soon after his death, Iqbal (1877–1938) was denounced as the creator of the “two-nation theory,”, a follower of pan-Islamism, and a fervent supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. After being hailed as Pakistan’s “national poet,” this criticism gained momentum in the years following the 1947 partition. However, people of India should pause and think about BJP’s hatred for the same poet who gave India “Saare Jahan Se Achha Hindustan hamara,” a song that, incidentally, is used as the marching theme by not just one but multiple military bands of different regiments of the Indian armed forces.

BJP’s and other Hindu right-wing groups’ tendencies to perceive India through a starkly black or white lens, has led the Indian people towards majoritarianism and vilifying any belief system that differs from their own. The mindless loathing for Iqbal and everything he stands for seems unsurprising and even inevitable given the intensely volatile and polarizing times we live in. 

Also, read Shraddha Murder Case Revealing Indian Media’s Rooted Islamophobia

WELCOME

MZEMO

GET EXCITING NEWS

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

The 20-Point Gaza Plan: A Blueprint for Dispossession?

Published

on

The-20-Point-Gaza-Plan

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.

Continue Reading

Featured

Global Sumud Flotilla Intercepted: Israel’s Naval Siege, Famine and Resistance

Published

on

Global Sumud Flotilla

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.

Continue Reading

Featured

If Law Still Means Anything: What the UN Genocide Finding Demands Next

Published

on

If-Law-Still-Means-Anything

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.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending