Walid Samir al-Sabah was perhaps the youngest martyr of Gaza. She clung to life for just two hours after delivery through emergency caesarean, following the killing of her mother, Salam al-Sabah, in a brutal Israeli bombing. Neither mother nor child belonged to any military organization or criminal group. Walid was the purest of souls– one of over 18,000 children and some 50,000 other unarmed Palestinians in Gaza who have been denied their most basic right: the right to exist.
Gaza today faces one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes of recent history— comparable to Bosnia, Sudan, Somalia, and Kashmir. The official death toll now exceeds 61,000 Palestinians, with many estimates placing the figure closer to 80,000 or even 100,000 when indirect deaths and unreported cases are included. Oxfam reports an average of 250 deaths per day in Gaza– higher than any major conflict of the 21st century, surpassing Syria (96.5/day), Sudan (51.6), Ukraine (43.9), Afghanistan (23.8), and Yemen (15.8). Alongside the staggering death toll, Gaza suffers mass displacement, near-total infrastructure destruction, and widespread starvation.
The killing of children is particularly shocking. As of July 31, Gaza’s Health Ministry reports over 18,500 children killed. Early estimates show over 10,000 children lost in just the first 100 days– an unprecedented rate in modern conflicts. In other genocides, children were tragic collateral victims; in Gaza, they are disproportionately targeted, with entire generations scarred or erased.
The continuously worsening situation in Gaza raises many fundamental questions. As a student of international relations, I ask myself: (1) which theory of international relations legitimizes Israel for deliberate killing of civilians– especially children? (2) Are there binding humanitarian laws that protect Palestinian lives and property? (3) Is the UN Security Council solely responsible for failure to implement its own resolutions– especially given the veto? (4) Above all, how can the world help Palestinians secure their legitimate right to exist as an independent, sovereign state?
The answer to the first query is a resounding no. Even hardline realists, who view war as an inevitable tool of politics, reject Israel’s actions. John Joseph Mearsheimer, founder of Offensive Realism, has called Israel’s Gaza campaign “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide,” declaring it “unacceptable to decent people around the world.” Similarly, Johan Galtung, the father of peace and conflict studies, has long condemned Israel’s structural and direct violence, pointing out that attacks on civilians are rooted in systemic oppression, cultural normalization of force, and a refusal to pursue inclusive, dignified peace.
Contrarily, the answer to the second question is unambiguously yes. Palestinians have an undeniable right to exist under international law. Alongside Kashmir, Palestine is one of the oldest unresolved issues on the UN agenda. The two-state solution was formally proposed in UN General Assembly Resolution 181(II) of 29 November 1947. While the Palestinian question is discussed more frequently at the UN than almost any other territorial dispute, decades of resolutions have gone unimplemented.
Why? There could be a mix of the following reasons: flaws in the UN’s structure, especially the veto power of the Security Council; the nature of the anarchic international system; strategic and economic interests of powerful states; and, great power politics overriding moral imperatives.
Every Palestinian child’s death is a call to the conscience of humanity. The world must act– not just in speeches or resolutions, but through tangible, coordinated measures that uphold justice and restore hope.
The UN’s founding purpose, as set out in Article 1 of its Charter (1945), was to prevent another world war and promote peace, security, and cooperation. Yet in the face of crises like Palestine and Kashmir, the UN stands paralyzed– constrained by structural weaknesses and the political will of member states, especially those directly supporting Israel diplomatically, financially, and militarily.
Who supports Israel? The USA, Germany, the UK, India, and France are among Israel’s strongest backers, providing diplomatic cover, economic integration and military equipment. The USA and Germany are the largest arms suppliers, accounting for roughly 69 percent and 30 percent of Israel’s arms imports, respectively. Many other countries supply components, parts, and technology. Over 100 international organizations– including Human Rights Watch and Oxfam— have called for a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel.
Blaming the UN alone is too easy, and not fully justified. Individual states also bear responsibility. If countries cut diplomatic, economic, and military support, they could ease Palestinian sufferings, pressurize Israel to recognize Palestinian statehood and comply with UN resolutions.
Following three levels of action by individual states are essential.
First– Diplomatic: Recognize the State of Palestine. Currently, 147 of the 193 UN member states have done so, but several influential powers in Europe still hold back. Recognition would strengthen Palestine’s political legitimacy and reinforce the two-state solution.
Second– Economic: End financial assistance and reduce trade with Israel. Israel’s trade with the USA (≈$37 billion) and EU (≈$50 billion) is vital to its economy. Since WWII, it has received around $318 billion in military and economic aid from various states. Cutting this support would create real pressure.
Third– Security: Halt military assistance. The USA remains Israel’s principal military sponsor, providing over $3.3 billion in 2023 alone, but European states also play critical roles in supplying arms, technology, and training. Ending this flow would significantly impact Israel’s military capacity.
The following impact are likely: (1) Short term: Israel to suffer a major shock to its military readiness, budgetary stress, and a symbolic diplomatic isolation; (2) Medium term: Israel could impose higher taxes to overcome the budgetary constraints but would face reduced technological edge and diplomatic leverage; and, (3) Long term: it might result into a shift in Middle East power balance, paving the way for Palestinian statehood.
Every Palestinian child’s death is a call to the conscience of humanity. The world must act– not just in speeches or resolutions, but through tangible, coordinated measures that uphold justice and restore hope.
