Calling for a “Zionist Palestinian state” shows Canadian PM is clueless about the history of Palestinian suffering

By framing a Palestinian state as needing to align with Zionism PM Mark Carney implicitly dismisses the legitimacy of Palestinian suffering and aspirations.

  

By Fareed Khan 

  

In a CNN interview at the NATO summit on June 25, 2025, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney ignited a firestorm of controversy in Canada by declaring that peace in the Middle East requires a “Zionist Palestinian state” that recognizes Israel’s right to exist and prosper. This statement, uttered in response to a question from Christiane Amanpour about his vision for a Palestinian state where its indigenous people can live in harmony, is not only profoundly ignorant but also deeply offensive.

 

Carney’s statement reveals a shocking disregard for the history of Palestinian suffering under Zionism and represents a slap in the face to Palestinians, particularly the more than 90% who are Muslim, as well as to the broader Muslim community. 

 

The prime minister's remark is more than a diplomatic misstep, it is an anti-Palestinian and Islamophobic assault on the cause of Palestinian human rights, exacerbating the anger and alienation felt by Palestinian Canadians, Muslims and their allies. Some who have criticized Carney’s statement have said it is irrational in its contradiction. 

 

Zionism, as a political ideology, advocates for the racist concept of a Jews only ethno-state in historic Palestine (similar in concept to white supremacy calling for a whites only Canada), at the expense of indigenous Palestinian rights and Palestinian self-determination. Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, Zionist policies have driven the systematic and brutal dispossession, ethnic cleansing, and oppression of Palestinians, culminating in what many, Holocaust, genocide and human rights scholars, international law experts and human rights organizations have described as an ongoing genocide in Gaza.

 

To suggest that a Palestinian state should adopt the very ideology responsible for their decades of suffering is not only unhinged but also a cruel mockery of their struggle. There have been many remarks on social media deriding Carney’s comment with one comment calling Carney’s comment “hateful”, “bigoted”, “cruel” and “evil”.  While another likened Carney’s remark to telling Blacks in the US South during the Jim Crow era that they should be more like white supremacists if they wanted to live in peace. Clearly Carney’s remark is a nonsensical contradiction that demonstrates a fundamental illiteracy about the history of what Palestinians have endured.

 

Carney’s remark demonstrates a staggering ignorance about Palestinian suffering. For the better part of eight decades Palestinians have endured ethnic cleansing, land theft, military occupation, and systemic violence under Zionist policies. And the Nakba made over 750,000 Palestinians refugees and resulted in tens of thousands murdered at the hands of Zionist terrorist militias.

 

Since October 2023 Israel’s actions—blockades, settlement expansion, military assaults, and crimes against civilians—continue to deny Palestinians their basic rights. In Gaza alone, over 63,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s ongoing genocide, with one Israeli scholar releasing a study which says that more than 377,000 Palestinians are missing—presumed dead, unaccounted for, or buried beneath the rubble of Gaza’s destroyed buildings. A recent Ha’aretz poll also revealed that 47% of Israeli Jews support the extermination of Palestinians in Gaza, and 56% favor the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian citizens within Israel to create a Jews only ethno-state. For Carney to propose that Palestinians embrace Zionism as a prerequisite for peace is to demand that the oppressed ignore the crimes committed against them by their oppressors, a suggestion that is as insulting as it is unrealistic.

 

The reaction from Palestinian Canadians and their allies has been one of visceral anger and betrayal. The National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) condemned Carney’s remarks as “insulting” and contrary to Canada’s stated foreign policy, which ostensibly supports a “sovereign, independent, viable, democratic, and territorially contiguous Palestinian state.” In a detailed thread on X, NCCM argued that Carney’s statement continues a troubling trend of ignoring Israel’s criminal actions in Gaza, which many international bodies now qualify as genocide, including the president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars. Similarly, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) decried Carney’s comments, stating, “In doing so, Carney is asking Palestinians to adopt the political ideology of their oppressors as a pre-condition for self-determination. He is dead wrong.”

 

Carney’s statement is not only anti-Palestinian but also carries Islamophobic undertones, given that over 90% of Palestinians are Muslim. By framing a Palestinian state as needing to align with Zionism—a movement that has been violently antagonistic with regard to Palestinian self-determination—Carney implicitly dismisses the legitimacy of Palestinian suffering and aspirations. This aligns with a broader pattern of Canadian foreign policy that has often sidelined the rights of Muslims. From Canada’s role in the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya to its support for US led sanctions and aggression against Iran, the Canadian government has repeatedly prioritized Western geopolitical interests over the well-being of ordinary Muslims. Carney’s remark reinforces this pattern, signalling to Palestinian Canadians that their government views their struggle through a lens that privileges Israel’s hegemony over their bodies and territories.

 

The Islamophobic undertones of Carney’s statement are particularly galling in light of Canada’s domestic context. Palestinian Canadians, alongside other Muslim communities, have faced rising hate and discrimination for years, but particularly since the escalation of violence in Gaza following October 7, 2023. Carney’s failure to acknowledge this reality, coupled with the offensive comment during his CNN interview,” dismisses the lived experiences of these communities and reinforces the systemic anti-Palestinian bias within the Canadian government.

 

Carney’s statement must be viewed within the broader context of Canada’s foreign policy, which has consistently favoured Israel over Palestinian rights. Canada’s close relationship with Israel—marked by significant financial, military, and diplomatic support—sets it apart from other nations. No other country sees such a steady flow of its citizens joining a foreign military, as Canadians have done with the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF). Ottawa has gone to extraordinary lengths to shield Israel from accountability, from threatening the International Criminal Court over arrest warrants for Israeli leaders to opposing South Africa’s genocide case at the International Court of Justice. The Canadian government has also failed to impose sanctions on the large number of Israeli officials responsible for war crimes, despite mountains of evidence of atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank.

 

Even as Carney has occasionally criticized Israel’s actions—such as calling the suffering in Gaza “intolerable” in a joint G7 statement in May 2025—his government has taken no concrete actions to hold Israel accountable. This inaction stands in stark contrast to Canada’s rhetoric about upholding international law where it concerns Russia’s war against Ukraine. As noted Canadian human rights expert Alex Neve wrote on social media, “Waiting, vacillating, remaining silent and failing or, worse, refusing to act in the face of mounting and incontrovertible evidence of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity can no longer be options for Canada.” Carney’s “Zionist Palestinian state” remark underscores this hypocrisy, revealing a government more concerned with appeasing Israel than with defending Palestinian human rights.

 

Carney’s statement is not an isolated gaffe but a reflection of a deeper anti-Palestinian bias within his government. Despite campaigning as a progressive alternative to the Conservatives, Carney has shown himself to be little different on this issue. His appointment of Marco Mendicino, a Zionist and vocal supporter of Israel, as interim chief of staff further signals his alignment with pro-Israel interests. Palestinian Canadians and their allies are rightly demanding an apology and a course correction. As Jason Toney of CJPME stated, “Carney’s call for a future Palestinian state to be ‘Zionist’ is a step backwards. Such a statement is offensive to the principle of Palestinian self-determination and undermines Canada’s credibility as a fair or credible partner in any future peace process.”

 

To restore trust, Carney must retract his statement and take concrete steps to align Canada’s foreign policy with international law and human rights, of which the government has often claimed to be a defender. This includes imposing sanctions on Israeli political and military leaders, enforcing a comprehensive arms embargo, recognizing the State of Palestine, and supporting international efforts to hold Israel accountable for its actions. Canada must also address the rising tide of anti-Palestinian and Islamophobic sentiment at home, ensuring that Palestinian Canadians and Muslims feel heard and protected.

 

Mark Carney’s “Zionist Palestinian state” comment is a shameful moment, exposing a profound ignorance of Palestinian history and suffering. It is an affront to Palestinian Canadians, whose righteous anger reflects decades of marginalization by a government that protects Israeli criminality rather than standing in defence of Palestinian justice and human rights. By framing peace as contingent on Palestinians embracing the ideology of the of Israel, Carney has not only undermined their right to self-determination but also perpetuated an anti-Palestinian and Islamophobic narrative. It is time for Carney to apologize, listen to the voices of Palestinian Canadians, and commit to a foreign policy that upholds the principles of equality, justice, and international law for all.

  

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

Canadian news media executives must face justice for their complicity in Gaza’s genocide

At Nuremberg Nazi media figures were convicted for inciting genocide against Jews by dehumanizing them. Canadian news executives must also be tried for narratives that dehumanized Palestinians. 

 

By Fareed Khan 

The unrelenting carnage in Gaza, where over 63,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since October 2023, demands accountability not only for those wielding weapons and issuing orders to commit genocide but also for those crafting public narratives that enable such atrocities. Executives at Canadian mainstream media outlets, including CBC, CTV, Global News, and major newspapers like the National Post and the Globe and Mail, bear a profound responsibility for perpetuating a pro-Israel bias that largely obscures Palestinian suffering, sanitizes Israel’s genocidal acts, and suppresses evidence of ongoing atrocities.

A stark example of this media bias is the near-total silence in Canadian and Western news media on a recent Harvard Dataverse report by Israeli academic Yaakov Garb estimating that 377,000 Palestinians are missing—presumed dead, unaccounted for, or buried beneath the rubble of demolished buildings. As well, the media has ignored a survey commissioned in March by Pennsylvania State University and conducted by Israeli scholar Tamir Sorek that was published in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz. It revealed that 82% of Jewish Israelis wanted to ethnically cleanse Gaza, 56% supported ethnically cleansing Israel of Palestinians, and 47% favoured exterminating all Palestinians in Gaza. None of this has been reported in Canadian mainstream media.

 

  

 

Even before October 2023, CBC news executives killed reporter story pitches to cover the 2021 Human Rights Watch report designating Israel an apartheid state, the Sheikh Jarrah evictions in Jerusalem the same year, Israel assassinating Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in 2022, and the Israeli bombing of the Jenin refugee camp in July 2023.

 

These are merely a handful of examples of editorial directives and slanted reporting practices resulting from the decades-long anti-Palestinian framing by these media outlets that aligns disturbingly with Israeli interests and propaganda, that has facilitated the Palestinian genocide. Just as Nazi news media figures were prosecuted at Nuremberg for their complicity in the Holocaust, these Canadian media executives must face trial—whether in Canada or at The Hague—for their part in pushing media narratives that support Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza.

 

Under the 1948 Genocide Convention, genocide encompasses acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. Complicity in genocide, including aiding and abetting through propaganda, is equally punishable. Canadian media’s news coverage of Israel’s atrocities in Gaza reveals a pattern of distortion that meets this threshold. Investigative journalism by independent media sites The Maple and The Breach has exposed how executives and editors at CBC, CTV, and Global News, as well as at the Post Media chain and the Globe and Mail, have enforced a narrative that favours Israel while marginalizing or negating Palestinian voices, effectively endorsing the conditions for genocide.

 

  

 

One of the most insidious practices is the deliberate manipulation of language. Reporters at broadcast and print media outlets have been explicitly instructed to avoid terms like “genocide,” “Palestine,” “horrific,” “brutal,” or “slaughter” when describing Palestinian deaths or Gaza’s destruction by Israel. Instead, Palestinians are described with passive terms like “died” or “dying”, euphemisms that strip agency from Israel’s criminal actions. In contrast, Israeli victims of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack have been described as being “killed,” “murdered,” or “slaughtered,” amplifying their suffering with emotive terminology. This linguistic double standard dehumanizes Palestinians, presenting their deaths as passive and taking place in a vacuum rather than the result of deliberate actions by the Israeli military. Such framing echoes Nazi-era media, which minimized Jewish suffering, or worse, supported Nazi policies, to normalize the Holocaust, a precedent that led to convictions at Nuremberg for propagandists like Julius Streicher.

 

Quantitative analysis further damns Canadian mainstream media. An investigative study by The Breach revealed that CBC’s flagship program, The National, featured 42% more Israeli voices than Palestinian ones in the first month of the Gaza conflict, despite Palestinians suffering seven times more deaths. Similarly, CTV’s National News, Canada’s most-watched news broadcast, consistently prioritized Israeli perspectives, with pro-Israel voices, particularly Israeli government voices, receiving far more airtime and attributions in stories than Palestinian ones, and rarely being challenged by reporters when their statements were questionable. Meanwhile, Global News suppressed critical reporting of Israel, with sources claiming an anchor’s stories exposing Israeli actions were refused airtime. This imbalance is not journalistic oversight but a systemic editorial choice to amplify the government of Israel’s narrative while silencing Palestinian voices as Israel was committing mass murder in Gaza.

 

  

Reporters’ failure to challenge Israeli claims during interviews for mainstream news outlets compounds this bias. Statements by Israeli officials—often riddled with inaccuracies and at times outright lies, such as denying starvation in Gaza or blaming Hamas for Palestinian civilian deaths—were aired without scrutiny or verification. In contrast, Palestinian accounts are often met with skepticism or outright dismissal. For instance, CBC reporters interrupted interviewees over 100 times when they raised allegations of genocide, a tactic rarely applied to Israeli guests. This selective journalistic rigour mirrors the “Palestine exception” in Canadian media, where Israel’s actions are insulated from the critical lens applied to other conflicts. By refusing to question Israeli propaganda, media executives enable a narrative that justifies mass violence, much as news media in Nazi Germany disseminated lies to enable the apathy of the German public towards state persecution of the Jewish population.

 

This bias is not new but rooted in decades of anti-Palestinian racism in Canadian reporting. Coverage of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories since 1967 has consistently framed Palestinians as aggressors and “terrorists” and Israel as a victim defending itself. The 1948 Nakba, when 750,000 Palestinians were expelled and tens of thousands murdered, is rarely mentioned, erasing the historical context of dispossession. Instead, stories emphasize Israel’s “security needs,” ignoring the Apartheid system documented by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the UN. This framing desensitizes audiences to Palestinian suffering, paving the way for acceptance of Gaza’s current catastrophe. As The Maple notes, Canadian media’s refusal to cover polls revealing Jewish Israeli support for extreme policies in Gaza further shields audiences from Israel’s genocidal intent.

 

The legal case for prosecuting Canadian media executives is robust. The Genocide Convention’s Article III(c) criminalizes “direct and public incitement to commit genocide,” while Article III(e) targets complicity. By systematically distorting the reality of Palestinians in Gaza in favour of Israel—downplaying their pain and suffering, amplifying Israeli narratives, and suppressing news about the crimes committed by Israel against Palestinians—news executives aid Israel’s ability to act with impunity and sell the dehumanization of Palestinians to the Canadian public. The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) 2024 provisional measures against Israel, citing plausible genocide, underscore the gravity of such complicity. In addition, Canadian law, incorporating the Convention through the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, allows for domestic prosecution of genocide-related offences. Alternatively, Canadians also have the option of filing complaints against Canadian news executives at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague which has ultimate jurisdiction over cases relating to complicity in genocide, as seen in the arrest warrants it issued for Israeli leaders.

 

Historical precedent supports this. At Nuremberg, media figures like Streicher, publisher of Der Stürmer, were convicted for inciting genocide through propaganda that dehumanized Jews. Hans Fritzsche, a radio propagandist, was tried for shaping public opinion to enable Nazi atrocities. Canadian executives’ actions—directing biased coverage, enforcing anti-Palestinian language, and silencing dissent—parallel these cases. Their influence over public perception, especially in a country with significant diplomatic support for Israel, makes their complicity undeniable.

 

  

Critics may argue that media bias, however egregious, does not constitute legal complicity. Yet propaganda’s role in enabling genocide is well-established. The Rwandan genocide saw radio stations prosecuted for inciting violence through biased narratives. Canadian media’s vast reach—CBC alone commands a $1.68 billion public budget—amplifies its impact. By shaping public and political opinion to tolerate Israel’s actions, news media executives contribute to Canada’s failure to enforce a ceasefire, halt arms exports and uphold international law, further establishing their complicity in genocide.

 

The counterargument that journalists merely report facts ignores the editorial gate keeping exposed by The Breach and The Maple in their investigations. Reporters have faced censorship and even been fired, with CTV’s Bell Media banning the word “Palestine” and CBC disciplining staff for sharing critical journalism on social media. These are not neutral decisions but deliberate efforts to align with Israel’s anti-Palestinian racist narratives. The Maple’s investigation into Post Media’s rewriting of wire stories to favour Israel—replacing “militants” with “terrorists” or omitting “occupied” from Palestinian territories—reveals a broader industry pattern of clear anti-Palestinian racism similar to what Jews faced in Europe in the 1930s. This top-down control implicates executives, producers, and editors not just reporters, in a racist propaganda machine that has contributed to genocide.

 

The human toll in Gaza—potentially over 100,000 children buried under rubble, families starved, hospitals and supposed “safe zones” bombed—demands accountability beyond the battlefield perpetrators, and the Israeli political and military leaders that ordered the genocidal acts. Canadian media executives, by whitewashing Israel’s actions, have blood on their hands, and they are not alone given that this anti-Palestinian prejudice is widespread among Western media outlets. The trial of these media executives, whether in Canada or at The Hague, would send a message—propaganda disguised as news that enables genocide is a crime against humanity.

 

As Nuremberg showed, those who wield pens and microphones to dehumanize and distort are as culpable as those who wield weapons. Justice for Palestinians requires dismantling this infrastructure of complicity, starting in the boardrooms and executive offices of CBC, CTV, Global News, and at the major newspaper outlets that peddle biased news to the Canadian public that enables the most horrific crimes under international law. Failure to do so would contribute to the commission of the ultimate crime, and fracture the foundations of on which justice and our collective humanity have been built.

  

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

US attack on Iran could be a step toward global catastrophe and the beginning of the end of the United Nations

The inability by the UN to rein in aggressor nations mirrors the League of Nations’ failure in 1935, to stop Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia leading to its demise.

  

By Fareed Khan 

       

On June 21, 2025, American president Donald Trump ordered a military strike on Iran, targeting its nuclear facilities and military infrastructure. This unprovoked act of aggression, following Israel’s earlier attacks, not only escalates tensions in the Middle East but also signals the potential collapse of the United Nations as a credible enforcer of international law. The UN, already weakened by decades of inaction in the face of global atrocities by state actors, now faces a crisis reminiscent of the League of Nations’ failure in 1930s, when Japan invaded and conquered Manchuria in 1932, and when Italy invaded Abyssinia (Ethiopia) in 1935, exposing its impotence.

 

 

In the face of the global community’s inability to stop the US or Israel from attacking Iran further this could light the fuse for a broader conflict, destabilizing the entire region, and potentially leading to global war. It is up to nations committed to the rule of law—particularly Western democracies—to condemn this naked aggression against a nation that posed no imminent threat to the US or Israel. Moreover, this aggression underscores a troubling pattern where the US consistently targets adversary nations unable to match its military might whey they allegedly violate international law, while shying away from confronting powerful adversaries like Russia which has invaded and occupied parts of Ukraine. Under Trump, and with this attack, the US has provided more evidence that it is a rogue nation, posing the greatest threat to global peace.

 

The UN has long struggled to uphold its mandate to maintain international peace and security. Established in 1945 to prevent the horrors of another global war, the UN’s effectiveness has been hamstrung by the veto power of the five permanent Security Council members: the US, Russia, China, the UK, and France. This structural flaw has rendered the UN a toothless tiger, incapable of acting decisively against powerful aggressors. From the Kashmir conflict between Indian and Pakistan, Israel’s decades-long violations of Palestinian rights to the Rwandan genocide, the Balkans conflict, the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the ongoing crises involving the Rohingya and Uyghurs, the UN has consistently failed to enforce the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Genocide Convention or the Geneva Conventions. Nations and their leaders which have committed crimes under international law have literally gotten away with murder.

The US strike on Iran is a stark reminder of this impotence, and how seriously broken the so-called international legal order is. Iran had already called for a UN Security Council session to address this blatant violation of its sovereignty as a result of Israel’s attacks, and threats by the US to join Israel’s unprovoked war. But had the meeting taken place it is more than likely that the US would have vetoed any resolution that would have advocated for peace and a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. This inability by the UN to rein in aggressor nations mirrors the League of Nations’ failure in 1935, when Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia faced only token sanctions, exposing the League’s inability to enforce international law. The League’s collapse soon followed, and the UN is now heading towards that same cliff. It may not happen tomorrow but the drift of the UN towards such an end is evident. A post on X by UN Secretary General Antonio Gutterres, condemned the US strike as a “dangerous escalation” and a “direct threat to peace and security, and urged diplomacy, underscoring the organization’s desperation to stay relevant. Yet, without the ability to hold veto-wielding nations accountable, the UN’s credibility as a guarantor of global stability is crumbling as the great powers ignore its pleas for peace and do as they please, with little regard for diplomacy or peace.

The justification for the US and Israeli attacks on Iran—allegedly to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons—lacks credibility. US intelligence officials have stated as recently as last week that Iran is not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon—an assessment that Trump has ignored. Iran has consistently maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, a right it holds under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Israel (an illegal nuclear nation), notably, is not a party. The Israeli strikes, followed by US involvement, appear less about neutralizing a genuine threat and more about advancing Israel’s agenda of becoming the supreme military power in the region, and undercut Iran’s support for the Palestinian resistance movement, which is the strongest among Middle-East nations.

Academic and media analyses reinforces this view. Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute has argued that Iran poses no existential threat to Israel, and any US attack would be driven by Israel’s desire to cripple a regional rival that vocally opposes its policies toward Palestinians. The Atlantic Council notes that Israel’s strikes were motivated by a narrow window of opportunity to target Iran’s nuclear program, not by an imminent threat. This suggests a premeditated act of aggression by Israel rather than a defensive necessity, undermining claims that Iran was an immediate danger to regional peace.

Far from enhancing security, the US and Israeli attacks on Iran risk plunging the Middle East into further chaos. Iran’s retaliatory missile and drone strikes on Israel, which have killed civilians and damaged infrastructure, demonstrate the potential for escalation. The conflict threatens critical global trade routes, such as the Strait of Hormuz, through which half of China’s oil imports pass. Iran’s weakened but still capable military, combined with its proxy forces, could target US bases or shipping lanes, drawing the US into a protracted conflict that will drain its treasury and weaken the US further.

The precedent set by US interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya suggests that such actions often lead to unintended consequences—failed states, refugee crises, and the rise of extremist groups. A destabilized Iran could trigger a regional power vacuum, fuelling civil war or enabling terrorist groups to seize nuclear materials, and create a refugee crisis on par with the Syrian crisis in the early 2010s. The US attack, far from neutralizing a threat, has heightened the risk of a broader regional conflict, with ripple effects that could destabilize surrounding nations, the way that Syria was destabilized as a result of the Iraq War.

The US has a long history of targeting adversary nations unable to match its military might, while avoiding direct confrontation with more formidable adversaries. Iran, despite its regional influence, lacks the capacity to challenge US military dominance directly, making it an easy target. In contrast, the US has refrained from military engagement with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, despite Russia’s clear violation of international law. Trump’s cancellation of a planned meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on June 17, 2025 at the G7 Summit, to focus on the Iran conflict highlights this selective approach. If the US truly prioritized enforcing global peace, it would have confronted Russia’s aggression head-on with military force, rather than targeting a nation like Iran, which has not invaded or occupied another country in modern history.

This pattern of selective aggression—attacking weaker states like Iraq, Libya, and now Iran, while avoiding peer adversaries—exposes the US as a global bully and a rogue nation. The 2003 invasion of Iraq, justified by lies about weapons of mass destruction, resulted in more than a million deaths, a destabilized region, the creation of ISIS, increased incidents of terrorism, and failed to enhance US security. Similarly, the US intervention in Libya in 2011 led to a failed state and a proliferation of arms to terrorist groups, undermining global stability. These actions demonstrate that American aggression, far from making the US safer, often exacerbates threats and fuels anti-American and anti-Western sentiment.

Under Donald Trump, the US has embraced a reckless foreign policy that prioritizes unilateral action over diplomacy. Trump’s bellicose rhetoric, including threats to “take out” Iran’s Supreme Leader and demands for “unconditional surrender,” reflects a delusional and dangerous disregard for international norms. His decision to attack Iran, despite ongoing nuclear negotiations, undermines the diplomatic efforts of US allies and shows the world that the US is a danger to its adversaries as well as its allies. Trump’s apparent yearning for an era when imperialism ruled the world is likely to cause other nations to see it as a danger to global peace and will accelerate US decline as a global power.

The United State’s actions under Trump mirror those of a rogue nation, launching unprovoked attacks, flouting international law and destabilizing peace and the global order. By aligning closely with Israel, another state accused of violating international norms, the US has eroded its already diminishing moral authority. The failure of US allies—particularly NATO members—to condemn this unprovoked aggression risks legitimizing a global order of might-makes-right. If these nations do not act to uphold the rule of law, they will be complicit in the erosion of the international legal order and the potential slide towards a conflict that could engulf nations around the world.

The American attack on Iran could be the spark that ignites a broader war. Russia, a key Iranian ally, has warned that the conflict risks a “nuclear catastrophe,” while China, reliant on Iranian oil, faces significant economic disruption, and could act to protect its economic interests. In addition, the involvement of regional actors, such as the Houthis, who have threatened to target ships in the Red Sea or Hezbollah, could escalate the conflict further. If Iran retaliates against US bases or allies, the cycle of escalation could knock over other dominoes, draw in other major powers, and result in a global conflagration.

The UN’s inability to act decisively, coupled with the unilateral aggression by the US sets a dangerous precedent. Nations like China, North Korea, or India, emboldened by the collapse of international norms, may pursue their own aggressive ambitions—China against Taiwan, North Korea against South Korea and Japan, and India against Pakistan—further destabilizing the global order. The failure to hold the US accountable could mark the beginning of the end for the UN, just as the League of Nations dissolved in the face of unchecked aggression by Japan, Italy and Nazi Germany.

The international community, particularly US allies, must condemn this act of aggression and demand accountability. The UK, France, Russia and China, as veto holding members of the UN Security Council, along with the 10 non-permanent UNSC members should push for sanctions against US officials involved in the strike, even if a US veto renders such efforts symbolic. Failure to act will embolden further violations of international law, paving the way for a world where aggression will become the norm between adversarial nations, and make meaningless the few rules that maintain an uneasy global peace. The US attack on Iran is not just a regional crisis, it is a global warning. If the rule of law is to survive, nations (including US allies) must unite to reject this dangerous rogue behaviour and chart a path towards diplomacy leading to peace.

  

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

Unprovoked attack on Iran shows Israel to be a rogue, terrorist state violating international laws with impunity

The world stands at a crossroads. Allowing Israel to continue its aggressive wars and genocidal campaign threatens the survival of international law and global peace. Military intervention by a UN-led coalition is urgent to halt Israel’s criminal actions . . .

 
By Fareed Khan

In launching an unprovoked attack on Iran under the flimsy pretext of "self-defence," Israel has not only escalated tensions in an already volatile region of the world, but has also inflicted irreparable damage to the international legal order. 

By launching air raids on Iran, that have killed over 400 Iranians to date (mostly civilians) and injured 654, and committing genocide in Gaza for more than 18 months, Israel has exposed itself as a rogue, terrorist state without parallel. The only path to a safer Middle East lies in decisive international military intervention to halt Israel’s  unprovoked wars against neighbouring nations, its genocidal campaign against Palestinians, and to dismantle its ethno-supremacist state apparatus, just as Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were dismantled post-World War II.  Israel needs to be reconstituted as a state free of the supremacist ideology of Zionism if Palestinians and citizens of neighbouring Muslim nations are ever to feel safe. 

Furthermore, for the sake of justice for the Palestinians slaughtered by Israel, every Israeli political leader, military commander, soldier, and pilot complicit in the genocide of Palestinians since October 2023 must face trial for their criminal acts and complicity in those acts at the International Criminal Court (ICC), or in states such as Denmark, Norway, Finland or Sweden, which rank highest on the World Justice Project’s rankings of nations with the most impartial and unbiased legal systems, given the limited resources of the ICC. The global community must act swiftly to restore the principles of international law and ensure justice for the victims of Israel’s unrelenting aggression.

Israel’s claim of "self-defence" in its pre-emptive strike on Iran is a grotesque distortion of international law. The Geneva Conventions and Article 51 of the UN Charter affirm a nation’s right to defend itself when under attack, but Israel’s actions invert this principle. As critical analyses have noted, Israel’s strike was not a response to an Iranian assault but a calculated act of aggression designed to provoke and destabilize. 

Iran, despite its unsavoury regime, has not launched wars of aggression against its neighbours, occupied their territories, or committed genocide. Additionally, unlike Israel, which possesses an arsenal of an estimated 90–400 illegal nuclear warheads, Iran’s nuclear program remains under stringent international scrutiny and for now complies with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The hypocrisy is glaring. Israel, armed with undeclared nuclear weapons, accuses Iran of posing a nuclear threat and commits an act of aggression, while Western powers grant it impunity and blame the victim of Israel's aggression. This double standard not only undermines the credibility of international law but also emboldens other states to flout it given Israel's example.

Israel’s history reveals a pattern of aggression that systematically violates international norms. Since its founding, it has occupied Palestinian territories, committed crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, annexed the Golan Heights from Syria, and conducted airstrikes in Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and now Iran with impunity. Its ongoing campaign in Gaza, described by UN experts and human rights organizations as genocidal, has killed over 63,000 Palestinians as of the middle of June 2025, displaced millions, and reduced entire neighbourhoods in Gaza to rubble. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued provisional measures in 2024 demanding Israel cease actions that could constitute genocide, yet Israel ignores the ICJ, emboldened by Western, particularly American, support. The blockade of Gaza, restricting food, water, and medical supplies, has been condemned as collective punishment, which is a war crime under the Geneva Convention. Israel’s actions are not those of a state led by sane leaders upholding the rule of law but that of a rogue actor led by criminals who are demolishing it, and setting a dangerous precedent for global stability.

The extremist leadership driving Israel’s policies exacerbates the current crisis. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich represent a theocratic-nationalist cabal whose ideologies mirror the violent ethno-nationalism of history’s darkest regimes. Ben-Gvir, once deemed too radical for Israel’s military, idolizes Baruch Goldstein, who massacred 29 Palestinians in a Hebron mosque in 1994. He once celebrated the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for negotiating peace with Palestinians. Smotrich, a self-proclaimed "fascist homophobe," has incited settler violence that has killed and displaced thousands in the West Bank since October 2023. These Israeli politicians, backed by Western military aid, are orchestrating policies of mass starvation, indiscriminate bombing, and civilian slaughter. Their actions echo the genocidal campaigns of Nazi Germany, which the world vowed never to allow again. Yet, Western media often sanitizes the extremism of Israeli leaders, focusing instead on Palestinian groups like Hamas, or on Iran’s flaws to justify Israel’s aggression.

The comparison to Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan is legitimate given the racist decisions and policies of Israeli leaders for decades, which mimic the racist policies of those two fascist regimes. Israel’s racist Nation-State Law, passed in 2018, was the latest anti-Palestinian law that privileges Jewish citizens over non-Jews within the territories Israel controls, and codifies a state ideology of Jewish supremacy akin to the racial hierarchies seen in fascist regimes. As with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, Israel’s policies of exclusion, occupation, and extermination of "the other" are driven by an ethno-nationalist vision that dehumanizes its victims. As victors post-World War II, the Allies dismantled their fascist adversaries, denazified Germany, and demilitarized Japan to ensure they could never again threaten global peace. 

A similar reckoning is required for Israel given its criminal history and acts of state terrorism. The international community must intervene militarily under a UN-led coalition to halt Israel’s genocide of Palestinians, disarm its illegal nuclear arsenal, and oversee the reconstitution of a state based on equality, not ethnic supremacy. This is not a call for destruction but for transformation, ensuring justice for occupied Palestinians, Arabs in neighbouring nations, Iranians, and all victims of Israel’s aggression.

Individuals also must be held accountable for their criminal actions. Every Israeli leader, from Netanyahu to Smotrich, all members of the Israeli cabinet, every military commander ordering attacks on civilians, and every soldier or pilot executing these orders must face charges of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity. In addition, those who implemented the policy of starvation of Gaza's inhabitants by withholding vital food and humanitarian aid shipments must also face justice.  The ICC’s 2024 arrest warrants for certain Israeli officials are a step toward that, but they must be expanded to include all complicit actors, and possibly leaders of Western nations that sold weapons to Israel which were then used in the Gaza genocide or in the attacks on Iran. 

Historical precedent supports this. Nazi officials, both military and civilian, faced trial at Nuremberg, and Japanese leaders were prosecuted in Tokyo after World War 2. Israel’s perpetrators cannot be exempt from being charged and tried for their crimes. The unprovoked and indiscriminate attack on Iran which killed hundreds of civilians constitutes a clear violation of the UN Charter, and the deliberate targeting of Palestinian civilians, including children, medics, and journalists is a violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention, which defines genocide as acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, or religious group.

Western complicity in Israel’s crimes compounds the damage to international law. The United States, Canada, the United Kingdom Germany, and others Israeli allies reflexively parrot Israel’s "right to defend itself" argument while ignoring its violations of international law. When Russia invaded Ukraine citing "national security," the West rightly condemned it as aggression, imposing sanctions and isolating Moscow. Yet Israel’s identical pretext for attacking Iran is met with silence or support, and if there is criticism it is mere political platitudes. This double standard erodes the principles of sovereignty and non-aggression that underpin global stability. By shielding Israel, the West undermines the very legal order it claims to champion, inviting other states to unilaterally commit acts of aggression with impunity to solve political conflicts.

Iran, while no model of global virtue, does not even compare to Israel’s record of aggression. Its government represses dissent, restricts women’s rights, and surveils minorities, but it has not invaded its neighbours, occupied them, or committed genocide. Iran’s Jewish community, numbering around 10,000, enjoys constitutional protections, operates over a dozen synagogues in Tehran alone, and holds a reserved parliamentary seat—facts that belie Israel’s portrayal of Iran as inherently anti-Semitic. Iran’s comparative restraint in the face of Israeli provocations, including assassinations of its scientists and military leaders, and sabotage of its nuclear facilities, contrasts sharply with Israel’s record of belligerence against anyone it perceives as an enemy. The West’s selective outrage, fixating on Iran’s flaws while ignoring Israel’s extremism, exposes a campaign to manufacture consent for war, reminiscent of the fear-mongering that led to the Iraq invasion, which killed millions, destabilized the region, and birthed more terrorism.

The consequences of Israel’s actions will ripple beyond the Middle East. Its consistent defiance of international law emboldens other states to act unilaterally, risking global chaos. Rising oil prices, economic instability, and strengthened hardliners in Iran are a few of the predictable outcomes of Israel’s aggression, some of which will burden ordinary citizens worldwide. Additionally, silencing critics with unfounded accusations of antisemitism because they criticize Israel violates the principles of free speech, stifles legitimate debate, fuels actual antisemitism, and shields Israel from being held accountable for its crimes. As one op-ed powerfully noted, exploiting the Holocaust to justify present-day horrors is not remembrance but manipulation. The memory of past atrocities should compel action to stop current ones, not serve as a shield for impunity.

The world stands at a crossroads. Allowing Israel to continue its aggressive wars against its neighbours and its genocidal campaign against Palestinians threatens the survival of international law and global peace. Military intervention by a UN-led coalition is urgent to halt Israel’s criminal actions, protect civilians, and enforce compliance with the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, UN Security Council resolutions and the Genocide Convention. Dismantling Israel’s supremacist framework and reconstituting it as an inclusive state that represents all its citizens is the only path to lasting justice. Prosecuting those responsible for the Gaza genocide will signal that no state, no matter how powerful, is above the law. The time for equivocation is over. Israel’s rogue status demands a response as resolute as that against history’s worst aggressors. The international community must act to restore the legal order it claims to uphold, ensuring a world where no state can cloak genocide and aggression in the language of self-defence.

 

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

West's inaction to stop Gaza genocide will fuel more extremist acts like the one's in the US

People horrified by images of baby’s bodies blown-apart and an obliterated society will act—some with words, others with protests, and a few, tragically, with violence. The West’s refusal to stop Israel’s genocide ensures more such acts, each a stain on the conscience of nations that could have acted but didn’t.

 

By Fareed Khan

The violent attack on Jewish protesters in Colorado Springs by an Egyptian national, illegally in the US, targeting those calling for the release of hostages held by Hamas, was a predictable tragedy. Similarly, the shooting of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington DC, underscores a growing danger. These acts of violence are direct consequences of the West’s failure to confront Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, a failure that not only enables atrocities but also fuels global extremism and instability.

For 19 months, Israel’s brutal military assault on Gaza—marked by the slaughter of more than 63,000 Palestinians—has obliterated entire communities, and imposed deliberate starvation on a defenceless population. This genocide, broadcast in real time for more than 600 days, is enabled by Western governments that claim to champion the “international legal order” yet refuse to take meaningful action. By shielding Israel from accountability, the United States, Canada, and the European Union are complicit in crimes that echo the horrors of the Nazi era. This inaction is not neutrality—it is collusion, and it risks igniting further extremist acts like those in Colorado Springs and Washington DC.

John F. Kennedy’s warning, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable,” resonates with chilling clarity today. By ignoring millions demanding justice for Israel’s violations of the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Genocide Convention, the Geneva Conventions, and the Hague Conventions, Western governments are sowing seeds of radicalization. The Colorado Springs and Washington DC, attacks are symptoms of their failure to do the right thing. Images of Palestinian children dismembered, families buried under rubble, and neighborhoods reduced to dust are not fiction—they are a daily livestreams of horrors seared into the global consciousness. When a rogue, terrorist state, backed by Western allies, bombs infants, shoots refugees, and starves civilians while defying international law, it creates a pressure cooker of seething anger among those who identify with the victims. The math is simple, unrelenting injustice breeds extremism. That more such attacks haven’t occurred over the past 19 months is shocking, and without Western intervention to halt Israel’s genocidal crimes, more such extremist acts are likely.

No one should face violence for exercising their right to protest, whether Jewish activists demanding the release of hostages or Palestinians and their allies calling for an end to the Gaza genocide. Yet, Western hypocrisy has been staggering. Governments have condemned attacks like those in Colorado Springs and Washington, DC, while funneling billions in military aid to a regime that has killed tens of thousands, razed schools and hospitals, and imposed a starvation campaign that makes a mockery of the concepts of human rights. In the US and Germany, pro-Palestinian protesters have also faced repression, with some jailed without charge. This is not governance—it is criminal negligence, betraying the very treaties Western nations claim to uphold, from the Geneva Conventions protecting civilians to the Hague Conventions demanding accountability.

The genocide in Gaza is a global cancer, endangering Jews worldwide by associating them with Israel’s crimes. From the Latino man who shot at Israeli Embassy staffers to US Airman Aaron Bushnell, who self-immolated in a protest outside the Israeli Embassy, to Israeli tourists harassed in some Asian countries—these are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a world pushing back against Western governments that refuse to act to stop the genocide. Israel’s actions, enabled by Western inaction, are a spark for global unrest, inflaming passions which could destroy the international legal order that has maintained global peace for more than 75 years.

Western leaders, including Canada’s, who lecture about the “rules-based order,” are complicit in this crisis. The UN Charter, demanding respect for sovereignty and human rights, is ignored as Israel occupies and destroys with impunity. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is meaningless when Palestinian lives are deemed worthless. The Genocide Convention, born from the Holocaust, is mocked as Israel’s leaders celebrate mass murder. The Geneva Conventions are violated as hospitals are bombed and aid blocked. The Hague Conventions are reduced to empty promises as the West shields Israel from the consequences of its crimes. This is not a policy failure—it is a crime in itself. The US, Canada, and their allies are active accomplices, arming and funding a regime that is committing genocide. Their refusal to demand a ceasefire, impose sanctions, or pursue prosecutions at the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice prioritizes geopolitics over human lives and basic humanity. Every bomb dropped on Gaza, every starved child, carries the West’s approval, fueling a rage that pushes some to desperate, inexcusable acts of violence.

The Colorado Springs and Washington DC, attacks are warnings. When governments dismiss peaceful protests, ignore petitions, and vilify dissenters, they create a space where frustration festers. Kennedy’s warning about violent revolution reflects human nature.  People horrified by images of baby’s bodies blown-apart and an obliterated society will act—some with words, others with protests, and a few, tragically, with violence. The West’s refusal to stop Israel’s genocide ensures more such acts, each a stain on the conscience of nations that could have acted but didn’t.

To break this cycle, the genocide must end. Israel’s political and military leaders who ordered the genocidal crimes, and the soldiers and pilots who committed them, must face accountability at the Hague. The West must enforce international law with an immediate ceasefire and impose wide ranging sanctions on Israel. Anything less betrays the principles of justice these nations claim to uphold. The attacks in the US are linked to the West’s moral bankruptcy, failing not only Palestinians but their own citizens and values. By enabling Israel’s genocide, they have lit the fuse for more extremist violence. The question is not if more incidents will occur, but when.  And when the next incident does happen the blood of the victims will be on the hands of Western leaders who chose to do nothing as innocent Palestinians were slaughtered.

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

Israel is a rogue, terrorist state enabled by Western complicity

Israel’s history of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide in Gaza has increasingly isolated it, even among some of its Western supporters.
 
By Fareed Khan
 
Since its founding in 1948, Israel has pursued policies against Palestinians that constitute severe violations of international law, including apartheid, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. From the Nakba to the ongoing devastation in Gaza, Israel’s actions, enabled by unwavering Western support, reveal a state operating beyond the bounds of legality and morality.

The Nakba, during Israel’s establishment in 1947–1948, marked the beginning of Israel’s crimes. Zionist, terrorist militias, such as Haganah, Irgun, and Lehi, orchestrated violent campaigns, ethnically cleansing over 750,000 Palestinians and destroying hundreds of 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 were slaughtered, and Yitzhak Shamir, who endorsed assassinations, later became Israeli prime ministers. Their actions, constituting war crimes and crimes against humanity under modern standards, set a precedent for Israel’s impunity.

Upon joining the United Nations in 1949, Israel pledged to honour UN Resolution 194, guaranteeing Palestinian refugees the right to return or receive compensation. Yet, for over 75 years, Israel has violated this commitment. The 1950 Absentee Property Law facilitated the confiscation of Palestinian properties, and by 1952, according to Israeli archives, over 400 villages had been depopulated or destroyed, with refugees barred from returning, in defiance of international law. This betrayal underscores Israel’s disregard for its UN obligations, which has been the case since it joined the international body.

Israel’s violations extend beyond the Nakba. The state has consistently flouted the Geneva Conventions through collective punishment, home demolitions, and settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza.

The Hague Conventions, prohibiting land appropriation in occupied territories, are violated by Israel’s annexation and construction of Jewish-only settlements, undermining the viability of a two-state solution.

The UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force is disregarded through Israel’s military assaults on Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria. Over 40 UN Security Council resolutions condemning Israel’s actions have been ignored, often shielded by US vetoes.

Israel’s apartheid system, as documented by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, mocks the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Palestinian citizens of Israel face systemic discrimination, while occupied Palestinians live under military law, unlike Jewish settlers who enjoy civilian protections.

The ongoing Gaza campaign, described by UN experts and genocide scholars as genocidal, has killed over 61,000 Palestinians since October 2023, predominantly civilians, and systematically destroyed healthcare, education, and civilian infrastructure. Israel’s weaponization of food and aid, causing famine and starvation, also violates the 1948 Genocide Convention, and is in violation of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) provisional orders to prevent genocide.

Western powers, particularly the United States, bear significant responsibility for enabling these violations. The US has provided over $150 billion in military aid since 1948, including munitions used in Gaza. The UK, France, and Germany have supplied weapons and diplomatic cover, often vetoing or abstaining on UN resolutions seeking accountability. This support has emboldened Israel to ignore UN resolutions and ICJ rulings, implicating these nations in violations of the Genocide Convention for failing to prevent or punish such acts.

This complicity exposes the fragility of the post-World War II international legal order. The US and its allies selectively enforce international law, condemning adversaries while excusing Israel’s transgressions. This double standard undermines the credibility of institutions like the UN, revealing a system where geopolitical agendas overshadow justice. The failure to hold Israel accountable demonstrates that international law often serves the powerful, allowing a rogue state to act with impunity.

Israel’s policies stem from Zionism, a racist ideology proclaiming Jews as "the chosen people, that prioritizes Jewish claims to Palestinian land, and dehumanizes Palestinians who are seen as obstacles to a Jews only state. Public statements by Zionist leaders, from Theodor Herzl to modern officials, label Palestinians as “terrorists,” echoing supremacist ideologies like Nazism. Policies of ethnic cleansing, segregation, and mass killing reflect this racist doctrine, rendering Zionism incompatible with the concept of universal human rights.

Western support for Israel is further underpinned by xenophobic attitudes toward Palestinians, Muslims, and Arabs within Western media, which often portrays Palestinians as inherently violent, all the while ignoring their dispossession and oppression. This bias, coupled with a deeply embedded Islamophobia, allows Western governments to justify arming Israel while dismissing Palestinian calls for justice. Without this support, Israel’s ability to sustain its occupation and violence would likely have faltered, enabling accountability decades ago.

Israel’s history of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide in Gaza has increasingly isolated it, even among some of its Western supporters. Global protests and boycott movements signal growing condemnation and isolation, and this will lead to Israel and the nations supporting it being judged harshly in the history books. The mass murder and genocide of Palestinians, facilitated by Western complicity, will be seen as the a moral failure of our era, just as the Holocaust is seen as the moral failure of an earlier time.

If there is to be justice for Palestinians it requires dismantling the structures sustaining Israel’s race-based policies, akin to the reconstitution of fascist Japan and Nazi Germany into democratic states. This begins with ending Western military and diplomatic support for a state that has violated its UN commitments, the Geneva, Hague, and Vienna Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Genocide Convention.

Global momentum for Palestinian justice is growing, particularly among non-Western nations and the Global South. History will likely affirm that Zionism, like Nazism, is a racist ideology, and Israel’s legacy, alongside that of its Western enablers, will be one of shame for perpetuating crimes against a people whose only wish has been to seek freedom and equality, a people who it can be reasonably said, are the most oppressed people in the world.

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