لقد ثبت أن الغرب بشكل عام، والولايات المتحدة بشكل خاص، يعتقدان أن القانون الدولى لا ينطبق على مجتمعاتهم وقراراتهم، ويعتبران أن ثقافة الغرب هى التى تملى القواعد لتضع الغرب فوق الجميع
وفقاً لوزارة الخارجية الأمريكية، فإن «الولايات المتحدة تعتقد أن القانون الدولى ذو أهمية. وتقول «نحن نساعد فى تطويره، ونعتمد عليه، ونلتزم به، وله – على عكس بعض الانطباعات – دور مهم فى دستور أمتنا وقانونها الداخلى.» وعلى الرغم من هذا الفكر، يبدو أن الولايات المتحدة غير راغبة فى الالتزام بالقانون الدولى. وبناء على ذلك، إذا عارضت الولايات المتحدة أو حلفاؤها قضية ما، فيُنتهك القانون الدولى بشكل صارخ؛ وتتخذ الولايات المتحدة موقفا غافلا تماما عن قواعد الإنصاف والحق
توازن القوى يتغير. ومع خلوها من أى التزام تجاه الغرب، بدأ العديد من الجبهات والأطراف الأخرى فى ترسيخ أنفسها، حيث تقف روسيا والصين وأعضاء آخرون فى مجموعة البريكس، وعدد كبير من بلدان عدم الانحياز النامية، وقفة مختلفة ضد الغرب
وبما أن الغرب كان يمارس دائما الهيمنة على العالم، حيث يملى ما هو صواب وما هو خطأ وفقا لتفضيلاته، فإن المشرعين فى الغرب يغضبون عندما تتعارض قضية ما مع المسار المحدد، وآنذاك تنكشف معاييرهم المزدوجة. ومن الأمثلة على الطريقة التى يتجاهل بها المشرعون الأمريكيون القانون الدولى ويعتبرون الولايات المتحدة وحلفاءها، خاصة إسرائيل، فوق القانون القانون الذى صدر فى سبتمبر 2024 المسمى «قانون الإجراءات المضادة لعدم الشرعية». يهدف هذا القانون إلى فرض عقوبات على أولئك الذين يستهدفون الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل ويفرض عقوبات على الذين يطبقون قرارات المحكمة الجنائية الدولية ويشاركون أى جهد للتحقيق أو اعتقال أو احتجاز أو محاكمة أى شخص محمىٌّ من قبل الولايات المتحدة وحلفائها
ليندسى جراهام، عضو مجلس الشيوخ الأمريكى عن ولاية كارولينا الشمالية، يقود مجموعة المفكرين المتحيزين. وبعد أن أصدرت المحكمة الجنائية الدولية مذكرة اعتقال بحق رئيس الوزراء نيتانياهو ووزير الدفاع السابق جالانت، هدد جراهام بفرض عقوبات على كل من ينفذ أوامر الاعتقال حتى الحلفاء منهم، ومحاصرتهم اقتصاديا إذا امتثلوا لهذه الأوامر وتعدوا على أفراد بعينهم. وقال أيضًا:إن قرارات المحكمة الدولية لا تنطبق على إسرائيل، أو الولايات المتحدة، أو فرنسا، أو ألمانيا، أو بريطانيا العظمى، لأنه لم يتم صنعها لملاحقتنا نحن
أعضاء آخرون فى الكونجرس ثاروا بالمثل من اتهام حليف للولايات المتحدة بارتكاب أعمال إجرامية. أحدهم قال: «الولايات المتحدة تقف بحزم إلى جانب إسرائيل وترفض السماح للبيروقراطيين الدوليين بإصدار أوامر اعتقال بلا أساس للقيادة الإسرائيلية بتهمة ارتكاب جرائم كاذبة» وآخر قال: المحكمة الجنائية الدولية هى محكمة صورية وكريم خان متعصب مختل. الويل له ولكل من يحاول تنفيذ هذه الأوامر الخارجة على القانون
يعنى هذا أن حلفاء الولايات المتحدة معصومون من الخطأ، ويعنى أيضا أن الولايات المتحدة تشوِّه صورتها بعدم تطبيق القوانين التى سخرتها لهدم الآخرين. اعتبرت الولايات المتحدة نفسها دائمًا منقذ العالم، أفعالها جميعها صحيحة، ولا تخطئ أبدًا، وتلتزم تمامًا بالقانون، وهذه الصورة تتآكل ببطء
هذا يعنى أيضًا أن العالم مرغم على أن يتبع المبادئ التوجيهية التى وضعها الغرب بدون حق. وتعتقد الولايات المتحدة أيضا أن قيمها قادرة على جعل العالم مكاناً أفضل، ولكن عندما تفشل الولايات المتحدة فى الالتزام بالمبادئ التوجيهية التى تضعها للآخرين، فإنها تفقد تفوقها ومصداقيتها وهيبتها العالمية
ومع عدم توافق العالم مع كل ما تحرض عليه الولايات المتحدة أو تدعو إليه، تصبح صورة الولايات المتحدة ملطخة، وتتشوه مكانتها
إن الاتساق فى السياسة الخارجية يشكل أهمية بالغة إذا كان الغرب راغبا فى الظهور بمظهر القوة الرائدة. إن المعايير المزدوجة تقوِّض القانون الدولى وجميع الدول التى تلتزم به. إن المبادئ التوجيهية التى يتوقع الغرب من روسيا أن تتبعها فيما يتعلق بأوكرانيا لابد أن تكون نفس المبادئ التوجيهية التى من المتوقع أن تتبعها إسرائيل ومؤيدوها فيما يتعلق بغزة. إذا صدرت مذكرة اعتقال للرئيس بوتين، فيجب أن يحصل نيتانياهو وجالانت على نفس المعاملة
فماذا يتعين على الولايات المتحدة والغرب أن يفعلاه للتغلب على هذه المعضلة؟ أولاً، يجب عليهم أن يطبقوا المبادئ التوجيهية التى وضعوها فى الأصل للعالم على أنفسهم. ثانياً، يجب على الغرب أن يتجنب المعايير المزدوجة لأن المعايير المزدوجة تعنى عالماً بلا معايير على الإطلاق. ثالثاً، يتعين على الغرب أن يتخلى عن سلطته غير الملزمة بالقانون الدولى؛ القوانين هى قوانين، وهى تنطبق على الجميع
سوف يتقبل الغرب عند نقطة معينة موجة التغيير الحالية
British and American-trained fighters in the Revolutionary Commando Army (RCA), a group aligned against Islamic State, were told “this is your moment” in a briefing by US Special Forces before Assad was ousted.
In the first indication that Washington had prior knowledge of the offensive, the RCA revealed it had been told to scale-up its forces and “be ready” for an attack that could lead to the end of the Assad regime.
“They did not tell us how it would happen,” Capt Bashar al-Mashadani, an RCA commander, told The Telegraph from a former Syrian army air base used by Russia on the outskirts of the city of Palmyra.
“We were just told: ‘Everything is about to change. This is your moment. Either Assad will fall, or you will fall.’ But they did not say when or where, they just told us to be ready.”
Having worked with the RCA to dismantle the Islamic State’s Syrian caliphate, the US still pays its fighters a salary to prevent the terror group’s resurgence.
In the weeks before the briefing at the US-controlled Al-Tanf air base on the border of Iraq, according to Capt Mashadani, the RCA’s ranks were swollen by smaller freelance units like his brought under its command.
As the main rebel force swept south to Damascus in a lightning offensive towards the end of last month, the RCA advanced out of Al Tanf and now occupies roughly one fifth of the country, including pockets of territory in the north of the capital.
US military commanders in Syria ordered the advance to prevent remnants of Isis – which occupied much of the north-east of the country until its defeat in 2019, taking advantage of a power vacuum if Assad fell – senior RCA officers said.
It indicates not only that Washington knew about the offensive led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which toppled the Assad regime on Dec 8, but that it had precise intelligence about its scale.
Among the chief targets of the US-backed operation was Palmyra, fabled for its Greco-Roman ruins, which was occupied by Isis between 2015 and 2017.
The ancient desert town 150 miles north-west of Damascus is considered a vital bridgehead against Isis and was heavily defended by Russia and Iran-backed militias, including the Lebanese group Hezbollah, until Assad’s fall.
RCA fighters who captured the Russian-controlled Syrian air base on the outskirts of the town last week said they had been told to prepare for Assad’s possible fall in early November, nearly three weeks before the offensive began.
Until one month earlier, Capt Mashadani had been second-in-command of the Abu Khatab brigade. This small unit of 150 men was created by US Special Forces and trained by their British counterparts in Jordan until 2016, to hunt down Isis fighters near Deir ez-Zor, a city in eastern Syria.
There were several such Sunni desert units operating out of Al Tanf. They fought separately from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Kurdish-led militia that controls much of the country’s north-east.
But, in early October, Capt Mashadani and his fellow commanders said, American officers at Al Tanf brought the Abu Khatab brigade and other units under the joint command of the RCA.
The RCA’s ranks grew from about 800 to as many as 3,000 as a result, he said. All members of the force continued to be armed by the US and to receive their salary of $400 (£315) a month, nearly 12 times what the soldiers in the now defunct Syrian army were paid.
As the offensive began, RCA forces fanned out across the eastern desert, taking control of key roads. They also joined up with a rebel faction in the southern city of Dera’a that reached Damascus before HTS.
Capt Mashadani said the RCA and the fighters of HTS, which is led by Syria’s interim leader Mohammed al-Jolani, were co-operating, and communication between the two forces was being co-ordinated by the Americans at Al-Tanf.
As Syria’s 13-year civil war ground on, it threw up a bewildering array of militias and alliances, most of them backed by foreign powers.
It would therefore be only one of many ironies if the US has been in an effective alliance with a group like HTS, which was al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria until it broke away in 2017.
It is equally ironic that rebel factions supported by the US are co-operating with those backed by Turkey in places like Palmyra, while fighting against each other elsewhere in the country.
In recent days, the US has carried out dozens of air strikes on Isis positions even as its Kurdish allies have come under sustained attack from Syrian factions supported by Turkey.
The Isis threat is clear in the town of Palmyra, which was largely destroyed in the Russian-led battle to recapture it in 2017 and remains mostly abandoned.
Isis fighters are positioned in the hills to the south-west of the town and have effective control of parts of the highway to Damascus, said Abdulrazzaq Abu Khatib, a commander in the Turkey-backed Falcons of the Levant Brigade, which controls central Palmyra.
The Falcons led the offensive that captured Palmyra, with casualties suffered both by his men and by Hezbollah, Mr Khatib said. Another five of his men died on Tuesday while trying to clear a building booby-trapped by the retreating Russians, he added.
An offensive against Isis in the area was likely to begin next month once Palmyra was fully secured, Mr Khatib said.
The picture depicted by Western media may be true, but the fact that these media outlets ignored the dangers ahead, the link with Al-Qaeda, and the Islamist links, together with the Israeli air strikes on Syria, and cheered the incoming faction as though it was made up of heroes was mystifying and suspicious.
To outside observers, the turmoil in Syria is puzzling. With lightening speed, rebel groups, as the Western media now calls them, seized control of Syria. Though I can fathom the reasons behind the armed factions choosing this month to launch an attack against the regime of former Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, I am also deeply worried about where Syria is heading.
Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), previously known as the Jabhat Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda’s official wing in the Syrian war until the breaking of ties in 2016, has been designated as a terrorist group. Today, it has seized control of Syria. It moved swiftly from Idlib to Aleppo, Homs, and Hama, and then into Damascus. Al-Assad abdicated power and left for Russia.
In 2022, HTS had an estimated 6,000 to 15,000 members. For this faction to morph into a power capable of defeating the Syrian Army, even if it had consolidated with other factions, is bewildering. The exact figure of Syrian armed forces personnel is unknown, but in 2022, it was estimated to be 269,000. It does not seem as if Syrian troops were even deployed in the events earlier this month, leaving HTS to move in briskly and effortlessly.
Why didn’t the Syrian Army resist? What was Al-Assad told that had him choose to flee when he had resisted for 13 years? How can the West forgive and forget the true nature of HTS leader Mohamed Al-Golani? It appears that agreements behind closed doors took place.
The Western media have chosen to depict HTS and Al-Golani in a constructive but striking fashion. First, it has insisted on calling the HTS factions rebels and not terrorists, extremists, or jihadists even though they are still considered to be terrorists by the UN and the US.
One media source said that “Syria topples Al-Assad,” claiming that all of Syria had unified itself behind Al-Golani to rid itself of Al-Assad. Even more bizarre, according to the UK newspaper the Guardian, the US and the UK are considering removing HTS from the terror list “to deepen contact” with the Al-Qaeda offshoot.
Once allied with Al-Qaeda, Al-Golani is now being portrayed in the Western media as a redeemed, legitimate, and moderate rebel. While the Western media brand him as having evolved into a positive and less brutal person, we must wait to see if the shift is genuine or merely strategic.
The US network CNN, not Aljazeera or any other Arab media outlet, was given the privilege of speaking to Al-Golani during the conflict. It also had him use his real name for the first time, Ahmed Al-Sharaa, instead of the nom de guerre he has been known by. There was nothing dismissive about the portrayal; quite the contrary, his salient characteristics were highlighted and his previous history erased. In fact, in the interview he came across as a progressive leader and not a barbaric emir.
Minutes after Damascus had fallen into the grip of HTS on 8 December, CNN reporters roamed the city, confident in their own safety and projecting a jubilant and glorious story. According to CNN, the streets were calm, and the flags of the Al-Assad regime lay torn on the ground. According to CNN, peace had finally arrived in Damascus.
This may be true, but the fact that Western media outlets ignored the dangers ahead, the link with Al-Qaeda, and the Islamist links, together with the Israeli air strikes on Syria, and cheered the incoming faction as though it was made up of heroes was mystifying and suspicious.
Timing is of the essence. The US wants to come across as though it was not involved and will not get involved, but it does have over 900 armed personnel in Syria, which raises the question of how informed the US was of the developments?
As the HTS gained ground and entered Damascus, the US utilised the moment to carry out a major round of airstrikes on Islamic State group targets. In a sense, it was supporting Al-Golani in his effort to take over Syria. No comment came from him or the HTS.
Again, timing is of the essence. Only days after the ceasefire in Lebanon was implemented, Israel carried out hundreds of air strikes across Syria, striking military targets such as weapons facilities and missile arsenals. It also wiped out the Syrian Navy. Israel said that its aim was to stop weapons falling into the hands of extremists, a flimsy excuse to wipe out the Syrian Army.
Israel also went further. An incursion into southern Syria advanced to about 25 km southwest of Damascus, destroying strategic targets as it went. However, according to the US network ABC News, “there was no immediate comment from the insurgent groups, led by Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, or HTS, that have taken control of Damascus.”
While the US and the UN special envoy for Syria called on Israel to halt its bombardments and movements inside the country, the Syrian media said that Syria’s new leader “is focused on the political transition for now.”
It seems obvious that Al-Golani’s gutsy move was known to many others and was prepared for and timed perfectly. So, who are the winners and the losers behind the overthrow of the Al-Assad regime?
Despite what the Western media have claimed, and despite what some Syrians themselves presume, Syria has not gained much. Quite the contrary: the future is gloomy and sombre. Too many opposing groups already exist on its soil, some jihadists and others ethnic such as the Kurds. Many states such as Russia, Turkey, Iran, Israel, and the US have splintered Syria into fragments. I doubt that all these groups will leave Syria in peace.
Then there is Israel. Israel is already on the move to gain more Syrian territory and utilise the present circumstances to its benefit. It may take over areas beyond the buffer zone in the south of the country, and it may continue its strikes on Syria, leaving it powerless.
Besides, the HTS and Al-Golani have deep jihadist roots. Will their current “new look” persist, or is it a mere façade, and will the HTS impose stringent Islamic laws over all the minority groups in Syria, such as the Alawites, who supported Al-Assad, and the Armenians and Druze, amongst others? Given its Islamist roots, will it saddle the Syrians with an Islamic government like the one in Afghanistan?
Iran and Russia have lost this round, a rather anticipated loss if Israel and its allies win. Both backed the ousted Syrian regime. I doubt that the new regime in Syria will seek to bolster its relationship with either of these countries. Iran used Syria to replenish Hizbullah and Hamas with weapons. Its role in Syria will definitely diminish.
Israel is the most important winner. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Al-Assad before the HTS push started that he was “playing with fire” by allowing the transfer of weapons to Hizbullah through Syria, and soon afterwards he gloated about the regime change in Syria, calling it a “historic day.”
Once the dust had cleared, Israel pounded Syria immediately, succeeding in eliminating another thorn in its side by squashing the supply route to Hizbullah from Syria. If you think that the Israeli hostages in Gaza are of any consequence in what Israel is reaping today, you must be from another planet.
Should Israel worry about Al-Golani and his Islamist group that has taken over Syria? I doubt it, since Al-Golani has said that his concern now is the Iranian and Hizbullah militias. At the same time, Israel has not been after Al-Golani’s troops, and Al-Golani and his group have turned a blind eye to Israel’s strikes on Syria. HTS has never got involved in the Gaza or Lebanon war, or even the Occupied Golan Heights, and it is now watching as Israel does what it wants.
Craig Murray, a Scottish author, human rights campaigner, and former diplomat, has said on X that “Israel has just taken land in Syria up to twice the size of the Gaza Strip, and Israeli tanks are within 30 miles of Damascus and possibly closer. Yet, HTS has not fired one single shot at an Israeli soldier. If that doesn’t make you understand what happened, nothing will.”
As the Western media feed its followers this new reality, the world may well think that it is being told the true story. It may take years for observers to get to the honest truth.
* The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 19 December, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
The West must abandon its double standards in the application of international law if it wants to regain its credibility with the rest of the world, writes Azza Radwan Sedky
It has been shown that the West in general and the US in particular consider international law to be inconsequential and something that does not apply to them. In general, the West’s culture of supremacy dictates the rules and puts the “liberal West” above the “illiberal rest.”
The phrase “illiberalism,” meaning the opposition to liberal principles, is quite new, but commentator Tanja A. Börzel has taken it further by drawing attention to the “illiberal rest,” which she also calls the “dirty rest.” The phrase is intended to identify a Western mindset that believes that the West is superior to the Global South.
According to the US State Department, “the US does believe that international law matters. We help develop it, rely on it, abide by it, and, contrary to some impressions, it has an important role in our nation’s constitution and domestic law.”
However, the US appears unwilling to be bound by international law. If the US or its allies are opposed to an issue, international law will be grossly flouted, and the US will take a stand that is totally oblivious to the rules of international law and to fairness and justice more generally.
Change is taking place around the world today, and the balance of power is shifting. Many other blocs are establishing themselves, including those involving Russia, China, and other members of the BRICS group of countries. There are also the many nonaligned and developing countries. These countries see the world differently to the West, and their views are affecting the global legal order as the West perceives it.
Since the West has long practised hegemony over the rest of the world, dictating what is right or wrong according to its own preferences, its governments become enraged when an issue goes against the path that they set for it. In the process, their double standards are exposed.
A case in point is how US lawmakers ignore international law. They consider the US and its allies, particularly Israel, to be above the law. In September, a US bill called the Illegitimate Counter Action Act that aimed to sanction anyone perceived to be against the US and Israel was passed in the US Congress. This is “an Act to impose sanctions with respect to the International Criminal Court engaged in any effort to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute any protected person of the United States and its allies.”
Lindsey Graham, a Senator for North Carolina, leads the pack of intolerant and prejudiced US lawmakers. After the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former minister of Defence Yoav Gallant in November, Graham threatened to sanction US allies enforcing the ICC warrants and reduce them to “economic oblivion” if they complied with them.
“The Rome Statute [that founded the ICC] doesn’t apply to Israel, or the United States, or France, or Germany, or Great Britain, because it wasn’t conceived of to come after us,” he said. On the other hand, Graham supported the ICC warrant issued to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Other members of Congress have been similarly outraged that a US ally could be prosecuted for committing criminal acts under international law. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson said that “the US firmly stands with Israel and refuses to allow international bureaucrats to baselessly issue arrest warrants to the Israeli leadership for false crimes.”
Senator Tom Cotton said, threateningly, that “the ICC is a kangaroo court and [Prosecutor] Karim Khan is a deranged fanatic. Woe to him and anyone who tries to enforce these outlaw warrants. Let me give them all a friendly reminder: the American law on the ICC is known as The Hague Invasion Act for a reason. Think about it.”
US President-elect Donald Trump has said there will be “all hell to pay in the Middle East if [the Israeli] hostages are not released by January 20.” Has he looked at the atrocities committed by Israel day in and day out over the last 400 days in Gaza and taken them into account? The double standards are glaring.
What this means is that the US is dismantling itself with the very tools that it had earlier harnessed. The US has always considered itself to be the world’s saviour, doing everything right, never erring, and in absolute conformity with the law. That image is slowly but surely eroding.
It also means that the only right way of dealing with issues around the world is to follow the guidelines set by the West, since the West often considers non-Western countries to be unequal. The US believes its values can make the world a better place, but when the US fails to adhere to the guidelines it sets for others, it loses its superiority, credibility, and global prestige.
As the world begins not to see eye-to-eye with everything that the US calls for, the country’s image becomes stained and its standing tarnished.
Consistency in foreign policy is vital if the West wants to come across as the world’s leading power. Double standards undermine international law and all countries that adhere to it. The rules that the West expects Russia to follow in Ukraine should be the same as those that Israel and its supporters should follow in Gaza. If Putin is to be arrested under an ICC warrant, then Netanyahu and Gallant should get the same treatment.
What should the US and the West do to overcome the problems of credibility they face today? First, they should apply the rules they originally set for the rest of the world to themselves as well. Second, they should avoid double standards since these entail a world with no standards at all. Third, the West should abandon its cherry-picking of international law. Laws are laws, and they should apply to everyone.
The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 12 December, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
هناك سؤال خطير يدور فى أذهان الحكماء ويجسد جوهر العلاقة بين الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل. ماذا يحدث بين الرفاق عندما يرتكب أحدهم خطأ فاحشا؟ هل ينتهى التعاون المتبادل أو على الأقل يطلب من المسيء التراجع عن الإجراءات المتخذة؟ وهل غض البصر عن تصرفات الآخر يعتبر تواطؤا؟
إن ما نراه فى العلاقة بين الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل هو اقتران يتحدى العالم. لقد ثبت طوال الأشهر الخمسة عشر الماضية أن إسرائيل، وفقا للولايات المتحدة، معصومة من الخطأ. ومهما تكن بشاعة التصرفات الإسرائيلية، فإن الولايات المتحدة تقف إلى جانب إسرائيل. لا شىء مما تفعله إسرائيل يستحق اللوم أو العقاب، وتظل الولايات المتحدة إلى الأبد داعمًا ثابتًا لإسرائيل
ورغم أن الولايات المتحدة تتهاون عن أعمال الإبادة الجماعية التى ترتكبها إسرائيل، فقد أدرك العالم أخيرا بشاعة ما يحدث. لقد أعربت الدول فى جميع أنحاء العالم عن سخطها ضد إسرائيل، ودعونا لا ننسى الملايين من المواطنين العاديين الذين انضموا إلى الاحتجاجات المؤيدة لوقف إطلاق النار حيث دعت المنظمات الدولية والمنظمات الطلابية وآلاف البشر إلى وقف إطلاق النار
وقطع العديد من الدول علاقاتها الدبلوماسية مع إسرائيل، بما فى ذلك بليز وبوليفيا وكولومبيا وهندوراس ونيكاراجوا. واستدعى آخرون سفراءهم مثل الأردن والبحرين وتركيا وجنوب إفريقيا. واعترفت أيرلندا والنرويج وإسبانيا وبلجيكا بالدولة الفلسطينية
وذهب آخرون أبعد من ذلك. رفعت جنوب إفريقيا قضية أمام محكمة العدل الدولية، وهى أعلى محكمة فى الأمم المتحدة، ومن خلال الأدلة التى قدمتها جنوب إفريقيا، قيَّمت أعمال إسرائيل فى غزة بمثابة إبادة جماعية
أدانت ماليزيا بشكل لا لبس فيه عدوان إسرائيل الوحشى المستمر على غزة ولبنان. وسعت إلى طرد إسرائيل من الأمم المتحدة لرفضها تزويد غزة بالمساعدات الإنسانية وتحظر الأونروا، المنظمة التى تدعم جهود الإغاثة للفلسطينيين
وتواصل دول عديدة الإعراب عن قلقها والدعوة إلى وقف إطلاق النار. منذ الهجوم على غزة، توترت العلاقات بين أيرلندا وإسرائيل، وأصبحت أيرلندا العضو الأكثر مناهضة لإسرائيل ومؤيدة لفلسطين فى الاتحاد الأوروبى. وقال رئيس الوزراء الأيرلندى سيمون هاريس: «لا يمكن أن يكون هناك سلام فى الشرق الأوسط إذا لم يكن هناك اعتراف بفلسطين
وكانت إسبانيا صريحة للغاية فى دفاعها عن الفلسطينيين، وألغت صفقة ذخيرة بملايين الدولارات مع إسرائيل. بينما دعمت الصين الأونروا ودعت أيضًا إلى إنشاء دولة فلسطينية مستقلة والاعتراف بها
لكن اليوم الذى أصدرت فيه المحكمة الجنائية الدولية مذكرة اعتقال بحق نيتانياهو بتهمة ارتكاب جرائم حرب، كان اليوم الذى قال فيه الرئيس المنتخب ترامب إنه سيرفع جميع القيود العسكرية المفروضة على إسرائيل فى أول يوم له فى منصبه. وهدد السيناتور الأمريكى ليندسى جراهام حلفاء الولايات المتحدة إن هم ساعدوا على اعتقال نيتانياهو. وأدانت الولايات المتحدة مذكرة الاعتقال، وبدأت حشدا دوليا لمنع تنفيذ القرار. يرى العالم الأمور بطريقة، وإسرائيل والولايات المتحدة تراها بشكل آخر
ورغم وجهة نظر العالم للحرب، تظل الولايات المتحدة ثابتة فى دعمها لإسرائيل سياسيا وماديا وعسكريا. لدى الولايات المتحدة تاريخ طويل فى استخدام حق النقض (الفيتو) فى مجلس الأمن لدعم إسرائيل. فى كل مشروع قرار ضد إسرائيل، صوتت الولايات المتحدة ضده، واستخدمت حق النقض (الفيتو) فى مجلس الأمن التابع للأمم المتحدة 42 مرة ضد القرارات التى تدين إسرائيل
كما تقدم الولايات المتحدة مساعدات مالية باهظة لإسرائيل. حزم مساعدات بمليارات الدولارات تسلم لإسرائيل بسرعة وبشكل متكرر. وهددت الولايات المتحدة إسرائيل بوقف المساعدات العسكرية لها إذا استمرت فى حظر المساعدات الإنسانية لغزة، لكنها بعد شهر المهلة الذى أعطته الولايات المتحدة لإسرائيل للامتثال، تراجعت الولايات المتحدة عن تهديدها رغم فشل إسرائيل فى تحقيق الرغبة الأمريكية المتمثلة فى السماح بدخول المزيد من المساعدات الإنسانية إلى غزة
يعنى كل هذا أن الولايات المتحدة ستضع دائمًا مصالح إسرائيل أولا، وأن لا شىء تفعله إسرائيل يمكن أن يغير تفانى الولايات المتحدة والتزامها تجاه إسرائيل
ومع ذلك، دعونا نسمى الأشياء بأسمائها الحقيقية. هذا الدعم الصارخ لإسرائيل يؤثر على صورة الولايات المتحدة ويضر بمكانتها العالمية. ويقول معهد كاتو الأمريكى: «إسرائيل مسئولية استراتيجية للولايات المتحدة. إن العلاقة الخاصة لا تفيد واشنطن وتعرض المصالح الأمريكية فى جميع أنحاء العالم للخطر«. لسوء الحظ، تتمسك الولايات المتحدة بالمفاهيم الأساسية لحقوق الإنسان والقانون الدولى،لكنها لا تطبقها على إسرائيل
لن تتخلى الولايات المتحدة يوما عن موقفها مع إسرائيل. إسرائيل والولايات المتحدة لا تهتمان بما يظنه العالم، ويعملون بأسلوب كما لو كانت إسرائيل هى الأعظم
