Charlie Kirk's assassination: A tragic crime, but a predictable result of toxic political rhetoric

Kirk was a key voice in America’s toxic political ecosystem.  Far from being a bold and courageous figure he was a divisive force whose rhetoric often veered into fascist territory,

By Fareed Khan

A version of this article can be found on Substack. 

In the early afternoon of September 10, 2025, during the kickoff of a speaking event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, conservative political commentator Charlie Kirk was fatally shot in the neck by a sniper from a nearby rooftop.  The 31-year-old Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA and a prominent voice in Donald Trump’s MAGA movement, collapsed in front of a crowd of about 3,000 attendees, dying shortly after from his wounds. 

The suspected shooter, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, was arrested two days later after a manhunt involving the FBI, which offered a $100,000 reward for tips leading to his capture.  Robinson, described by family members as increasingly political and vocal about Kirk's “hate,” left bullet casings engraved with messages like “Hey, fascist! Catch!”  Authorities have labeled it a targeted political assassination, the latest in a string of violent incidents plaguing American politics.

This murder is unequivocally a crime and the perpetrator needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, because political violence has no place in a democracy.  The crime has been roundly condemned by American politicians of all political persuasions and has resulted in people asking how American politics arrived at this point.  Robinson's actions, whatever his grievances, cross an unforgivable and very dangerous line, because assassination of political voices silences discourse and endangers everyone, regardless of ideology.

Kirk leaves behind a wife and two young children, who deserve our condolences and sympathy for the tragedy that has engulfed their lives.  Yet, as we condemn this criminal act—and we must—it's impossible to ignore the broader context.  Given his very controversial political statements and, at times, implicit support for political violence, Kirk's death at the hands of an assassination is not entirely surprising.  It is a grim symptom of the poisonous tone that has infected US politics under Donald Trump's influence, where vilifying opponents and stoking rage in one's base has normalized threats and, increasingly, actual violence.

Trump's rhetoric has long blurred the line between heated debate and calls for harm.  From his 2015 campaign rallies, where he encouraged supporters to “knock the crap out of” hecklers, to his 2020 tweet during George Floyd protests—”when the looting starts, the shooting starts”—Trump has repeatedly used dangerous language that experts describe as inciting aggression and violence.  In a 2023 Veterans Day speech, he vowed to “root out the Communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country,” portraying political opponents as subhuman enemies to be eradicated.  Such dehumanizing words don't exist in a vacuum.  They embolden extremists and lead to tragedy.

A 2023 analysis by extremism researchers found that Trump's inflammatory speech correlated with a spike in threats against public officials, with over 150 politically motivated attacks in the first half of 2025 alone.  When leaders like Trump legitimize violence—praising January 6 rioters as “patriots” or suggesting protesters be shot—it's no shock that someone like Robinson, radicalized by the very hate Kirk amplified, takes it to its deadly conclusion.

Kirk himself was a key voice in this toxic ecosystem.  Far from the bold and courageous figure eulogized by Trump and allies like Israel prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who called him a “lion-hearted friend of Israel” fighting for “Judeo-Christian civilization”—Kirk was a divisive force whose rhetoric often veered into fascist territory, targeting vulnerable groups and stoking fear.  He built Turning Point USA into a machine for mobilizing young conservatives to support Trump, but it was fueled by hate speech that demonized immigrants, progressives, and left-wing voices.  
Kirk's involvement in Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's blueprint for a second Trump term, underscored his authoritarian leanings.  The plan advocates consolidating executive power, dismantling federal agencies meant to protect Americans, and enacting Christian nationalist policies like criminalizing abortion and birth control—hallmarks of illiberal governance that critics label fascist.  Kirk not only endorsed the plan, but also used his platform to promote its goals, urging followers to “fight” against a supposed “deep state” and “woke” threats to America.

Consider Kirk's own words, which reveal his disdain for empathy and humanity that borders on the sociopathic.  In a 2022 episode of his podcast, “The Charlie Kirk Show,” he declared, “I can't stand the word empathy, actually.  I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that—it does a lot of damage.”  He argued that true empathy—feeling others' pain—weakens resolve against political foes.  This rejection of basic human connection was no slip up.  It permeated his worldview and the politics he promoted.

Kirk also frequently invoked the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, a racist white nationalist trope alleging that immigrants are deliberately supplanting white Americans.  In a 2023 Turning Point USA event, he ranted, “America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever.  We should be unafraid to do that.” 

He targeted Indians specifically, claiming in a podcast, “America does not need more visas for people from India.  Perhaps no form of legal immigration has so displaced American workers as those from India.  Enough already.”  Such statements weren't abstract.  They fueled real-world harm, echoing the manifestos of mass shooters like the 2019 El Paso gunman who cited similar anti-immigrant fears.

Kirk's attacks on progressive and left-wing voices were equally vicious, often laced with fascist messaging of cultural purity and suppression.  He accused the Democratic Party of supporting “everything that God hates,” urging pastors to deliver sermons framing Democrats as divine enemies.  In discussions of race, he claimed Black Americans were “better” in the 1940s—before civil rights—because they “committed less crimes,” ignoring the era's rampant segregation and lynchings of Black people. 

On gender and LGBTQ+ issues, Kirk was unrelenting, dismissing transgender rights and feminism as societal poisons.  He once stated, in response to a question about what he would do if a 10-year-old was raped, that the girl should carry the pregnancy to term, saying, “The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered . . . Wouldn't it be a better story to say something evil happened and we do something good in the face of evil?”  These weren't fringe opinions.  They were broadcast to millions where they radicalized youth and normalized hate.

His stance on Israel further highlighted his selective sympathy, blending fervent support with genocidal undertones.  Kirk was a vocal defender of Israel's actions in Gaza, denying reports of famine and starvation as “pure visual warfare” by Hamas, despite UN documentation of over tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths.  He visited Israel multiple times, interviewed Netanyahu, and positioned himself as a bulwark against “anti-Semitism,” yet his rhetoric often veered into anti-Semitic territory.  In 2023, he claimed “Jews control... the colleges, the nonprofits, the movies, Hollywood, all of it,” and blamed “Jewish donors” for funding “anti-whiteness” and “Cultural Marxism.”  This wasn't pro-Israel advocacy but instead a fascist fusion of Christian nationalism and conspiracy theories, where support for one nation's violence justified hatred toward others.

The hypocrisy in reactions to Kirk's death versus similar violence against Democrats is stark.  When Minnesota Democratic Representative Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark were assassinated in their Brooklyn Park home on June 14, 2025—along with an attempt on Senator John Hoffman and his wife—the MAGA base, including Kirk, revelled in it.  Kirk himself used the incident to rail against “radical left” policies and boost his following, much like he did after the 2022 hammer attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  Kirk called for a “patriot” to bail out the attacker, David DePape, saying, “If some amazing patriot out there in San Francisco or the Bay Area wants to really be a midterm hero, someone should go and bail this guy out.”  Right-wing influencers, echoing Kirk, mocked Pelosi's injuries and blamed “San Francisco elites.”

Contrast that with the outpouring for Kirk.  Trump ordered flags lowered to half-staff, awarded him a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom, and blamed the “radical left” without evidence.  Netanyahu mourned him as a “warrior for truth,” ignoring Kirk's own anti-Jewish bigotries.  This double standard—glee for left-wing victims, praise and martyrdom for right-wing ones—exposes how Trump's era has weaponized tragedy to deepen social and political divides.

Kirk's murder must be condemned universally, as should all political violence.  The Hortman assassination, the Pelosi attack, the arson at Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro's residence in April 2025—these are all abhorrent, and the perpetrators deserve significant prison time for their crimes. 

But violence solves nothing, and it begets more violence, turning political disagreements into blood feuds.  If we accept assassination as a response to ugly political voices we oppose, as some online reactions to Kirk's death suggest, we'll soon see targets on all sides—progressives, conservatives, moderates alike.  Tens of millions may breathe a sigh of relief at the silencing of Kirk's brand of hate, but that's a dangerous path. 

As former Congressional Representative Gabby Giffords, a survivor of political gun violence, said after the shooting, “Democratic societies will always have political disagreements, but we must never allow America to become a country that confronts those disagreements with violence."  Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, targeted in a right-wing kidnapping plot, echoed this, saying, “We should all come together to stand up against any and all forms of political violence."  Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro added, “The attack on Charlie Kirk is horrifying and this growing type of unconscionable violence cannot be allowed in our society.”   These voices, all from the Democratic Party, are voices that advocate empathy— the very quality Kirk scorned—noting that it is essential for healing.

To pretend Kirk was a benevolent commentator is disingenuous.  He was a vile architect of division and hate, whose fascist-leaning rhetoric tore at America's fabric.  His support for Project 2025's authoritarian blueprint, his dehumanization of immigrants as “invaders,” his denial of empathy as “damage”—these weren't bold truths.  They were a cancer that should be excised from America’s body politic.  And all of this thrives under Trump's political umbrella, where rage is currency and opponents should be seen “vermin” to be eradicated. 

Kirk didn't deserve to die the way he did, but his legacy demands a reckoning with truth.  The political culture he spoke to, one dominated by far-right wing elements, Republicans, and the MAGA cult, must use this tragedy to tone down political hate and division.  Whether they will or not remains to be seen.  Given how they thrive on political rage it is unlikely.

What is clear is that Trump's incitement— from shooting looters to rooting out the enemy within—has legitimized political violence in the US, leading directly to tragedies like this.  If he and his followers choose to reject prudence and an elimination of extreme political rhetoric, things will only escalate.  More assassinations, more martyrs, more division. 

The American people deserve better—dialogue over death, unity over us-versus-them.  Only by rejecting the fascist ideologies embodied in Kirk’s messaging can the next assassination of a political voice—on the left or the right—be prevented.  Whether those pushing extreme political ideologies come to realize that they are as much to blame for Kirk’s assassination as are their opponents on the far left is something we are all waiting to find out.

© 2025 The View From Here. © 2025 Fareed Khan. All Rights Reserved.

Why are the lives of 9/11 victims valued above those of the millions of victims of the “War on Terror”

There are no memorials to honour the millions killed in Iraq, Afghanistan and the "War on Terror," and no moving annual commemoration ceremonies like those for the victims of the 9/11 attacks.

By Fareed Khan

A version of this article can be found on Substack. 

Every September 11th, the United States and its allies pause to commemorate the 2,977 lives lost in the horrific terrorist attacks of 2001.  Solemn ceremonies unfold at  “ground zero “ in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington DC, and a field in Pennsylvania, accompanied by poignant statements from politicians vowing to never forget.  These rituals honour the victims of a single day ‘s horror, etched into the collective memory of the United States and the West.

Yet, as we reflect on the 24th anniversary of 9/11, a glaring question remains unanswered. Why are the lives of those killed on September 11, 2001 deemed more worthy of remembrance than the hundreds of thousands—possibly millions—of innocent civilians, predominantly Muslim, killed in the US-led wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the broader  “War on Terror“?  This selective mourning reveals a troubling double standard and Western societal prejudice that disregards the humanity of these forgotten victims and perpetuates a cycle of violence that has made the world less safe due to US actions and policies.

The 9/11 attacks were a profound tragedy, a moment of collective trauma that reshaped global politics.  The horror of that day—planes crashing into towers, buildings collapsing, and lives extinguished—remains vivid for those who witnessed it, whether in person or through relentless news coverage.  For Muslim communities, the attacks also sparked fear and foreboding, as they braced for the inevitable backlash.

Within months, the US launched its  “War on Terror, “ a sprawling global military campaign that included the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, a years long campaign of drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and other nations, and other operations targeting suspected terrorists wherever they were situated.  These actions, justified as a response to 9/11, have left a trail of devastation, with civilian deaths exponentially surpassing the toll of the original 9/11 attacks. Yet, the victims of these wars—men, women, and children who experienced their own terror from bombs, bullets, and missiles fired by the militaries of the US and its allies—are rarely acknowledged, let alone commemorated, in Western society.

The horrendous civilian death toll

The scale of civilian casualties in the War on Terror is staggering.  A 2006 study by Johns Hopkins University, published in The Lancet, estimated that 655,000 Iraqis had died by the middle of the year as a direct result of the US invasion, with later estimates suggesting a death toll of up to 940,000.  In Afghanistan, the Costs of War project at Brown University estimates over 400,000 civilian deaths, including those killed directly by conflict and indirectly through disease, malnutrition, displacement and destruction of societal infrastructure.  Drone strikes, a hallmark of US counter-terrorism since 9/11, have killed at least 25,835 civilians across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, according to data from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Additional analysis, put the cumulative death toll in all of America ‘s post 9/11 wars at between 4.5 million and 4.7 million, a number more than 1,500 times greater than the casualties of September 11, 2001.

These numbers represent not just lives lost but families wiped out, communities destroyed, societies shredded, and futures erased.  Each death carried the same weight of terror as those felt by the victims of 9/11, yet these people, who also had loved ones, remain largely invisible in Western memory.

The human cost is vividly illustrated by individual stories of loss.  In 2003, Ali Ismail Abbas, a 12-year-old Iraqi boy, lost both arms when a US missile struck his family ‘s home near Baghdad due to faulty intelligence, killing his father and pregnant mother, his brother and 13 other members of his family. The attack also left third degree burns covering at least 35% of his body.

In 2002, a US B-52 bomber dropped a bomb that obliterated a wedding party. What should have been a joyous occasion resulted in the death of up to 250 civilians.  Then US forces launched a two-hour assault on the location with additional bombs and an AC-130 gunship after mistaking the wedding guests‘ celebratory gunshots into the air as hostile fire, and raining hell down on the wedding venue.

In October 2012, Momina Bibi, a 67-year-old Pakistani grandmother, was killed by a US drone strike while picking vegetables with her two grandchildren, who were also injured.  There were no military targets nearby, and she and the children were clearly visible in the field and could not have been mistaken for insurgents.  Her son, Rafiq ur Rehman, a primary school teacher appeared at a hearing on Capitol Hill with his children, Zubair (13), and Nabila (9), and through a translator said, “Nobody has ever told me why my mother was targeted that day."

In August 2021, a US drone strike in a residential area of Kabul killed ten members of an Afghan family, including seven children, again due to faulty intelligence.  The youngest victims of the attack were two 2-year-old girls who were in a car that was targeted.  Neighbours who rushed to help put out the fire resulting from the attack described body parts strewn around the site of the airstrike.  At a funeral held later family members shouted  "Death to America."

These are only a handful of incidents among tens of thousands across Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen, revealing a pattern of reckless disregard for civilian lives by the US. The euphemism “collateral damage” masks these preventable tragedies, leaving survivors with lasting physical and psychological scars, their grief intensified by the failure of the US to acknowledge or be held accountable for its actions. This silence betrays a deep-seated bias, devaluing Muslim and Arab lives and reinforcing systemic prejudice in Western consciousness.

Compensation for some victims and not others

In the year following the 9/11 attacks the US government established the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund, disbursing $7.375 billion to victims and their families.  In contrast, compensation for civilian victims of US military aggression has been rare and minimal, often limited to token payments or none at all.  For example, families of drone strike victims in Pakistan and Yemen have received little to no redress, and when it has been offered, payments have been insultingly low compared to payouts for families of 9/11 victims. 

Additionally, there are no memorials to honour the millions killed in Iraq or Afghanistan.  And there are no Western leader delivering moving speeches at annual commemoration ceremonies to mourn the loss.  This silence reinforces a hierarchy of grief, where American lives are deemed more valuable than those of Muslim civilians in distant lands.

The consequences of this double standard extend far beyond moral failure, and impacts security and safety.  America’s military response to 9/11 has made the world less safe, including for Americans. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq destabilized the Middle East, fueling insurgencies and creating fertile ground for groups like ISIS. 

Civilian deaths, seen merely as “collateral damage,” dehumanizes Arab and Muslim populations and leads to the radicalization of families and communities who lost loved ones to attacks by the US or its allies, in turn creating cycles of revenge.  The 2013 testimony before Congress by the son and children of the Pakistani grandmother killed by a US drone highlights how such strikes breed resentment, pushing survivors toward extremism.

Travelling Americans also face heightened risks abroad, as the actions of their government have eroded goodwill in many nations.  The Costs of War project estimates that the War on Terror has cost over $8 trillion, surpassing the cost of World War Two when adjusted for inflation, and yet it has failed to eliminate terrorism, and instead spread political instability and created breeding grounds for terrorists in the Middle East and across North Africa.

The erosion of civil liberties

This selective mourning has also perpetuated a cycle of anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia that continues to haunt Muslim communities.  In addition, post-9/11 policies, such as the Patriot Act in the US and similar laws in Canada and Europe, eroded civil liberties, and disproportionately targeted Muslims.  These measures, often justified under the banner of “national security,” have planted the seeds of distrust and alienation, damaging the fabric of Western societies, and further marginalized Muslim populations.  The lack of acknowledgement for the victims of US wars has also reinforced the narrative that Arab and Muslim lives are expendable, emboldening right-wing rhetoric that vilified entire communities for the actions of a few.  This dehumanization not only undermines global solidarity but also hinders efforts to address the root causes of terrorism, such as oppression and foreign intervention (primarily by the US) into the politics of other nations.

To break this cycle, we must expand the scope of 9/11 remembrance to include all victims of terrorism, whether perpetrated by non-state actors or states.  The terror felt by an Afghan, Pakistani or Yemeni family obliterated by a drone strike is no less real than that experienced by those who were in the Twin Towers or on the passenger jets used as missiles.  A global day of remembrance for all victims of terrorism could serve as a powerful gesture of united humanity, acknowledging the shared suffering of those affected by violence. Such an initiative would require Western leaders to confront uncomfortable truths about the roles of their nations in perpetuating terror, including the war crimes committed in Iraq and Afghanistan.  It would also demand accountability, such as prosecuting those responsible for illegal wars and ensuring meaningful compensation for victims of US actions.

Moreover, recognizing these forgotten victims could help dismantle the narrative of American exceptionalism that underpins the War on Terror.  By valuing all lives equally, we can challenge the notion that Western suffering is uniquely worthy of mourning.  This shift could foster dialogue and reconciliation, reducing the resentment that fuels extremism.  For example, acknowledging the pain of families like that of Momina Bibi and providing restitution could demonstrate a commitment to justice, potentially mitigating the radicalization of their communities.  It would also signal to the world’s two billion Muslims that their humanity matters, countering the Islamophobia that has poisoned global relations since 9/11.

Until we confront this double standard, the legacy of 9/11 will remain incomplete. Commemorating only American victims while ignoring the hundreds of thousands killed by the US and it allies perpetuates a narrative that dehumanizes Arab and   Muslim lives and excuses state terrorism. It is time to expand our moral imagination and mourn all who have suffered, and to work toward a world where no innocent life is deemed expendable.  Only then can we claim to honour the true cost of 9/11 and build a future where peace, not vengeance, prevails.

© 2025 The View From Here. © 2025 Fareed Khan. All Rights Reserved.

 

Qatar attack shows again that Israel is a rogue, terrorist state

Israel’s Zionist ideology, grounded in a doctrine of Jewish racial superiority and the dehumanization of Palestinians, is the foundation of its terrorist actions.

By Fareed Khan 
A version of this article can also be found on Substack.

On September 9, 2025, Israel launched a brazen airstrike on Doha, Qatar, targeting senior Hamas leaders, an act that not only violated international law and the territorial sovereignty of Qatar, but also exemplified Israel’s persistent pattern of acting as a rogue, terrorist state. The attack struck a residential complex hosting Hamas negotiators discussing a US-proposed ceasefire for Gaza, killing six individuals, including a Qatari security official, and drawing widespread condemnation from Qatar, the UN, and dozens of other nations, including Canada.

 

This incident, coupled with Israel’s decades-long history of violating multiple UN resolutions, and committing crimes against humanity, war crimes, and more recently genocide in Gaza, underscores the urgent need for Canada and other allied governments to designate Israel and its military as a terrorist state and organization. Such a designation is justified by the definition of terrorism, which in its broadest sense is “the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims." Israel’s actions, enabled by unwavering US support, epitomize this definition for its entire existence, rendering it a pariah state that flouts international norms with impunity.

A history of terror and impunity

Israel’s founding in 1948 on stolen Palestinian land set the stage for its criminal trajectory. The Nakba, in 1947–1948, marked the beginning of Israel’s history of criminal actions. Zionist, terrorist militias, such as Haganah, Irgun, and Lehi, orchestrated violent campaigns, ethnically cleansing over 750,000 Palestinians and destroying hundreds of Palestinian villages. Leaders like Menachem Begin, implicated in the 1946 King David Hotel bombing that killed 91 people and the Deir Yassin massacre where over 100 Palestinian civilians (including babies) were slaughtered, and Yitzhak Shamir, who endorsed assassinations, later became Israeli prime ministers. Their actions, which constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity, embedded a legacy of criminal violence into Israel’s political fabric, and established a pattern of disregard for international law, a pattern reinforced by Israel’s failure to honour UN Resolution 194, which guaranteed Palestinian refugees’ right to return or compensation for their losses.

The Absentee Property Law, passed by Israel's Knesset in 1950, and the destruction of over 400 Palestinian villages by 1952 further entrenched the concept of ethnic cleansing in Israeli politics, defying Israel’s UN obligations.  Since then, Israel’s violations have only escalated. Its apartheid system, documented by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Israeli organizations like B’Tselem, subjects Palestinians to systemic discrimination and brutal military rule, while illegal Jewish settlers enjoy civilian protections. Settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem violates the Geneva and Hague Conventions’ prohibition on land appropriation in occupied territories. Israel’s repeated military assaults on Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria flout the UN Charter’s ban on the use of force, with over 40 UN Security Council resolutions condemning Israel ignored, often shielded by US vetoes.

The ongoing Gaza campaign, labelled genocidal by UN experts and scholars like Raz Segal, Amos Goldberg, and Omer Bartov, has killed over 71,000 Palestinians since October 2023, mostly civilians, and systematically destroyed healthcare, education, and infrastructure. Furthermore, Israel’s deliberate weaponization of food and aid, causing famine, violates the 1948 Genocide Convention and defies International Court of Justice (ICJ) orders to prevent genocide. The Doha attack, targeting Hamas negotiators during ceasefire talks, further illustrates Israel’s contempt for seeking a peaceful settlement with, by attacking a US ally’s capital.

The Doha attack is an act of state terrorism

The Qatari prime minister declared the Israeli attack as an act of state terrorism. Beyond violating Qatar’s sovereignty, the attack targeted an area where there were many civilians, and resulted in the death of a Qatari security officer alongside Hamas officials. This reckless disregard for innocent lives aligns with Israel’s pattern of using military force to attack targets despite the presence of innocents, and the likelihood of civilian casualties. 

Similar Israeli violence is evident in acts of collective punishment of Palestinians (crimes under international law) that have been repeated for decades with impunity, as seen in the Gaza genocide, and Israeli actions in the West Bank. Furthermore, Israeli officials’ open admission of responsibility, claiming the right to strike anywhere, reflects a belief in their immunity from international law, a stance emboldened by unwavering US support.

Experts have commented that the intent of the attack was to disrupt ceasefire negotiations, prioritizing military and political objectives, rather than the lives of Israeli hostages, and nearby Palestinian civilians over peace. As Josh Paul, a former US State Department official, noted, targeting negotiators during ceasefire talks demonstrates bad faith and undermines diplomatic efforts. This act of terrorist intimidation, conducted in a neutral country hosting US-backed talks, seeking to create peace, not only violated international norms but also destabilized regional security, and risked escalation with Qatar and other Gulf states. Such actions fit the definition of terrorism, using violence to coerce and disrupt for political gain.

Israel’s genocidal intent and actions

Israel’s leaders have openly expressed genocidal intent, reinforcing the terrorist designation. Statements from political and religious figures advocating for the ethnic cleansing and annihilation of Palestinians are well-documented. For instance, Israeli officials have called for Gaza’s complete destruction and the displacement of its population to other nations, with some religious leaders labelling Palestinians as “human animals”, and obstacles to a purely Jewish state. This view is supported by a poll published in the Israel newspaper Ha'aretz in May which showed that 82% off Israel Jews want Gaza ethnically cleansed, while 47% want every Palestinian man, woman and child in the enclave killed.  These statements, coupled with Israel's systematic destruction and starvation policies in Gaza, align with the Genocide Convention’s criteria for intent to destroy a group in whole or part, and give further credence to applying the "terrorist" label to Israel.

Further legitimacy was given to the genocide declaration when the International Association of Genocide Scholars, declared that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, and that Israel's conduct meets the legal definition as laid out in the Genocide Convention. Among many other elements, the organization notes that 50,000 children have been killed or injured by Israel, as highlighted by UN aid organization UNICEF, which impacts the ability of Palestinians in Gaza to survive as a group and regenerate.

US complicity: Enabling a terrorist state

It should be noted that Israel’s ability to perpetrate these acts completely hinges on US backing. Since 1948, the US has provided over $150 billion in military aid, including weapons and munitions used in Gaza and, as well as in the Doha attack. This support, coupled with diplomatic cover through America’s UN vetoes, has shielded Israel from accountability since its inception. 

As the attack was underway the US military stationed in Qatar was advised and passed the information on to the US Embassy in Doha, which then issued a shelter-in-place order after the attack had already occurred. And yet despite this assault on the territory of an American ally there was no condemnation by the Trump administration. Were it not for US supplied weapons, funding, and political protection, Israel’s capacity to sustain its occupation, apartheid, and terrorist acts would have been severely curtailed, and its history of crimes in violation of international law would likely not have occurred.

Additionally, the biased portrayal of Palestinian resistance by Western news media as “terrorism” while portraying Israel's criminal acts as "self defence" has further enabled Western complicity in Israeli crimes.  This depiction ignores Palestinians' history of dispossession, oppression and occupation under Israel, while amplifying anti-Palestinian racist and Islamophobic narratives. This bias has allowed the US and allies like the UK, France, and Germany to justify arming Israel while dismissing the suffering of Palestinians. This selective enforcement of international law by the US and its allies—condemning adversaries like Russia and China but excusing Israel—undermines the international legal order, and exposes a system where geopolitical interests trump justice and human rights, and enables the misery and suffering of an oppressed people.

The case for Canada and its allies to act

Canada and other nations that have historically supported Israel must finally admit that it is a rogue terrorist state, and its military is a terrorist organization. The Doha attack, alongside Israel’s documented history of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, genocide and attacks against neighbouring nations, meets the terrorism definition. Canada, as a signatory to the Genocide Convention, supporter of the UN, and a proponent of international law, has a legal and moral obligation to treat take action against Israel for its crimes they it has against Russia. Designating Israel’s military as a terrorist organization would align Canada with its commitments to prevent and punish genocide and war crimes, and put it in the same company as a majority of countries which see Israel for the terrorist rogue state it is.

Such a designation would involve halting military and diplomatic support, imposing broad sanctions, similar to those placed on Russia in response to its invasion of Ukraine, and supporting ICC and ICJ prosecutions of Israeli leaders’ crimes. Failing to take such action would implicate Canada’s in Israel’s violations of international laws and conventions. Other Canadian allies, like Belgium, Spain, Norway, Turkiye and Ireland, along with most nations in the global south, are increasingly condemning Israel, with growing calls for accountability reflected in global protests and boycott movements, and it is long past time for Canada to stand on the right side of history.

Israel’s Zionist ideology, grounded in a doctrine of Jewish racial superiority and the dehumanization of Palestinians, is the foundation of its terrorist actions, in the same manner as white supremacy and Nazism. Dismantling this fascist infrastructure requires ending Western complicity in Israeli crimes, and taking action to restructure Israeli society as was done with Nazi Germany and imperial Japan after World War Two. If Canada is truly the supporter of international law as it claims it and its international partners should take the lead by declaring Israel a terrorist regime, withdrawing all backing, and championing a fair, democratic society on the lands of historic Palestine for both Jews and Palestinians, where equality prevails for everyone, irrespective of ethnic or religious background.

History will judge if the world fails to act

Israel’s attack on Doha aimed at Hamas leaders stands as the latest manifestation of Israel’s lawless, terrorist conduct. Its legacy of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, apartheid, crimes against humanity, as well as genocidal acts in Gaza—enabled and sustained through American patronage—compels Canada and fellow self-proclaimed guardians of the “international rule of law” to classify Israel and its armed forces as terrorist entities. Inaction only prolongs a moral and legal failure of global proportions, permitting a nation that believes that it is above the law, to continue committing crimes with impunity. 

History will condemn Israel and its accomplices with the same severity it reserved for Western powers that stood idle as Nazi Germany ignited the Holocaust, and ignored the plight of Jewish refugees. Without prompt measures to enforce justice and international law the world risks witnessing a Palestinian holocaust mirroring the Jewish one in Europe. However, this time, the excuse of ignorance won’t hold. Rather it will simply reveal the callous indifference and racism of those Western nations that claim to be defenders of international law only when it favours their own political interests.

 

© 2025 The View From Here. © 2025 Fareed Khan. All Rights Reserved.

The United Nations: A toothless tiger in the face of global atrocities

The veto power of the five permanent members of the UN has been used to shield aggressors from accountability for decades and has prevented the organization from applying its founding principles.

By Fareed Khan 

A version of this article can also be found on Substack.

  
As the 23rd month of Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza approaches, the United Nations (UN), created in 1945 to prevent such atrocities and uphold global peace, stands exposed as a hollow institution, unable to do the job for which it was created. In a Harvard published study based on Israeli military data, Israeli academic Yaakov Garb estimates that 377,000 to 400,000 Palestinians are missing and presumed dead. This catastrophic loss of life underscores the UN’s abject failure to enforce its own Charter and conventions, particularly the Genocide Convention, which obligates states to prevent and punish the crime of genocide.

The veto power of the five permanent UN  Security Council (UNSC) members—the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France—paralyzes the UN, allowing powerful nations and their allies to perpetrate international crimes with impunity. The UN’s inability to halt state-sponsored aggression, exemplified by Israel’s genocide in Gaza, mirrors the collapse of the League of Nations’ in the 1930s, when it failed to curb Japan, Italy, and Germany’s violations of international law. Global political and economic conditions today echo circumstances of the 1930s—a deteriorating geopolitical situation and economic turmoil. In this context, and the UN’s historic inability to reign in its members when they have committed genocidal crimes (Rwanda, Rohingya, Uyghurs), the UN’s structural flaws render it irrelevant in confronting atrocities committed by states like Israel.

The UN’s structural paralysis: The veto power

The UN Security Council, tasked with maintaining international peace, is hamstrung by the veto power of its five permanent members (P5). This mechanism, originally meant to ensure great power consensus, has instead been used to shield aggressors from accountability, including the five permanent members themselves. American scholar Stephen Zunes, who specializes in Middle-East politics and US foreign policy, argues that the violations of UNSC resolutions by the US and its allies are in breach of the UN Charter and Geneva Conventions, and demonstrate the double standards used in selectively enforcing resolutions against American adversaries but not its allies. Since the 1970s the US has vetoed over 50 resolutions critical of Israel, repeatedly blocking UN intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Russia and China have similarly vetoed resolutions targeting their allies, preventing action, as in the case of Syria during its civil war.  This echoes the League of Nations’ failure to enforce sanctions against Japan’s 1931 invasion of Manchuria or Italy’s 1935 conquest of Ethiopia, where weak responses emboldened aggressors.

Gaza: A case study in UN failure

Israel’s actions in Gaza since October 2023 exemplify the UN’s impotence. A 2024 UN Special Committee report found that Israel’s warfare, including mass civilian casualties, starvation policies, and destruction of infrastructure, is “consistent with the characteristics of genocide.” The report documented over 52,535 deaths by May 2025, with 70% being women and children, and notes Israel’s deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued provisional measures in January 2024, ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts, but Israel has ignored these rulings without consequence. The UN General Assembly has also passed resolutions calling for a ceasefire, but US vetoes in the Security Council render them unenforceable. The role of the US veto in preventing the implementation of a UN backed ceasefire has allowed Israel’s genocide of Palestinians to continue, while the world and the UN are powerless to act.

This mirrors the League of Nations’ failure to counter Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia, where symbolic sanctions excluded critical oil exports due to great power resistance. UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese’s 2024 report, Anatomy of a Genocide, argues that Israel’s actions meet the legal threshold for genocide, yet the UN’s inaction “emboldens further violations.” The UN’s failure to enforce ICJ rulings or provide humanitarian protection in Gaza, due opposition by a member of the P5, highlights its inability to confront powerful states or their allies, a systemic flaw rooted in the veto power.

Historical parallels to the League of Nations

The UN’s continual failures recalls the League of Nations’ collapse in the 1930s. While the League was established to prevent aggression by its members it lacked enforcement mechanisms and relied on great power consensus, a situation similar to that facing the UN. Japan’s 1931 invasion of Manchuria prompted a League investigation, and when the report was tabled it condemned the actions of the Japanese.  The conclusions of the report, which the Japanese delegation rejected, resulted in Japan withdrawing from the organization. Similarly, the League was ineffective in resolving the crisis around Italy’s 1935 invasion of Ethiopia.  The military campaign was marked by the use of chemical weapons and civilian massacres, and was met with weak sanctions, which were undermined by France and Britain’s appeasement policies. The inability of the League to enforce international law was amplified when Nazi Germany annexed Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia, further exposing the organization’s impotence, paving the way for World War II. The League’s inability to act against aggressors not only emboldened further aggression but also rendered it useless at preserving international political stability, a dynamic replicated in the UN’s paralysis today.

The UN’s inability to confront P5 members or their allies mirrors the failures of the League of Nations in the 1930s. Today the US veto shields Israel from accountability over its crimes against Palestinians, just as Britain and France protected Italy in the 1930s. Russia’s vetoes block action on its aggression in Ukraine, where over 13,800 civilians have been killed since 2022. China’s vetoes prevent scrutiny of its abuses against Uyghur Muslims, labelled crimes against humanity by Amnesty International. While India’s policies in Kashmir, including mass detentions and extrajudicial killings since 2019, have been described as potential crimes against humanity.  And yet the UN fails to act due to a systemic flaw where crimes are committed with impunity due to the veto power of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.

Beyond Gaza: A pattern of impunity

Of course the UN’s failures extend beyond Gaza. The US-led war in Iraq, based on lies about weapons of mass destruction, resulted in close to 300,000 dead, with some putting the death toll at over 900,000.  The actions of the US and its allies destabilized the region and resulted in the rise of the “Islamic state”, and yet the UN imposed no sanctions. The 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, authorized by the UN under the Responsibility to Protect doctrine (R2P), exceeded its mandate, leading to that nation becoming a failed state and an incubator for terrorist groups. Furthermore, in Yemen, air strikes by Saudi Arabia, backed by the US since 2015, caused over 377,000 civilian deaths, with no UN action against either nation.

Additionally, China’s imprisonment of over one million Uyghurs in concentration camps, involving forced labour and sterilization, has been documented by a 2022 UN report, but China’s veto power blocks Security Council action on the matter. In the South China Sea, China’s militarization of disputed islands and creation of islands in contested waters, violates the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, yet the UN has issued no sanctions. 

The ongoing decline of the UN is furthered when repressive governments around the world see leading democracies violate the rights of their own citizens.  Such actions result in leaders of anti-democratic nations justifying their own repressive measures and weakening the international laws and institutions under the UN meant to protect human rights.

Historical failures: Rwanda, Bosnia, and the Rohingya

When it comes to failures the UN’s track record includes a list of crises where lives and societies have been destroyed. The 1994 Rwandan genocide, which killed over 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus, occurred despite the presence of UN peacekeepers, with the Security Council refusing intervention due to veto threats. The 1995 Srebrenica massacre, where over 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were killed under UN watch, also exposed the organization’s inability to protect civilians. And the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar, with over 700,000 displaced since 2017, has seen no effective UN response despite ICJ rulings. Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan admitted these failures stem from a lack of political will, a view echoed by genocide scholar Gregory Stanton (founder of Genocide Watch), who blames the UN’s paralysis on an unwillingness by P5 nations to give power to the UN that might end up being used against them at some point.

The human cost and moral imperative

The human toll of the UN’s inaction is staggering. In Gaza, entire family lines have been erased, and communities have been wiped off the map, with hospitals, schools, and homes reduced to rubble. Survivors face starvation and disease orchestrated by Israel, with no safe haven. The psychological trauma on children, who constitute nearly half of Gaza’s population, will reverberate for generations to come. Similarly, in Ukraine, Uyghur camps, and Kashmir, millions suffer under the UN’s gaze, their pleas for justice going unanswered. The UN’s failure to act not only betrays its founding principles but also erodes trust in international institutions, fuelling global instability.

A path forward: Reform or replacement

The UN’s inability to prevent atrocities stems from its structural flaws and lack of enforcement power, which is a direct result of the P5 veto. Reform proposals have included limiting the veto through the 1950 Uniting for Peace resolution, which allows the General Assembly to act when the Security Council is paralyzed. A General Conference under Article 109 could amend the veto system, though P5 resistance makes this challenging. Alternatively, an international police force under the International Criminal Court could execute arrest warrants for atrocity crimes, bypassing Security Council gridlock. Regional organizations, like the African Union or the Organization of American States, could also assume greater responsibility for conflict prevention, reducing reliance on a paralyzed UN.

Without reform, the UN risks becoming a relic, and go the way of the League of Nations. The crisis in Gaza, where the UN has failed to enforce ICJ rulings or protect civilians, underscores this urgency. The international order championed by Western nations lies in tatters, as a direct result of their actions, as the UN stands by while powerful states commit atrocities. To fulfill its promise of preventing war and genocide, the UN must evolve into an institution capable of holding all nations accountable, regardless of their power.

© 2025 The View From Here. © 2025 Fareed Khan. All Rights Reserved.