Despite Israeli violations of international law, the United States continues to support Israel, driven by political and economic interests. Support for the Israeli occupation is considered for US geopolitical strategies in the region. If Israel disappears or weakens decisively, Washington worries that BRICS countries, particularly Russia and China, may obtain control of much of the world’s oil, which would be cataclysmic for US national security. Washington’s goal is to keep the world in “balance” by keeping Eurasia divided as we shall see later.

Divisions in both Eurasia and the world are rising with the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas (as well as Palestine). The current armed conflict has created a humanitarian disaster in Gaza. As of August 15, 2024, Israeli military actions have over 40,000 Palestinians, including women and children, and wounded over 92,000 more. The actual deaths may be due to war induced underestimation. Ending this conflict requires addressing its root causes, including historic and ongoing Palestinian displacement, occupation and the reality of Zionist apartheid. in the international political economy may offer opportunities for a lasting resolution to the Israel–Palestine conflict.

History of Israeli settler colonialism

During the British Mandate from 1922 to 1947 there was large-scale Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe to historic Palestine. Jewish migration especially surged in the 1930s due to Nazi persecution. In 1947, the United Nations mandated the partition of historic Palestine into separate states for Jews and Palestinians, leading to the establishment of Israel. Since then, the Israeli state has engaged in settler colonialism.

Two parts of Israel’s settler colonialism shaped the modern conflict we see today. First is the expulsion of the indigenous Palestinian population. Following the partition, many Palestinians were expelled from the Israeli part of historic Palestine. This violated Chapter 3, Point 1 of the United Nations General Assembly , which states:

“Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine [modern-day historic Palestine] outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.”

The second is Israel’s establishment of illegal occupations and settlements in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, violating international law. Moreover, Israel’s occupation extends beyond Palestinian territories to regions such as the Shebaa Farms (which is part of Lebanon) and Golan Heights (which is part of Syria).

Israeli settler colonialism in Palestine, like all forms of colonial rule, is driven by political and economic motives. The are to dominate land and resources — water, natural gas reserves and fertile soil — while systematically subjugating the Palestinian population. Additionally, settler colonialism serves to socio-political within Israel.

Limited access to basic necessities such as clean water, electricity and food has devastated the Palestinian people. Poverty, malnutrition and health crises are widespread. Furthermore, the systematic denial of rights to nutrition, healthcare, education, employment and freedom of movement by the Israeli occupation has caused immense suffering and deprivation. The occupation has displaced millions of Palestinians, making them refugees outside historic Palestine. Millions more face forced expulsion from their lands.

Despite these harsh measures, the US steadfastly supports Israel

Since the 1960s, the US has played a pivotal role in providing extensive material and diplomatic support to Israel, establishing it as its foremost ally in West Asia. Despite ongoing human rights abuses and international criticism, why do US policymakers, who ostensibly champion human rights, continue to support the Israeli occupation of Palestine?

One possible explanation is that US policymakers have been integrated into the . However, this theory raises questions, as the US also supports various regimes in Eastern Europe with anti-Semitic “founding myths” and histories of complicity in the Nazi genocide — most notably in .

Another explanation suggests that American policymakers feel a with Zionism due to its roots in European colonialism against non-white peoples. However, this overlooks the history of conflicts among European and North American countries before 1945. It also ignores the ethnic within Israel, where a significant fraction of Jews are not of white descent. Mizrahi Jews of Middle Eastern and North African descent are the largest Jewish ethnic group in Israel, comprising approximately 40%-45% of the country’s population.

The third, more strategic explanation posits that Washington’s support for the Israeli occupation of Palestine is crucial in maintaining a divided Eurasia as we mentioned earlier. As , a professor of global affairs at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, describes it:

“All the great conflicts of the modern era have been contests over Eurasia, where dueling coalitions have clashed for dominance of that supercontinent and its surrounding oceans. Indeed, the American Century has been the Eurasian Century: Washington’s vital task as a superpower has been keeping the world in balance by keeping Eurasia divided.”

The same view was previously articulated by , arguing that the United States’s task is to establish itself as the sole political arbiter in Eurasia and prevent the rise of any potential rival power (or alliance) that could threaten its material and diplomatic interests. Israel plays a crucial role in helping US policymakers achieve this goal. This understanding widely mainstream US .

Therefore, considerations of the international political economy likely drive US policymakers’ support for the Israeli occupation. However, this does not negate the validity of the other two explanations.

Zionism and white racism serve as that underlying political and economic motivations. In Western Europe, legitimate rejection of the Nazi genocide legacy is often to make it to criticize US support for Israeli occupation. This effort aims to maintain European countries’ limited strategic autonomy vis-à-vis the US. In the Global South, support for Palestinian freedom has varied with the consolidation of the neoliberal project, but remains present. Today, many Global South countries commonly Israeli violations of international law.

Washington continues to support Israel even as the Israel–Hamas war persists, with Israel being accused of war crimes and causing a humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The state of the Israel–Palestine conflict today

For years, Gaza’s two million residents have endured Israeli-imposed blockades marked by violence, severely restricting travel, trade and daily life. Under these conditions, Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation has evolved and intensified.

Tensions between Israel and Palestine have often run high, but the events of October 7, 2023 marked a new level of horror. The current round of armed began when Hamas launched attacks against Israel. The subsequent Israeli armed response, primarily targeting Gaza (but on the West Bank), demonstrates a now genocidal colonial policy.

Israel has launched indiscriminate airstrikes and heavy artillery attacks on civilian-occupied areas of Gaza. The Israeli Defense Force (IDF) has destroyed most buildings there, including hospitals, schools and residential structures. Particularly egregious is the use of to target buildings without human corroboration of the generated kill lists, resulting in mass civilian deaths among Palestinians.

Besides attacking cities where Palestinians seek refuge, Israelis have seized of the crossing into Rafah on the Egyptian border in of the Camp David Accords. This control allows Israel to use the blockade as a tool of war, causing mass starvation by food, medical supplies and essential from entering Gaza. The insufficient aid that makes it through fails to meet escalating needs, leading to starvation and disease. This exacerbates an unprecedented humanitarian crisis and violates international law.

Despite the IDF’s assaults, Hamas resistance fighters persist in through extensive tunnel networks, complicating Israeli efforts to neutralize them.

In addition to these ongoing attacks on Gaza and the West Bank, Israel has also engaged in military conflicts with in Lebanon. The border between the two countries has witnessed daily exchanges of fire since the current conflict broke out. The fight with Hezbollah has not yet escalated into a full-fledged war, but are growing as both sides continue to carry out strikes. It remains to be seen whether the most recent Israeli on Hezbollah using exploding pagers and walkie-talkies will ignite the situation further.

Iran’s mission to the UN has that any “full-scale military aggression” by Israel in Lebanon could trigger “an obliterating war.” Tensions have run high between Tehran and Jerusalem following Israel’s attack on the Iranian in Syria and the of  Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas in Teheran. However, repeated rounds of  seems to have defused the situation for .

The Ansarallah (Houthi) forces in Yemen have imposed a naval blockade on ships passing through the to and from Israel, excluding those of Israel’s supporters. Reportedly, their goal is to pressure for a resolution to the conflict stemming from Israeli attacks on Palestine. Despite military operations on Yemen led by the US and its “allies,” these ineffective efforts have not ended the naval blockade.

The scale and intensity of Palestinian killings by the Israeli armed forces have sparked unprecedented political reactions in the US, particularly outside the mainstream. Students and educators across many are protesting en masse, urging their institutions to sever financial ties with Israel and calling for a shift in US foreign policy toward Israel. These protests are concerning for the Biden administration, as they strongly with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. If the administration continues its unwavering support for the Israeli government, it may adversely affect Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris’s prospects in the 2024 presidential election.

Consequently, the current administration is attempting a balancing act. It publicly critiques some Israeli policies, such as calling for the of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and imposing on certain Israeli settler groups in the West Bank. It has also publicly stated that weapons will not be to the Israeli armed forces for attacks on Gaza. However, in practice, the administration continues to support Israel through , even during attacks, and provides diplomatic cover. This was evident when the administration vetoed a UN Security Council resolution advocating full membership status for Palestine.

The nuanced public posture of Washington regarding its verbal policies is also influenced by another factor. With the end of the unipolar moment, marked by increasing strategic between China and Russia, many countries in the Global South are asserting greater strategic autonomy. This was evident in the overwhelming United Nations General Assembly in favor of full membership for Palestine.

Given that US support for Israel’s policies is driven by its aim to maintain division in Eurasia, excessive support in a multipolar world may counteract this objective.

Two examples illustrate this point clearly. First, Saudi Arabia, now aligned with the BRICS nations, has insisted that any strategic engagement with the US must Saudi recognition of Israel. This stance appears not to have been opposed by the US government, despite directly the intentions of the Abraham Accords.

Second, many countries in the Global South, historically aligned with the US such as — also a BRICS member — are actively pursuing a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICC). This legal action was initiated by and highlights shifting and strategic autonomy among these nations.

Within Israel, Netanyahu is that ending the military offensive without achieving a clear “victory” could not only end his political but also result in his conviction on corruption charges. This partly explains his repeated escalatory interventions. Meanwhile, family members of Israelis held by Hamas are advocating for negotiations between Hamas and the Israeli government to defuse the situation. Israel’s increasing international isolation, coupled with military and challenges, is prompting calls for a change of course from some quarters within the country.

How do we achieve lasting peace in the region?

To bring an end to the war, addressing the roots of the conflict is essential, including historic and ongoing Palestinian displacement, occupation and the reality of apartheid. Against this backdrop, any lasting resolution to the Israel–Palestine conflict must include the following elements:

First, the ongoing genocidal attacks on innocent Palestinians by the IDF must be universally . Those responsible for Israeli crimes against international law must be held legally . Second, there must be an immediate ceasefire. Proposals are currently being . Hamas has that it is willing to accept the proposal of the US  President Biden that was put forward in May 2024 but Israel remains . Third, immediate humanitarian assistance and relief measures, including infrastructure rebuilding, must be provided to Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

These are initial steps, but addressing the root cause of the conflict — the Israeli occupation of Palestine — is essential for achieving a lasting resolution. Several steps are required to make this happen:

One, Israeli occupation of all Palestinian territories must end unconditionally.

Two, all Palestinians displaced from historic Palestine must be accorded the right to return and live with full human rights. If Israel cannot agree to this, it should make mutually acceptable territorial concessions from its share of historic Palestine to rehabilitate displaced Palestinians. These lands should be fully integrated with Palestine.

Three, both Israel and Palestine must recognize each other’s right to exist as an independent country, with Palestine having membership in the UN to match Israel’s.

As discussed earlier, shifts in the international political economy have made a lasting resolution more achievable. Countries in the Global South and like-minded nations are increasingly vocal in their opposition to Israeli occupation. The international community urgently needs to increase its to pressure Israel and its external supporters into agreeing to a sustainable solution to the Israel–Palestine conflict.

[ and edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Examining the Urgent Israel–Palestine Conflict and Its Shameless Political Economy appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Traditionally, a Muslim should donate at least one-third of the meat from the animal to poor or vulnerable people. The remainder of the meat is split into one-third for the family that offers the udhiya and the final third to their neighbors. Muslims who live in the West often donate money to charities that conduct the sacrifice on their behalf in places like Somalia, Bangladesh and Syria.

Interactive: Ramadan Explained

READ MORE

The Quran explicitly , “That they may witness benefits for themselves and mention the name of Allah on known days over what He has provided for them of [sacrificial] animals. So eat of them and feed the miserable and poor” (Al-Haj 22/28). Further, it says: “And the camels and cattle We have appointed for you as among the symbols of Allah ; for you therein is good. So mention the name of Allah upon them when lined up [for sacrifice]; and when they are [lifeless] on their sides, then eat from them and feed the needy and the beggar. Thus have We subjected them to you that you may be grateful” (Al-Haj 22/36).

Muslims believe the Quran is ����������’s final revelation that is still preserved to this day. According to Islamic teaching, while the udhiya should be of an animal, the flesh and blood do not reach Allah. In fact, nothing in its “form” is an offering to Allah. Rather, the act is a way of showing piety. It is the intent behind the udhiya that is important. Having said that, the act of sacrifice itself is a way to assess the intent behind it. Conversely, if we hold the view that mere intention is enough, then all acts of worship could be done away with. This is not the case in Islam.

How Does It Benefit Others?

According to the most recent UN , more than 736 million people live below the international poverty line as of 2015. The United Nations mentions that around 10% of the “world population is living in extreme poverty and struggling to fulfil the most basic needs.” The adds that in “most parts of the world, growth rates are too slow, and investment is too subdued to increase median incomes. For many nations, poverty reduction has slowed or even reversed.”

Around the world, the income gap between citizens is steadily widening and food insecurity and malnutrition continue to be major problems plaguing our societies. A mere glance at the food and nutrition data from across the world is enough to understand the magnitude of this problem.

So, with this in mind, there will always be enough people in need of the meat from the sacrificed animal on Eid al-Adha. In fact, in all my years of performing this act in several developing countries, we have always run out of meat. Invariably, there are many needy people in places like Nigeria or India who look forward to this annual ritual so they can feast at home. Yet there is never enough meat to go around.

Freedom to Choose

Giving to charity is one of five pillars in Islam, the fundamentals on which the religion is built. Charitable actions — which can include non-monetary ones — are split between zakah (compulsory charity) and sadaqa (voluntary). These acts hinge all on the element of piety and intent, but to group them all together or replace one with the other does not appear to be a good idea.

It is true that udhiya is not fard (compulsory) in Islam. Some Muslims believe it is wajib — compulsory for those who have the means to do so — while others believe it is sunna muakkada (recommended). So, if one chooses not to sacrifice an animal on Eid al-Adha, it is purely an individual choice and they are free to act according to their qiyas — i.e., the interpretation of the scriptures — and there are many schools of thought in Islam.

For Muslims, the intention behind all acts of worship is of utmost importance. A person who performs an act of worship to show off does not really earn credit from Allah. It is the act of worship performed with the right intention that counts.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Is Animal Sacrifice on Eid al-Adha Still Relevant? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

On February 25, 2018, Rome’s ancient Colosseum was to condemn Asia Noreen’s death sentence. Commonly known as , Noreen is a Christian woman in Pakistan who faced the death sentence under the country’s blasphemy laws. A farm laborer from the Ittan Wali village in Pakistan’s Punjab province, she was involved in an argument with a group of Muslim women in 2010 over water and accused of insulting Prophet Muhammad. On the basis of this charge, she was arrested and imprisoned under Section 295C of Pakistan’s Penal Code. Later that year, she was tried and sentenced to death.

In October 2018, the Supreme Court of Pakistan from the charge of blasphemy after she languished for many years in prison. Yet a simple question arises: How free is Asia Bibi to live in her own country with the ever-present fear of being killed or lynched by so-called defenders of Islam?

That almost everyone seems reconciled to the idea that her only shot at safety is to seek refuge outside Pakistan speaks volumes about the state of affairs in the country. Pakistan’s blasphemy laws carry strict punishments for anyone convicted of having “insulted” Islam. Punishments range from a heavy fine to the death penalty. Alarmingly, convictions and the ensuing punishments can be based on as little as a single man’s testimony.

Obviously, such a terrible due process leaves the blasphemy laws open to abuses. Today, these laws are regularly used as the means of waging personal vendettas and settling scores. Again and again, these laws are used to persecute people from religious minorities. Pakistan’s 2.5 million Christians have suffered disproportionately, as have members of the Ahmadi Muslim sect.

BLASPHEMY LAWS IN THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT

Long before Pakistan was created in 1947, the Indian subcontinent had blasphemy laws. These were mainly the work of Muslim rulers. British colonizers repealed these laws to enable Christian missionaries to evangelize in the subcontinent. After the revolt of 1857, blasphemy laws made a comeback in the 1860 Indian Penal Code. Section 295 still gives protection to worship places, scriptures and personages of all religions of India. Later in 1927, two Sections 295 (A) and (B) were inserted, which prescribed punishment for outraging religious feelings of any class or religious group with deliberate and malicious intentions. Pakistan and Bangladesh inherited this penal code, and blasphemy laws live on in all three children of British India.

Over the last few decades, Pakistan has experienced a strong wave of . Its constitution has been amended and its judiciary has turned more fanatical. As a result, Pakistan has taken the lead in instituting some of the strictest blasphemy laws among all Muslim-majority states. An amendment was introduced to 295 (B) of its penal code in 1982 that extended penalty options to include life imprisonment. In 1986, an amendment inserted that makes defamation against Prophet Muhammad punishable by death. In 1992, a judgment of the made the death sentence the only punishment for blasphemy.

Yet blasphemy laws are not a South Asian monopoly. As per a 2014 report, over a quarter of the world’s countries and territories, 26% to be precise, had anti-blasphemy laws or policies, and that more than one in ten (13%) nations had laws or policies penalizing apostasy. The report found that “the legal punishments for such transgressions vary from fines to death.”

As of 2014, there were 50 countries around the world outlawing blasphemy. Thirty out of those countries had a majority Muslim population. As expected, theocracies like Saudi Arabia were part of this list, but more surprising were the names of countries supposed to be modern, such as Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Pakistan and Indonesia. To top it all, the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), which is based in Saudi Arabia, has been campaigning for a global blasphemy law to ostensibly protect Muslims from what it calls Islamophobia.

The reality is that blasphemy laws cause great injustice to some of the greatest Muslim minds. The famous Egyptian poet has been facing a three-year blasphemy sentence for criticizing the slaughter of animals on Eid al-Adha, an Islamic festival. In Malaysia, a man was simply because he posed questions to his religious teacher. And, of course, we cannot forget the brutal who argued with a cleric “about his practice of selling charms to women at a shrine.” The killing of within a university precinct in Pakistan is too fresh in memory.

There is no dearth of examples. Take that of Jakarta’s governor, popularly called Ahok, who was given a on charges of blasphemy. In fact, blasphemy charges have risen steadily in Indonesia over the last decade and have a nearly 100% conviction rate. It is a similar situation in where blasphemy accusations have risen manifold since the ouster of Hosni Mubarak in 2011 and, like Pakistan, have been used “as a form of anti-minority oppression.” Even Bangladesh has seen deadly marches in favor of a more stringent blasphemy law.

Blasphemy laws are meant to protect Muslims. However, it would not be an overstatement to say that these laws have targeted those at the margins of their respective Muslim societies instead of protecting ordinary people.

BLASPHEMY AND THE QURAN

As per the Quran, blasphemy is a serious offense against God, but no earthly legal penalty is ever mentioned in the holy book. Rather, it emphasizes that God will ultimately punish blasphemers, though not through any human law. The Quran tells the Prophet Muhammad directly that it is foolish to expect everyone to follow him, as only God knows who will find guidance and that humans, including messengers of God, have no ability to control this.

As per the Quran, “the life of this world is nothing but play and amusement.” The pious, the polytheists and the wrongdoers are all to be punished by God in the hereafter. In fact, God asks Prophet Muhammad to be patient with (the ignorant). It is God who has the right to punish disbelievers, not the prophet. This punishment is reserved for the afterlife, not this life.

Given the lack of any mention of earthly punishment at all for this crime in the Quran, how can traditional Islamic law justify punishing blasphemy with death? The answer is that traditional Islamic law is not derived only from the Quran, but also from the prophetic practice or sunnah, which is established by the hadith, the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. A narrative of prophetic actions, and hence of sunnah, can also be derived from the sirah, the biographies of the Prophet.

As Islamic jurisprudence developed over the centuries, much was added to the spirit of the Quran, based often on dubious reports about the words and deeds of the prophet. Blasphemy, and in particular the crime of “insulting the prophet,” gradually became a capital offense. Yet this happened despite objections from prominent jurists like Abu Hanifa, the eighth-century founder of one of the four main schools of Sunni thought. He argued that a bigger sin than insulting the prophet is disbelief in God, but Islam decrees no punishment for that.

Today, Pakistani liberals, most of whom are faithful Muslims, refer to such sources in the Islamic tradition to argue against blasphemy laws. They are right. Those laws should be abandoned — in Pakistan and elsewhere — on Islamic grounds alone.

There is also another important point. The Quran conceives of an omnipotent and omnipresent God. The logical implication of this point is that God cannot be harmed even a jot. Therefore, blasphemy laws are not required for God’s protection.

ISLAM AND MODERNITY

Blasphemy laws prevent one of the world’s major religions from reconciling with modernity. This issue goes much deeper than irreverent , which have received much media attention. It includes controversy over Pope Benedict XVI’s erudite at Regensburg University to an academic audience. This speech caused , triggered riots, many killings and even the murder of a nun. Even more significantly, Muslims themselves who express liberal ideas can be killed or intimidated, even in the West.

A good example of a Muslim who has suffered because of anti-blasphemy laws is of Saudi Arabia. He wrote a blog post arguing that clerics should not have a monopoly on the truth. For this, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes in 2012. In Iran, Ayatollah Hossein Kazemeyni Boroujerdi said , and he is now rotting away in Evin Prison. His real crime was not blasphemy, but opposing political Islam and clerical rule. There are plenty of other examples from Iran, which beats Pakistan to gain top position in . The country has decreed an entire religious minority, the Baha’i, blasphemous. The Baha’i are afforded no protections for their life or their property under the Iranian Constitution. They are true second-class citizens.

The best people who can address blasphemy laws are Muslim theologians and religious leaders. They are aware of the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad himself. People insulted the prophet personally. They threw trash at his home and called him all sorts of names. Yet the he did not execute or imprison them. He demonstrated that the message of Islam is spread through compassion, not through punishing people who disagree with you.

In 2019, it is time that Muslim theologians, religious leaders and intellectuals help their societies understand that blasphemy laws serve not the honor of Islam, but much more mundane interests. They help the powerful persecute non-Muslim minorities out of greed or jealousy, and silence Muslims themselves who criticize or challenge the powers that be. Importantly, they have no basis in the Quran.

All Muslims of good faith should stand up more forcefully for people like Asia Bibi, who was falsely accused of blasphemy. Also, they should tolerate those who really do blaspheme and “not sit with them” as the Quran itself counsels. Muslim societies must simultaneously return to their roots and embrace modernity by repealing irreligious and unjust blasphemy laws.

Till then, let peace be upon us all.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

The post Blasphemy Laws: Sacrilege in God’s Name appeared first on 51�Թ�.