- Abiding lessons of history
Westphalia is a little-known town in north-west Germany, which earned unparalleled fame in 1648 as the venue of a Treaty signed among the countries who were fighting a ceaseless war that started in 1618. The conclusion of the Thirty Years’ War was an epic moment in European history. The principles evolved in the Treaty have been the guiding principles for European nations, and subsequently, after their ascendency on the international scene, for the international affairs in general.
The primary cause of the conflict was the attempt by the Austrian Habsburg Empire to impose the Catholic faith on its Protestants subjects in Bohemia, but soon it spread and caught in its midst every region in continental Europe. The principles evolved under the Treaty included the notion of a nation-state, sovereignty, non-interference in the domestic affairs of one state by another and, above all, the concept of ‘balance of power’. Furthermore, religious identity was not to be a basis for discrimination against subjects. Even though the wars continued during and beyond the Treaty, their axes shifted to territorial considerations (as opposed to religious beliefs). However, the principles survived for more than 150 years until Napoleon’s armies ravaged the entire continent and obliterated the concept of balance of power. The Congress of Vienna in 1814 eventually succeeded Treaty of Westphalia, which basically reversed the Napoleon’s conquests but upheld the principles of Westphalia.
1920, this process was repeated at Versailles, where the League of Nations was also created. Hitler’s armies did exactly what Napoleon had done and met the same fate, together with other Axis Powers, Italy and Japan. At the end of WW-II, on 24 October 1945 (exactly 297 years after Westphalia) United Nations was created under the leadership of Allied Countries led by United States of America and Soviet Union and aided by Republic of China (and after 1971 Peoples’ Republic of China), Britain and France. They became permanent members wielding veto powers. The UN embraced the Westphalian principles of nation-state, sovereignty, non-interference and balance of power. It established a supra-national body ‘the UN Security Council’ charged with the responsibility to secure and maintain peace in the world and help parties to a dispute to resolve their differences through peaceful means. A new principle was also contrived, namely, of ‘great powers unanimity’ (a euphemism for veto). A new world order, therefore, was as crafted and sanctioned by the winners of the WW-II.
Despite its success so far in preventing a new world war, the UN has miserably failed in upholding its founding principles, as the permanent members, directly or through proxies, contravene its Charter with impunity. The Muslim world at large bears a disproportionate burden of impotence of SC resolutions (SCRs) as its lands are usurped (Middle East, Russia, Philippines); invaded by great powers (Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan); great power rivalries are played out in its lands (Syria, Iraq, Somalia); or its populations are denied the right to self-determination (Kashmir).
The most conspicuous failure of the UN is in forestalling the occupation of Palestine by European Zionists and ending the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank of Jordan and Golan Heights in Syria. Despite numerous SCRs restraining its actions, Israel has occupied these territories, put a ban on return of the refugees, and is building homes and other settlements in the West Bank on occupied lands. All of this has been made possible by American opposition to the adoption of any restraining measures against Israel.
In 1980, Israel passed a basic law that declared East Jerusalem as part of Israel. In response, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 478 (with only America abstaining) in August 1980 with following features: 1. Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the “basic law” on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions; 2. Affirms that the enactment of the “basic law” by Israel constitutes a violation of international law and does not affect the continued application of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since June 1967, including Jerusalem; 3. Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent “basic law” on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith; 4. Affirms also that this action constitutes a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East; 5. Decides not to recognise the “basic law” and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem and calls upon: (a) All Member States to accept this decision; (b) Those States that have established diplomatic missions at Jerusalem to withdraw such missions from the Holy City.
There is a great deal of debate regarding interpretation of SC resolutions and their binding nature. From the practice of how SCRs have been implemented, it is evident that no adverse action would be taken against a violator so long as one of the major powers vetoes the action. Israel was not deterred by the resolution and refused to rescind the so-called basic law that annexed East Jerusalem and made it its capital. Despite its absention, until now the US has been standing by the international community in not recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Then in 1995, the pro-Israel lobby succeeded in getting congressional approval of a law titled Jerusalem Embassy Act 1995 that obligated US Administration to allocate funds for constructing and moving the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. They also contrived a waiver in the law for the President to escape the charge of constitutional violation of Presidential prerogative in foreign affairs. The waiver allowed the President to issue a certificate to Congress every six-months that doing so was in the security interest of the US. Despite avowed promises, every President from Clinton to Obama kept issuing these certificates. President Trump has broken from this tradition by accepting Jerusalem as the ‘eternal capital’ of Israel.
On 18th December, the UNSC took up a Resolution moved by Egypt against the decision of the US, urging the Council to declare that ‘such decisions had no legal standing and were null and void… that international law must be respected lest chaos prevail
On 18th December, the UNSC took up a Resolution moved by Egypt against the decision of the US, urging the Council to declare that ‘such decisions had no legal standing and were null and void… that international law must be respected lest chaos prevail… it must be opposed as being in violation of many Council resolutions as well as the UN Charter’. 14 out of 15 members of the Council voted in favour of adoption of the Resolution. Predictably, the 15th vote, that of the US, was against, and because it was from a permanent member, the Resolution was vetoed. The US ambassador was defiant to the rest of the world when she said: ‘Today, the Council had witnessed an insult that would not be forgotten, the United Nations was doing more harm than good for the cause of peace. For the cause of peace and in the best interest of both peoples firmly in mind, the United States had voted “no”.’
With the US taking such belligerent actions against multilateralism, modern Westphalia is failing. The world faces serious dangers to peace and security. Fairness and legitimacy are the lynchpin of any societal organisation. It is true not just of small societies but at the global level as well. Injustice and lawlessness, no matter how much destruction they may bring in their wake, would ultimately be vanquished by forces beyond the comprehension of their perpetrators. This is the abiding lesson of human history.
