SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
united nations
Why Israeli Impunity Still Shapes Global Politics
Every time the world looks away, it signals to other aggressors that crimes can be committed without consequence, as long as the perpetrator has the right allies.
Jul 11, 2025
In a world increasingly defined by calls for accountability, human rights, and a rules-based international order, one glaring exception continues to shape global norms: Israel’s impunity. Despite decades of United Nations resolutions, extensive documentation of war crimes, and near-universal condemnation from civil society, Israel has consistently avoided meaningful consequences for its actions in occupied Palestine and beyond.
This impunity is not just a regional concern—it is a systemic issue that corrodes the credibility of international law. Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and the consistent shielding it receives from powerful allies like the United States create a precedent where international law becomes selectively enforced. In 2023 and 2024, Israel’s assault on Gaza reached levels of devastation previously unseen. Tens of thousands of civilians were killed, and more than a million displaced. According to Amnesty International, Israel used starvation as a weapon of war against civilians, a war crime under international law.
The bombing of hospitals, refugee camps, and humanitarian corridors was condemned by organizations such as Human Rights Watch, but the global response remained muted. Instead of sanctions or diplomatic isolation, Israel continued to receive arms and military support from the West. The United States, in particular, increased military assistance and used its veto power to block multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions calling for a cease-fire, most recently in June 2025.
The struggle for Palestinian rights is, ultimately, a struggle for the soul of the international system.
The consequences of this selective enforcement go far beyond the borders of Gaza. First, it emboldens authoritarian regimes worldwide to dismiss international law, citing the double standard applied to Israel. Second, it undermines the legitimacy of multilateral institutions, especially among Global South nations that have long decried Western hypocrisy. How can justice be demanded from others when it is not applied evenly?
This imbalance also undermines emerging efforts toward multipolarity. Coalitions like BRICS and the Non-Aligned Movement have made rhetorical commitments to a just world order. However, their credibility depends not only on economic cooperation but also on moral consistency. When they remain silent on Israel’s violations, they risk perpetuating the same hierarchy they claim to resist.
The issue is also deeply embedded in Western domestic politics. In the U.S., the so-called ”Palestine Exception” means that standard principles of free speech, human rights, and legal accountability are suspended when applied to Israel. Politicians and activists who question unconditional support for Israel often face severe professional and personal consequences. Meanwhile, countries like Germany and France have suppressed peaceful pro-Palestinian protests under the guise of combating antisemitism—even when such protests are rights-based and nonviolent.
Critics are not merely challenging Israeli policy; they are questioning a larger structure of Western dominance that hinges on exceptions. Israel’s impunity acts as a litmus test: Those who support it are often invested in preserving U.S.-led hegemony, while those who challenge it advocate for a global system based on equal rights and accountability.
The human cost is incalculable. Families have been wiped out, infrastructure destroyed, generations traumatized. And yet, the global community continues to debate whether the threshold for genocide has been crossed, rather than acting to stop it. A column in The Guardian recently described Gaza as a “killing field where people are being starved.” The language is clear, but the political will remains absent.
Ending Israeli impunity is not only a matter of justice for Palestinians—it is essential for restoring faith in international law. Selective justice is no justice at all. Every time the world looks away, it signals to other aggressors that crimes can be committed without consequence, as long as the perpetrator has the right allies.
Civil society has a role to play. Pressure must be maintained on governments to cut military aid, impose sanctions, and support international investigations into war crimes. Institutions like the International Criminal Court must be empowered, not obstructed. Media must resist censorship and double standards in their coverage.
As we face interconnected global crises—from climate collapse to growing authoritarianism—allowing one state to remain above the law undermines collective survival. The struggle for Palestinian rights is, ultimately, a struggle for the soul of the international system. It asks a simple question: Will we uphold justice, or allow power to define who deserves it?
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Warns Millions Could Die in Next 4 Years Due to Trump Cuts to HIV Funding
"It's a ticking time bomb," said the executive director of UNAIDS.
Jul 10, 2025
UNAIDS, the United Nations agency dedicated to combating the spread of HIV around the globe, has issued a dire warning about the impact of the United States slashing its funding for foreign aid.
In a newly released report, the agency contends that the Trump administration's drastic reduction of foreign aid funding to the United States President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been a "systemic shock" to organizations trying to stop the spread of HIV.
"HIV programs across the world are struggling from the sudden, drastic reductions in funding for the global HIV response announced by the United States Government in early 2025," the report states. "PEPFAR had committed USD 4.3 billion in bilateral support in 2025. Those services were stopped overnight when the United States Government shifted its foreign assistance strategies. Disruptions are being felt across the HIV response and pose a huge risk of increased mortality, a surge of new HIV infections, and the development of resistance to the most commonly used treatment regimens. Urgent action and revived solidarity are needed to sustain the progress made and prevent a resurgence of HIV."
The report estimates that if American funding for HIV prevention collapses entirely, it would result in 6 million additional infections and 4 million additional deaths over the next four years alone.
"This is not just a funding gap—it's a ticking time bomb," said Winnie Byanyima, executive director of UNAIDS. "We have seen services vanish overnight. Health workers have been sent home. And people—especially children and key populations—are being pushed out of care."
The report notes that countries that have traditionally benefited from American PEPFAR funding cannot possibly hope to make up the difference with domestic revenue and it calls on other nations to step up where the U.S. has stepped away.
"Low- and lower-middle-income countries... remain highly vulnerable," the report warns. "HIV programs in many of them are highly dependent on external financing and they are unlikely to withstand unplanned or rapid reductions in donor funding. This could lead to disruptions in essential services and weaken the overall HIV response."
Five countries in particular—Haiti, Mozambique, Nigeria, the United Republic of Tanzania, and Zambia—are highlighted as particularly vulnerable given that they received more than 60% of their funding for HIV-related programs through PEPFAR.
Regardless, the report said that the world is still closer than it ever has been to ending the threat of AIDS. But it stressed that low- and middle-income countries would nonetheless need annual funding of $21.9 billion USD to make that goal a reality by 2030.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Slams 'War Criminal' Netanyahu Ahead of New Meeting With Trump to Plan Gaza Ethnic Cleansing
The progressive senator underscored that the Israeli leader has been indicted by the International Criminal Court "for overseeing the systematic killing and starvation of civilians in Gaza."
Jul 08, 2025
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders sharply criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday as the fugitive from the International Criminal Court met with lawmakers ahead of a second White House meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump to advance plans for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the embattled Gaza Strip.
"As President Trump and members of Congress roll out the red carpet for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, let's remember that Netanyahu has been indicted as a war criminal by the International Criminal Court for overseeing the systematic killing and starvation of civilians in Gaza," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement.
"This is the man Trump and Congress are welcoming this week: a war criminal who will be remembered as one of modern history's monsters," the senator continued. "His extremist government has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians and wounded almost 135,000, 60% of whom are women, children, or elderly people. The United Nations reports that at least 17,000 children have been killed and more than 25,000 wounded. More than 3,000 children in Gaza have had one or more limbs amputated."
"At this moment, hundreds of thousands of people are starving after Israel prevented any aid from entering Gaza for nearly three months," Sanders noted. "In the last six weeks, Israel has allowed a trickle of aid to get in, but has tried to replace the established United Nations distribution system with a private foundation backed by security contractors. This has been a catastrophe, with near-daily massacres at the new aid distribution sites. In its first five weeks in operation, 640 people have been killed and at least 4,488 injured while trying to access food through this mechanism."
Trump and Netanyahu—who said Monday that he nominated the U.S. president for the Nobel Peace Prize—are expected to discuss ongoing efforts to reach a new deal to secure the release of the 22 remaining Israeli and other hostages held by Hamas since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, as well as plans for giving Gazans what the prime minister described as a "better future" by finding third countries willing to accept forcibly displaced Palestinians.
Critics said such euphemistic language is an attempt to give cover to Israel's plan to ethnically cleanse and indefinitely occupy Gaza. Observers expressed alarm over Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz' Tuesday affirmation of a plan to force all Palestinians in Gaza into a camp at the southern tip of the strip.
"There is no such thing as voluntary displacement amongst a population that has been under constant bombardment for nearly two years and has been cut off from essential aid," Jeremy Konyndyk, president of the advocacy group Refugees International and a former senior official at the U.S. Agency for International Development, told Reuters.
Most Palestinians are vehemently opposed to what they say would amount to a second Nakba, the forced displacement of more than 750,000 people from Palestine during and after the 1948 establishment of the modern state of Israel.
"This is our land," one Palestinian man, Mansour Abu Al-Khaier, told The Times of Israel on Tuesday. "Who would we leave it to, where would we go?"
Another Gazan, Abu Samir el-Fakaawi, told the newspaper: "I will not leave Gaza. This is my country. Our children who were martyred in the war are buried here. Our families. Our friends. Our cousins. We are all buried here. Whether Trump or Netanyahu or anyone else likes it or not, we are staying on this land."
Officials at the United Nations—whose judicial body, the International Court of Justice, is weighing a genocide case against Israel brought by South Africa and supported by around two dozen countries—condemned any forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza.
"This raises concerns with regards to forcible transfer—the concept of voluntary transfers in the context that we are seeing in Gaza right now [is] very questionable," Ravina Shamdasani, a spokesperson for the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said Tuesday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular