By Iqbal Jassat

The concept of an International Community ie the Western bloc of nation-states, representing the sum total of entire humanity, is baseless. 

To generate a false sense of it being “outlawed by the world”, they argue that Hamas is listed as a terror group by the “international community”. 

In the context of Zionist propaganda that Israel is at war with Hamas, the impression created is that the “poor little Jewish state” is “defending itself” from “an evil monster” called Hamas. 

The sinister use of the term “International Community” is misleading for it implies that the entire world has rallied together and agreed to outlaw Hamas. 

The reality is that it is not true: the concept of an International Community ie the Western bloc of nation-states, representing the sum total of entire humanity, is baseless. 

Apart from a handful of countries which include the United States the United Kingdom and a few European countries, none of the rest of the world – the majority – do not subscribe to Israel’s demonization of Hamas. 

It is thus a deliberate ploy to misrepresent a minority of white European nations as the voice and conscience of the world.

Hasbara (Zionist propaganda) dictates this narrative and thrives on it for no other reason except to mislead public opinion. 

‘Doctrinal Meaning’

Noam Chomsky reminds us of the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein who advised readers to attend to the use of a phrase to determine its meaning. 

“Adopting that suggestion, one regularly discovers that terms of political discourse are used with a doctrinal meaning that is crucially different from the literal one.”

The example he cites is the term “terrorism”.

He points out that it is not used in accordance with the official definition but “… is restricted to terrorism (as officially defined) carried out by them against us and our clients”. 

Similar conventions hold for “war crime,” “defense,” “peace process,” and other standard terms. 

Of course, what concerns us is the dehumanization of both Palestinians as well as their resistance movements by Israel invoking the term “the international community”. 

Chomsky argues that the term is regularly used in a technical sense to describe the United States joined by some allies and clients.

However, if the UN General Assembly or a substantial majority of its member states is a fair approximation, the term in a literal sense will be clear. 

This standard thus nullifies and makes Zionist hasbara on the so-called listing of Hamas as a terrorist organization by a minority of UN member states as representative of the International Community entirely redundant. 

UNGA Resolution

On the other hand when a majority of UN member states do pass resolutions outlawing Israel’s criminal conduct, that by all accounts would be a true and accurate reflection of the will of the International Community. 

The most recent UN General Assembly resolution by an overwhelming number of countries demanding Israel’s immediate withdrawal from the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) of East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the West Bank, is a classic example of Israeli failure. 

As is known, the resolution used strong language, saying that “Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful” and that it is “under an obligation” to end its “unlawful presence” in the OPT “as rapidly as possible.”

Don’t expect pro-Apartheid Israel Zionist lobbies to acknowledge that the result of the vote unambiguously demonstrates the will of the International Community is opposed to the illegality of the occupation. 

While 43 countries abstained, 124 voted for the resolution and only 14 voted against it. Expectedly the US and Israel headed the minority of 14. 

‘Zero Ambiguity’

The context of the UNGA resolution is crucial to note for it follows the ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in July 2024. 

Though Zionist apologists will find all manner of lame-duck excuses to downplay both the text of the ICJ as well as the fact that the International Community has invoked the UN Charter to impose demands on Israel, their attempts will be futile. 

“The sustained abuse by Israel of its position as an occupying Power, through annexation and an assertion of permanent control over the Occupied Palestinian Territory and continued frustration of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, violates fundamental principles of international law and renders Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory unlawful.”

There is zero ambiguity in this ICJ ruling, and none in the UNGA resolution that followed.