Ceasefire-a case study in the failure of two of my principals
On Friday as I left the office, I left it having penned down a couple of lines. Abstracts that read ceasefire. In books and discussion, the idea of ceasefire means shooting stops. The very essence of the lexicon of the word. However, in real life apparently, this doesn’t apply. I read somewhere, perhaps an essay question-paraphrased to read “ does language dictate reality”. This perhaps is the answer to that question. A simplistic no. That Friday as I left the office, I smiled. I thought that soon people might once again return to building their lives.
The weekend was fraught with activities. Also, perhaps naively, but in escapist fashion, I refuse to read or keep up with the news over the weekends. (this rule does not extend to football and the Sunday comics.) Imagine than the startling manner in which I responded, when I found out that both Hamas and Israel had decided to defy the ceasefire.
In a manner I was angry. Angry in a poorly oriented manner. My thoughts were a mess and my anger seemed confused at best. I asked, and I still ask. What are International organisations such as the UN for? If any country/ government can just push aside the voice of the international community. Its happened before. With the US, its easier to understand-whether I agree or otherwise, the voice of power always rings clearer than all others. However, in this instance its a very much more complex situation. There is a government hardly competent of managing its country, than there is a military power backed by the States. I shan’t try to rationalise it. Its been done by people far more equipped than I.
Its with more than a tinge of moroseness that I come to believe that the problem is with the abject difference between reality and the intellectual sphere that “plays at governance of the actual transpiring of the world”. In having not lived in any place close to modest discomfort or maniacal regimes. All dealings of mine in Foreign Affairs is purely theoretical. I live in a Country in which politics is an engineering project- the results pretty much within limits and the objectives (perimetres) set. So, I cannot relate to the people who fight for their country or die for the political cause of some warped ideology. I have the benefit and privilege of distance and hence a seat of theory and rationality. (I hesitate to say a seat of neutrality) In this context, I read ceasefire, I read UN- I expect to come to an office on Monday, to read on the CNN or BBC that Israel is sending construction aid to the Gaza. I’ve read a few essays on how the issue can be resolved. (such as this) I see how it all seems so possible that peace can actually be just a phone call away and a couple more meetings. What however is left unconsidered, is that the human will and perhaps a collective enshrouded vision can leave all this unread or un-acted upon.
It leaves me thinking- what good is academia if it fails to influence? To this I perhaps know the answer. Although in current times, the answer seems inadequate. The presumption being inaccurate-for influence need not be direct. There is a second thought that is brought forward, the loose usage of Hamas to mean terrorist organisation. I find this mostly disturbing. Firstly, because it was a legitimately elected government, and because secondly it is used as I have used it, to parallel “Israel”. There is an incongruity. In that one is a government and the other a country. The usage of Hamas to refer to the Gaza Strip is disturbing, because it brings with it much negative connotations. People think of the plight of the Palestinians when “Gaza” is used. But with Hamas they are inclined towards disgust. I think what is disturbing is that this distinction is hardly made in most literature.
It seems than, in this instance, the failure of the two nations to subscribe to the International will, has brought up for me, a failure in the intellect, through a lack of critical application of information and of the lack of influence it seems to harbour; and the failure of the human conscience, in that the will of these nations (as represented by their leaders-or through a lack of influence by the general voice of the people on their leaders-another failure of democracy in my view) have been so easily cast into shadow, and that simple morals did not triumph.
