A Ceasefire Resolution

The United Nations, founded 78 years ago, cannot remain neutral today as civilian lives — women and children — are massacred in Gaza in revenge for the brutal and inhumane acts of terrorism against Israeli civilians on October 7. No level of cruelty can be used to measure the relative worth of, or the exchange rate for, another human life. No human life is worth more than another.

WHEREAS, the United Nations must stand for respect of international law, including the right of self-defense, and the law of war;

WHEREAS, all acts of terrorism against unarmed civilian populations, such as those of October 7, are condemned as unjustifiable and illegal;

WHEREAS, the prevention and defense against the acts of terrorism of October 7 was a neglected responsibility of the Israel Defence Forces;

WHEREAS, the loss of civilian life by inhumane acts of terrorists does not justify the reprisal of collective death punishment, a crime of war;

WHEREAS, the ongoing Israel-Gaza war has resulted in considerable loss of life and property, causing humanitarian crises and straining international relations;

WHEREAS, a ceasefire offers an immediate cessation of hostilities, enabling humanitarian relief efforts to reach those most in need;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, any ceasefire agreement

• should not only involve the cessation of hostilities,
• but also the unconditional release of all civilian hostages,
• as well as steps towards addressing the root causes of the conflict,
  • including negotiations over key issues like the status of Jerusalem,
  • the rights of Palestinian refugees, and
  • the borders of a Palestinian state in recognition of its inalienable right of self-determination.

---

---

Q: if you have a cage with wild and hungry animals in a zoo, and the guards are unable to secure the gates of the cage broken wide open by the restless beasts, resulting in the brutal death a hundreds of visitors, who are responsible for the deaths, the wild animals or the guards?

A: In such a tragic scenario, the responsibility would likely be attributed to the zoo authorities, which includes the guards. While the animals are acting on their instincts and don’t have the same understanding of right and wrong as humans, the zoo authorities are expected to ensure the safety of both the animals and visitors. If the gates are not secured properly, leading to an incident, it would indicate negligence on their part. A thorough investigation would be needed to determine the exact circumstances and assign responsibility.

Q: if a child is chronically abused and tortured, to the point that rehabilitation is impossible, and only killing him, as an adult terrorist behaving like a beast, is a legitimate act of self-defense, who bears the ultimate responsibility for the hideous acts: i) the individual terrorist, ii) the structural injustices creating the conditions of abuse and torture, or iii) the aggrieved civil community out of which this youth emerged as a disfigured human with subhuman instincts?

A: This is a deeply complex and sensitive issue, touching on aspects of psychology, sociology, justice, and ethics. In such a situation, responsibility may not be attributed to a single entity, but rather distributed across multiple factors:

1. The individual terrorist: While it’s true that the individual committed the act, their ability to differentiate between right and wrong may have been severely compromised due to chronic abuse and torture. However, this doesn’t absolve them completely, as they are still the direct agents of their actions.
   
2. Structural injustices: These play a significant role in creating conditions conducive for such behavior. If the abuse and torture were a result of systemic failures, those systems bear a share of the responsibility.
   
3. The community: Communities, particularly those that may have enabled or ignored the abuse, also hold some responsibility. However, it’s crucial to remember that communities are often victims themselves, suffering from the consequences of the individual’s actions.
   
4. Rehabilitation systems: If rehabilitation was deemed impossible, it might indicate a failure of the systems put in place to rehabilitate such individuals.

In sum, the responsibility is shared and complex. It underscores the importance of proactive measures to prevent abuse, address structural injustices, and provide effective rehabilitation methods.

Q: should the relatives of the terrorist be held responsible, even if they do not support acts of terrorism? Should such potential responsibility amount to a death sentence of the relatives?

R: The responsibility primarily lies with the individual and the group that influenced their radicalization.

In terms of human rights, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) emphasizes that effective counter-terrorism measures and the protection of human rights must be pursued together. This implies that punishing a whole family for the actions of one member would likely be a violation of their human rights.

---