Latest news with #CarlvonClausewitz
Wall Street Journal
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
Mike Singletary: Courage, Clausewitz and the NFL
In his magnum opus 'On War,' the 19th century Prussian general and military theorist Carl von Clausewitz wrote that the population of a country must be courageous to achieve greatness. Without the strong will of the citizens, everything that follows in his book is irrelevant. I was a strong-willed child despite being short, skinny and sickly with chronic asthma. The doctors knew in utero that my lungs were feeble; I frequented hospital oxygen tents. But I had a vision: I would play in the National Football League. I wrote out my life's goals on a poster and placed it over my bed. Great success demands audacious goals. Audacious goals in turn demand tremendous courage, because people who find them threatening will try to tear them down. When I put my poster on the wall, I didn't know people would take offense. It seemed like my siblings and friends viewed my goal as a shot at them, calling them out for not setting their sights high. They called it stupid and impossible and made personal attacks.
IOL News
11-07-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Double standards, and let's band together to save Southside FM and build a better South Africa
Such double standards applied There are moves afoot to impeach Ayman Odeh, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Knesset known for his principled stands against what Israel is doing in Gaza. Military theorist Carl von Clausewitz said: 'War is the continuation of politics by other means.' It is the obverse vis-a-vis Israel's Knesset, for their parliamentary duties have become the perilous as typically the Jewish lawmakers like the apartheid SA lawmakers acted in a similar fashion, with Helen Suzman one of the few active opponents Prime Minister BJ Vorster's war against anyone who opposed his government. And so in the Knesset, being an opponent to apartheid has led to the continuation of war by other means. What was Odeh's crime? In January 2025, soon after the two-month Gaza ceasefire came into effect, he reportedly tweeted that: 'I am happy about the release of the (Israeli) hostages and (Palestinian)prisoners. From here, both peoples (sic) must be freed from the yoke of the occupation. We were all born free.' Scant attention was paid by the 'only democracy in the Middle East', ignoring the parliamentary legal adviser that impeachment was illegal. Nevertheless, it carried on. It looks like the mask of democracy has slipped as (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) Bibi's minions mimic their Arab cousins (Arabs and Jews bear a similar bloodline). The next move – Supreme Court action? | Saber Ahmed Jazbhay Newlands Band together save Tamil radio station Southside FM faces financial crisis; Icasa gives 3 month ultimatum', highlights a regrettable reality. The Chatsworth community radio station is facing a critical financial crisis that threatens its very existence. This institution has been a cornerstone of community life, providing a platform for local voices. The South Indian community needs to fully support Southside FM. Let's rally together to save our station. Tamil culture has been an important characteristic that embodies our rich cultural heritage. We need your (community) support to preserve our culture for future generations. It's time for a major shake-up and a new chapter. Maybe it's time for the station to seek more additional vibrant board members, the likes of Morgan and Darsen Nadasen, Merebank Tamil School Society, and Professor Gan Moodley to play a crucial role in shaping the station's future. If elected it will have people making significant contributions towards reaffirming Tamil values, as this is important so it can be passed down to the next generation. Let's make it happen. We owe it to ourselves, our community, and future generations to preserve this vital institution. The fate of our radio station reflects our community's values. We need to act now to ensure that Southside FM continues to thrive. It is unfortunate that staff are volunteering. Hats off to the presenters Thashriya Naidoo, Yogambal Singaram, Lalitha Gurukkal, Daeshni Pather, and not forgetting Station Manager Tansen Nepaul and many others who work tirelessly on a voluntary basis, sacrificing their time, energy, and expertise – you will be richly blessed. It is also unfair for these presenters not to be paid. Something has to be done. I love the quote by Elizabeth Andrew that so aptly expresses puts their devotion into context: 'Volunteers do not necessarily have the time, they just have the heart'. | Dhayalan Moodley Mobeni Heights Let's build on this for the good of SA Minister of Basic Education Siviwe Gwarube's announcement of the Safe Schools Programme is a welcome sign of urgency and intent. School safety is a foundational issue – learners cannot thrive in classrooms where violence, fear or instability are the norm. For too long, South Africa's education debate has been weighed down by basic questions of safety, sanitation, infrastructure and attendance. This programme is an important step forward, but let us be clear: Safety is only the beginning, not the end goal. The real crisis in education is not just about safety, but about outcomes – and what those outcomes mean for the future of our economy. We are in the grip of a long-term unemployment crisis, especially among the youth. And while government and civil society focus on interventions to stimulate job creation, too often they ignore the truth: Jobs don't just appear – they are built by entrepreneurs. The question is whether our education system is producing the kinds of learners who will go on to create businesses, innovate products, and grow industries. Right now the answer is no. If we truly want to prepare learners for life beyond the classroom, we must go beyond ensuring safety. We must commit to building schools that nurture entrepreneurial thinking, problem-solving, curiosity and digital fluency, because that's where job creation really begins – not in a policy, but in a classroom that gives every child the confidence and tools to dream big and build boldly. Gwarube has opened the door, now let's walk through it and transform our schools from safe zones into launch pads for a thriving business ecosystem in South Africa. | Nicole Mirkin CEO at Omnia Strategic Counsel & Communications Digging an even deeper hole for itself Israel will only be digging a deeper hole for itself internationally if it proceeds with a plan outlined by its Defence Minister Israel Katz to eventually forcibly relocate the entire Palestinian population to a 'humanitarian city' on the ruins of Rafah in the south of the Gaza Strip, from where they will be unable to leave once relocated. | Eric Palm Gympie, Australia Have we truly lose our critical thinking? If you can create a global crisis, you can promote a global solution, right? Successful and famous businessmen and philanthropists such as Bill Gates, George Soros and Klaus Schwab are masters of making us believe that if we do not agree with them or go along with their sick ideas for a better future, we are the problem. Think of the 2020 Covid Pandemic, so-called global warming and other potentially dangerous, but highly fabricated, man-made dilemmas, such as water or food shortages. They were all designed to make you believe that if we don't do something quickly, or if don't trust the global elites and unelected oligarchs, something terrible will happen if we do not heed their calls. Meanwhile, the opposite is true, but any attempt to discredit these obscenely rich know-it-alls, is drowned out or deemed to be 'misinformation/disinformation. When you hear woke doomsday prophets, such as Greta Thunberg spew garbage about the planet busy dying from too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, Bill Gates warning us of the 'next global pandemic, or Klaus Schwab – whose brainchild is the World Economic Forum – tells you that you will 'own nothing and be happy', you know that its time to start asking some serious questions. How did these unelected bullies get so wealthy, influential and arrogant, and why do we listen to them? When the World Economic Forum suggests that we should start eating crickets and bugs instead of meat, due to rising carbon dioxide levels in the Earth's atmosphere, are we honestly going to believe this rubbish? It's scary that so many people believe these lies and spend 99% of their lives with their heads buried deep in the sand. Can we not think for ourselves anymore? Have we lost the ability to think critically? A big threat to our privacy is the rise of CBDC's, or Central Bank Digital Currencies, and digital ID. Could you imagine the immense power that would be given to any government if we allow them to track our every move and transaction. This is already happening in some parts of the world, such as Scotland and Australia and other first-world countries. | L Oosthuizen Durban DAILY NEWS
Newsweek
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
How Humanitarian Aid Became a Weapon of War
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. At its best, humanitarian aid is a lifeline—keeping civilians alive in war zones, famine-struck regions, and disaster zones. But what happens when that aid, instead of alleviating suffering, ends up prolonging it? Recent history shows that humanitarian assistance, as currently structured by the United Nations and many Western organizations, is too often hijacked by the very actors responsible for the crises it seeks to resolve. Aid, to borrow from Prussian General Carl von Clausewitz, has become a continuation of war by other means. This is not an isolated failure. From Syria to Somalia, Yemen to Gaza, aid diversion is now routine—and too often enabled by the very institutions tasked with preventing it. U.N. agencies and the World Food Program (WFP), in particular, have tolerated systematic abuse of aid pipelines. Worse still, they have consistently downplayed or concealed the extent of the problem, even when their own internal reports document extensive diversion, fraud, and abuse. A Palestinian man walks back through the Netzarim corridor in central Gaza carrying aid parcels received from a U.S.-based aid distribution point set up by the privately-run Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) on June 26, 2025. A Palestinian man walks back through the Netzarim corridor in central Gaza carrying aid parcels received from a U.S.-based aid distribution point set up by the privately-run Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) on June 26, 2025. MOIZ SALHI/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images In Syria, the U.N. allowed the Assad regime to dictate where aid could be delivered—channeling supplies to loyalist areas while blocking opposition zones. In Ethiopia, aid was centralized and diverted to support government troops. A senior aid worker admitted, "It was a perfect environment for aid diversion, and we created it." In Sudan, the regime withheld travel permits to block aid from reaching opposition-held areas. In Somalia, the WFP subcontracted militias to transport aid, enriching warlords who skimmed off profits and allowed only a fraction of supplies to reach refugee camps. Inside those camps, local "gatekeepers" ruled through violence and abuse, delivering what remained to favored groups. In Yemen, the WFP publicly claimed only 1 percent of aid was lost in Houthi-controlled areas. Internal data showed that in Sana'a alone, 60 percent of intended recipients never received anything. In Gaza, the relationship between UNRWA and Hamas has become so symbiotic that 49 percent of UNRWA employees were tied to Hamas. These are not accidental lapses. They are part of a systemic pattern in which oppressive regimes, armed militias, and terrorist organizations use aid strategically—and are quietly accommodated by humanitarian organizations, rather than confronted. The justifications for these arrangements vary, but the logic is always the same: flawed aid is better than no aid. Humanitarian workers—many idealistic and committed—fear that sounding the alarm will end operations altogether. Yet this silence only ensures that the aid continues to empower the very actors responsible for mass suffering. What's especially alarming is how little has changed, despite repeated failures. The mechanisms of diversion have evolved, becoming more sophisticated—employment schemes, militias establishing NGO fronts, financial transfers, inflated contracts—but the U.N. response remains the same: brief suspensions, minor reshuffling, and a return to business as usual. Even when diversion is acknowledged, it is rarely punished. This reflects a deeper contradiction in the humanitarian model itself. The principle of "humanity"—delivering aid no matter what—often overrides the principles of neutrality, independence, and impartiality. But aid is a resource like any other, and in war zones, resources mean leverage, power, and control. The more desperate the population, the more valuable the aid becomes to local power brokers. In reality, most humanitarian operations now maintain covert accommodations with these power brokers. The question is no longer whether diversion exists, but whom it benefits. All too often, the answer is: those perpetuating the conflict. This must change. A principled humanitarian response today requires three things: the willingness to secure distribution through transparent partners (including governments capable of oversight), the readiness to halt aid when diversion persists, and the courage to publicly acknowledge when existing models have failed. Most of all, a principled humanitarian model requires confronting the economic and institutional incentives—within the U.N. and its partner ecosystem—that favor cover-up over accountability. As British academic Alex de Waal has noted, humanitarian aid has become entangled in what he calls an "iron triangle" of Western farmers, shippers, and NGOs whose incentives reward high-profile relief and quick fixes, not long-term prevention or reform. As budgets shrink and donor patience wears thin, humanitarian organizations face an inflection point. To remain credible, they must acknowledge the scale of the problem and abandon the fiction that principled aid delivery is currently the norm. A principled humanitarian model cannot survive by empowering tyrants and terrorists. To serve humanity, aid must cease serving tyranny and terror. Professor Netta Barak-Corren is the Haim H. Cohn chair in human rights, faculty of law, and member of the Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Dr. Jonathan Boxman is a health sciences and quantitative science independent researcher. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
Express Tribune
29-06-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
The Iran-Israel War: lessons learnt & unlearnt
Wars are the continuation of policy by other means. This famous dictum by Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz forms the bedrock of post-industrial modern warfare. Every conflict makes military leaders unlearn some older lessons and learn new ones. However, the 'principles of war' distilled over space and centuries in time, remain unchanged. Any violation of these 'imperatives' costs dearly in time, effort and treasury, besides causing loss of life and limb. The recent 12-day war between Israel and Iran – with the US dragged into the fray at the 11th hour – is instructive, as it has profound geostrategic, political and military implications not only for the belligerents, but also for the region and the world, especially for the militaries like Pakistan Armed Forces. The rundown But first a factual recap. Israel started its air offensive against Iran on June 13, 2025, notching up the ongoing shadow war between the two counties into a full-scale shooting war. For 12 days upto June 25, both sides traded missiles, and drones, with Israel using IAF and inserting commando teams in clandestine operations. Both sides targeted military and industrial sites with civilian population targeted in collateral damage. The stated purpose of Israeli offensive was to destroy Iran's nuclear programme and facilitate regime change, as possible. The US, on Israeli PM Netanyahu's desperate urging joined the war on June 21, 2025, bombing the three Iranian nuclear sites at Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan in a complex attack involving around 125 aircraft, including seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, and one submarine. The US used the heaviest conventional munitions like the 30,000 pounds GBU-57 bunker busting MOP (massive ordnance penetrator), and BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Iran after pre-coordination, retaliated the US bombing by attacking the sprawling Al Udaid US base in Qatar, firing 16 ballistic missiles, most of which were intercepted. On June 24, President Trump announced a complex ceasefire as dramatically as he had entered the war, which after some angry US reactions on violations, still holds. Decoys, covert operations and deception movements were used liberally especially by the US/Israel. Results and implications Iran's Fordow complex, containing around 3,000 sophisticated centrifuges in two enrichment halls, was attacked using the GBU-57s, and is 'severely damaged but not destroyed' as per agreed intelligence assessments, including that of Iran. The IDF-US Combo destroyed the above ground structures, electric supply and underground enrichment centrifuges at Natanz, the largest uranium enrichment facility. The laboratories at Isfahan complex, the storage site for the near bomb-grade nuclear fuel, were also destroyed. Tehran still possesses over 400kg of Uranium, reportedly enriched up to 60 per cent, below the weapons grade enrichment of around 80-90 per cent. This is enough for some nine nuclear bombs. Iran is likely to have stored this enriched Uranium safely elsewhere, and most likely shifted some critical infrastructure to other unknown, undeclared and undetected sites beforehand. So, it is safe to assume that Irani nuclear progamme is mauled, delayed but probably not eliminated. The nuclear programme seems to have survived the strongest possible challenge, and Iran's missiles capability remains intact and able to re-establish deterrence. Geostrategically, Iran's 3H (Hamas, Houthi and Hezbollah) proxies are effectively degraded in the IDF and Mossad's joint military and covert operations. Consequently, Irani military and political influence got a big hit in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. The Sunni crescent seems to have come out stronger. Militarily, the IDF has extensively degraded Iran's air defence system, and left over air power through effective SEAD (Suppression of Enemy AD) operations. It targeted missile sites, launchers and manufacturing facilities. Through clandestine teams using agents, moles within the Irani military and government, Tel Aviv has killed the top leadership of Revolutionary Guards (IRGC or Pasadaran) and other branches of Irani military, and upto a dozen top nuclear scientists and clergy. However, despite this attrition, Ayatollahs remain in power with no immediate threat to their rule and authority for now. Irani people were subjected to intense psy-ops, and propaganda involving pro-Shah expat Irani communities, to rise up against the regime and vacate Tehran during hostilities. However, despite deep fissures, unrest and suppression and faltering economy, Iran seemed to hold its ground during this brief but intense combat. The Middle East (ME) balance of power is altered decidedly away from Iran and tilted towards Israel. This will have implications. For now, Israel seems to be the dominant military power in the ME and is on the roll with the US backing. China and Russia provided diplomatic, political and 'some' military support to Tehran. Türkiye, Qatar, UAE, Egypt and Saudi Arabia played helpful role in the ceasefire and containment of hostilities. COAS Field Marshal Asim, during his recent visit to the US, was reportedly able to persuade President Trump not to use excessive force against Iran, during their unprecedented Oval Office meeting. Lessons unlearnt 'The first lesson 'was'…that nuclear sites are not to be attacked'. Israel's no-holds-barred illegality aside, the unprecedented US attack on another country's nuclear sites sets a new normal by the sole superpower. This could and would be emulated in future conflicts with immense consequences. Nuclear facilities are no longer sacrosanct in a military conflict. Modi's India, following Netanyahu's template, can and might replicate this brazenness. 'Second, technological advantage is guarantee for security'. Unlearnt. Israel emerged neither victorious nor unscathed from the relentless and en-masse Irani hypersonic missile response, that during the last days of the war was able to penetrate Israel's multi-layered AD system, comprising Arrow Missiles, David's Sling and the Iron Dome. This costly AD system (costing some 167 million USD per engagement) was swarmed, saturated and exhausted repeatedly by low-cost Irani drone and missile combos, in layers, wearing it down. 'Third, Israel's effective strategy of 'Escalation Dominance', (that is to disproportionately punish any state or non-state actor committing violence against Israel) will ensure peace and security for Israel'. Unlearnt. Irani drone-missile barrages undermined not only Israel's 'Escalation Dominance' but also its strategy under the Dahiya Doctrine, that involves large-scale destruction of civilian infrastructure, like in Gaza. Dahiya is also called 'domicide' and is employed to pressure foreign governments. Despite being without effective air cover, Iran was able to absorb IDF attacks and sustain its own drone/missile offensive till the very end. The roughly 11 per cent mostly hypersonic ballistic missiles getting through the Israeli AD and hitting electricity grids, refineries, and in some cases, Israeli settlements on occupied lands, caused mass exodus of Jewish settlers. The bunker psychosis, and vanishing sense of security forced many Israelis to flee to other countries, to a not very warm welcome. 'The fourth lesson to be unlearnt is that antisemitism is dead for good'. Conversely, antisemitism spiked to an all-time high and remains so for the 'child killers of Gaza' as IDF and Israeli Government are referred to. The over 600-day wars in Gaza and Iran has left deep scars on the already stressed Israeli state, society, psyche and armed forces. This exhaustion will have socio-psychological implications. 'Fifth, the rule-based international order has no scope for 'rogue' behaviour'. Unlearnt. This conflict validates the age-old dictum of 'might is right', demonstrating that rules, regulations and statutes are only for the weak and voiceless. The strong can trample them with impunity. International organisations like the UN, established for the very purpose of ensuring global peace and security, remain hostage to the powerful. The US vetoes in the UNSC in favour of a genocidal Israel are cases in point. Geostrategic realignment The global chessboard is re-aligned like never before. Israel although bruised and battered by the Iranian onslaught, remains a dominant military power in the ME, for now. Iran will recuperate from its moment of peril and weakness overtime. Iran has undergone a reality check and would be a nuclear power sooner than later. Rationally speaking, it would mend its fractured ties with the Sunni world and avoid nurturing destabilising proxies. It has realised the value of its relationship with Pakistan, and seen the Indian duplicity, given New Delhi's friendship with and support to Israel. Jewish and Zionist causes took a great hit and sympathy towards Jewish people among gentiles is at an all-time low. Israel under BB has greatly damaged the Jewish cause by bringing to limelight the Jewish stranglehold on the US power levers. This is not to the liking of majority of non-Jewish Americans, most of whom comprise Trump's power base. The US attacks on Iran remained conspicuously unpopular within the US, and exacerbated divisions among Americans and among the Europeans, stemming from Israeli conduct and cruelty in Gaza over the last some two years. Russia is likely to be an assertive player with or without China and may push for ingress into Syria, its erstwhile ally. Its tacit support will continue for Tehran. Middle East per se is likely to go towards multipolarity with the US, China and Russian fiefs, especially after America's direct involvement in the war. Political lessons Politically, the war will reverberate into the domestic politics of belligerents. Bibi Netanyahu, for now idolised as 'Mr. Security' by a paranoid Israel, will ultimately have to deal with the more complex question of 'what now' in Gaza and the West Bank in dealing with the hereafter of his genocidal destruction. He or the future Israeli leadership will have to calibrate relations with an Iran that will ultimately be a nuclear power. Iran will have to decide if its proxy power is to stay or otherwise, as it is to the great chagrin of most stake holders in the greater Middle East. Lebanon wants to re-assert its control that was ceded to Hezbollah; Yemen would like to restrain in the Houthis; and Hamas may not die its death but would look for alternative patrons, after the Syrian route for their logistic replenishment is gone. The Sunni crescent would like to see Iran defanged from its interventionist politics and brinkmanship. Military lessons Militarily this war will, heretofore, intensify the race to acquire nuclear weapons globally, hitting at the very basis of non-proliferation. Iran may be restrained for some time, but a nuclear Iran in the mid to long-term is a reality, that Israel will have to live with, with or without the Ayatollahs in power. Physical infrastructure of a nuclear progamme can be destroyed but not the knowledge base. In this case, even the physical infrastructure was not completely taken out, given its impossibility. Destroying Iran's knowledge base by assassinating its scientists is just an act of desperate jitteriness by Israel. Knowledge is non-perishable. Nuclear sites are no more kosher in a shooting war, especially since the sole superpower has set a new normal by participating in attacks on Irani nuclear facilities. This will have lasting implications for America and other nuclear powers especially China and Russia. Pakistan will also need to consider this once unthought scenario in dealing with Modi's India. Asset hardening like in Fordow is the way to go. Small powers like Pakistan, facing larger enemies will have to seriously invest in hardening their aerial, missile and nuclear assets. For nuclear powers, announcement of a clear nuclear policy is a compulsion now to remove any misunderstanding and/or breakdown of conventional deterrence during escalation. Iran will have to come clear on the issue of nuclearisation, civil or military; scale down its revolutionary rhetoric; and deal with its post-nuclear policy. Pakistan must announce its nuclear policy to debunk the strategic thinking among some Indian decision-makers, civil and military, that there is space for a limited punitive conventional conflict with Pakistan, under the nuclear overhang. Escalation control was demonstrated by both Iran and Israel, through limiting their attacks largely to the military targets, agreeing to a ceasefire and re-establish deterrence once military options were not making headway. Iran re-established conventional deterrence through its relentless missile barrages, especially immediately after the US attack, when its longest attack lasted a good 40 minutes. The conflict validated the use of drone and missile technologies by the weaker states, and their socio-psychological impact on the population. Warfare, given the intense involvement of media especially the amok social media, is now a whole-of-the nation affair, not restricted to the military alone. Likewise, as experienced in this conflict, AD with continuous upgradation, acquisition of cutting-edge aircraft, investment in the drone and missile technologies, and strengthening air force are critical, especially for Pakistan now, like never before. Contact ground battle is taking a back seat, especially when belligerents are distant and do not share any land border like Iran and Israel. This may in such cases, gradually diminish the role and importance of services like the Army, and particularly the infantry. This validates greater significance of air force, drones, missiles, electronic warfare, space and cyber capabilities. Pakistani military should need to keep a watchful eye on these domains. For us, following a 'Continental Strategy' would remain vogue, as ground war with India is a lurking possibility. Pakistan would need the dual investment in conventional force structure, as well as niche capabilities, as cited. Our own short skirmish with India in May this year has validated these lessons. Israel's bold and successful manipulation of Irani assets to their great advantage, substantiates the importance of counterintelligence. Insertion of commando teams inside Iran, establishing bases, recruiting agents and moles, assassinations, pager explosions, and induction of cyber tools are some areas where IDF worked very closely with Mossad. Pakistan will have to ensure counterintelligence vis-à-vis India, and strengthen its own intelligence collection and counterintelligence capabilities, using paramilitary, espionage and other assets. One of the glaring weaknesses was Israel's ability to sustain regular AD at home, and aerial onslaught over Iran, due to the dual challenges of geography and logistics. The over 3,000 kms roundtrip to attack Iran needed multiple midair refueling by IAF fighter jets. IAF's limited KC-707 air refuellers fleet curtailed the size of IAF flotilla, making its offensive punch lighter over targets, needing multiple revisits. Non- availability of bunker busting munitions and long-range bombers to carry these over to targets in Iran also limited Israeli options, enhancing its dependence on the US. Over employment of the AD system created munition shortfalls even within the US, allowing more Irani missiles to penetrate through, particularly during the last days of war. Finally, the resolve of leadership, civil and military, is very important. Iran's refusal to surrender; and Netanyahu who mostly followed his gut rather than the advice of World Jewry; remained decisive during various stages of the war. Iran's will to fight, its ingenious employment of drones, and Tehran enhancing the tyranny of its geography for Israel, remained decisive factors. Every major conflict changes the nature of warfare, without affecting the rules and principles of warfare. In geostrategy, Israel was a victim of over-stretch, trying to overcome its demographic and geographic vulnerabilities; just like Iran was a victim of its own over-stretch by raising, mentoring and financing proxies and muddying its ties with stake holders in the region. One hopes, this war leads to some sort of wise accommodation on the core issues like the Palestinian problem, Iran's nuclear programme, and Israel's heartless application of force and America's blind support. Inam ul Haque is a retired Pakistan Army major general who writes on defence, global affairs and political sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@ and his Twitter handle @20_Inam All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the author
Euronews
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Euronews
Is this the UN's last chance to take the right side in history?
"War is the continuation of policy with other means," Carl von Clausewitz's haunting observation has echoed through generations of statesmen, soldiers and scholars. It is not a celebration of violence, but a sober reflection on the nature of power, diplomacy and human conflict. Today, this quote is more than an abstract idea; it is a lens through which we must examine the paralysis of international institutions, particularly the United Nations, in the face of the Iranian nuclear threat, which went unabated for so long. I have always believed in the importance and power of international organisations and have worked closely with UN bodies, participating in efforts that sought to uphold human rights, protect civilians, and foster international cooperation. Like many who grew up in the shadow of World War II, I saw the UN as potentially a moral beacon, a structure built on the ashes of the crematoria, forged by a collective promise: Never Again. Nevertheless, here we are. In 2025, the global Jewish population is finally expected to reach its pre-Holocaust size. That should be a cause for hope, for reflection, and for solemn gratitude. Instead, the Jewish State is left to militarily confront a regime, the Islamic Republic of Iran, that has never tried to hide its desire to annihilate Israel. From its leaders' genocidal rhetoric to its funding of terrorist proxies and pursuit of nuclear weapons, Iran's intentions were never speculative. They are spoken clearly, broadcast openly and carried out violently. Where was the outcry? Where was the moral clarity that once defined the post-war global order? Israel has no aversion to diplomacy, but sometimes diplomacy must follow, not precede, the clear demonstration that Iran cannot and will not achieve its goals. For now, that lesson has to be taught on the battlefield. As enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, 'Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations…' Israel's actions are not acts of aggression; they are acts of lawful self-defence, taken to prevent another 7 October but on a far greater scale, which itself was the first act in this war of aggression by the Islamic Republic and its proxies. Any institution truly committed to peace and security must recognise this right and support it, not condemn it out of fear or political convenience. The world should see in Israel's determination to destroy the Iranian genocidal threat that diplomacy is a tool, not a virtue in itself. It must be wielded strategically, with eyes open. The hard truth is that diplomacy only works when backed by strength, when the other side believes that refusal to compromise carries unacceptable consequences. Without that, negotiations become little more than performance, a charade designed to delay, deflect, and deceive. This is the lesson from Tehran going back decades. This is also a lesson that institutions like the United Nations have tragically forgotten. Where I once placed deep faith in the UN's moral mission, I now watch with a heavy heart as that promise falters. Working for many years with UN institutions, I witnessed the good they can do, but also the growing tendency toward equivocation, toward moral relativism, toward a fear of action against evil, of taking sides, even when the facts scream for judgment. Time and again, the UN settled for diluted resolutions aimed at appeasing the unappeasable - an approach that prioritised false balance over moral clarity. For too long, there had been no unequivocal condemnation of the Iranian regime's threats against Israel. No unambiguous denunciation of its proxies' murderous attacks on civilians. Silence, or, worse, symmetry, dominates the global discourse, as though a liberal democracy defending itself against an existential threat is no different from a theocratic regime calling for genocide. This silence is not neutral. It is a message, and it will not go unnoticed. This moment is not simply about Israel and Iran. It is about whether the world still remembers the moral foundations upon which institutions like the UN were built. If the UN cannot stand against a regime that openly declares its intention to destroy a member state, and a people, then what, exactly, does it stand for? Clausewitz's maxim is not an endorsement of war. It is a warning: when diplomacy loses credibility, war becomes the tool of last resort. The United Nations must ask itself what role it played in this equation. It failed to take a stand against naked aggression and the constant shrill of incitement to genocide. The Israel-Iran conflict is not just another diplomatic crisis. It is a test of the international system's moral spine. The Iranian regime was never made to understand that it could not succeed in its nuclear and annihilationist ambitions. This is perhaps the UN's last opportunity to take the right side in the history of humanity. If it fails now, it risks irrelevance, or worse, complicity. Israel has taught the international community a stinging lesson: for peace to prevail, it must be defended, not only with words, but with resolve and action. Robert Singer is the chairman of the Center for Jewish Impact and the former CEO of World ORT and the World Jewish Congress.
