Page first published on June 25, 2025
To the index page on international politics
This site hasn't been updated since 2022, when I addressed the Russian attack on Ukraine. Today, I'm returning to write about these topics, while waiting to reopen the philosophy and religion section, prompted by another similar event: Israel's attack on Iran, later supported by the United States.
As in 1999, when I began covering international politics on the site, there is (for now) only an air war between nations. Just as NATO attacked Serbia then, now Israel is attacking Iran. This time, the aim is to block Iran's nuclear program, which could lead to the development of the atomic bomb, in parallel with Israel's offensive against the Palestinian territories of Gaza and the West Bank.
Faced with the horrendous tragedy in Gaza, I had limited myself to social media posts, but the attack on yet another country, with the direct participation of the United States of America, prompted me to awaken Eurynome from its lethargy. The United States' participation was precisely the trigger that led me to write again, but we must start with what Israel is doing.
The conflict in Palestine has formally been ongoing since 1947, when fighting erupted following the UN resolution calling for a two-state solution. In reality, however, its origins date back to the Zionist movement, and therefore to the late 19th century, and then to the 1917 Balfour Declaration on the creation of a "Jewish homeland" in Palestine.
The chain of actions and reactions has never stopped since then: there have been moments of relative calm, but the violence has always been present. The root of the problem remains precisely the idea that there should be separate states for Jews and non-Jews. I find it useful to reproduce here a letter from Albert Einstein clarifying the terms of his participation in the Allied Commission on Palestine, expressing his opposition to the idea of creating separate states for Jews and non-Jews. Later, he was offered the presidency of Israel, but Einstein declined. The great scientist had foreseen that the conditions were being created in Palestine for a situation of perennial and insoluble conflict.
Indeed, there is an irresolvable contradiction between the concept of a "state of the Jews" and that of a "democratic state": one of the cornerstones of the definition of a democratic state is the absence of discrimination among citizens based on ethnicity and religion, as well as gender, political beliefs, etc., as stated, for example, in Article 2 of the Italian Constitution. Israel does not have a Constitution, but only a few fundamental laws, within which the current governing majority has added the statement "Israel is the State of the Jews," a previously absent statement. The contradiction is now clear.
Returning to the conflict, each side justifies its actions as reactions to those of the other. It's said, "Israel must defend itself," and that's obviously true, but it's Israel that systematically expands, occupying ever more territory and forcing Palestinians into increasingly restricted and resource-starved areas, further subjected to its suffocating military control.
Israel's intention to remove the entire Palestinian population from Gaza is demonstrated by countless statements and actions, some overt, some less so. I can summarize it all in US President Trump's infamous plan to transform Gaza into a tourist development area after expelling the entire current resident population. Trump has seized upon, in his own way, what is openly discussed in Israel.
It doesn't generate as much media attention, but the systematic reduction and fragmentation of Palestinian territory in the West Bank continues.
The current phase of the conflict began on October 7, 2023, with the sudden and seemingly unexpected attack by Hamas, supported by others such as Islamic Jihad, against Israel. It was an attack unprecedented in its violence and terrible consequences, resulting in approximately 1,200 deaths and 250 kidnappings. Israeli forces, who were monitoring the Gaza Strip from a fence equipped with sophisticated detection systems, were caught completely by surprise. It's difficult to say how much of this was due to underestimation of the adversary, how much due to simple negligence, and how much due to political will to ignore the alarms that had been raised. The result was what one might have expected: a very violent response with military intervention in the Gaza Strip. However, whereas in the past Israel responded to terrorist attacks with targeted and short-lived actions, designed to undermine the adversary's capabilities but limited in space and time, now an all-out war has been unleashed for the complete destruction of Hamas, with no regard for the population of Gaza.
As was easy to predict, this drive to eliminate Hamas has not yet ended, as of June 2025. The population of Gaza has been literally massacred, with countless deaths, including thousands of women and children. Those not directly killed are now dying of hunger and thirst, in addition to the lack of medical care, as it is virtually impossible to provide adequate assistance to the population. All medical facilities in Gaza have been destroyed, under the pretext of "hosting terrorists." Journalists have been systematically murdered, including their families.
The dead now number in the tens of thousands, with dozens more added every day. Often, they were people trying to procure food and other basic necessities for their families. The Israeli military continually orders people to move from one area to another, only to then attack even the zones they themselves define as safe. The entire Gaza Strip is nothing but a pile of ruins, where desperate people try to survive the hell.
This situation is clearly denounced by humanitarian organizations on the ground, some of which have suffered losses in people and facilities. There have been incidents of direct attacks on rescuers trying to help the wounded. I personally support several humanitarian organizations, and I refer them to them for full details. I also have regular links on my website. For example, I'm linking to the Emergency initiative that led to the demonstration on June 21st.
top of pageAn important point always emphasized by the so-called West, a term that I will use briefly to indicate the United States of America, NATO and other more or less formally allied countries, is the obligation to respect international law and in general the concept of the rule of law .
That organizations like Hamas have committed countless crimes is not in dispute, but we are talking about organizations considered terrorist by many countries and operating, by their own admission, outside of international law . The purpose of this chapter is to show how the West's claims to respect this law are baseless, highlighting the untenability of its supposed moral superiority over such organizations.
It is possible to state in fact that:
The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas leader Mohammad Deif—the other Hamas leaders under investigation, and possibly Netanyahu himself, all of whom are believed to have been killed by Israeli forces.
In this regard, I would like to point out that some states today publicly declare that they are seeking individuals, leaders of organizations, and even heads of state, for the purpose of killing them. In any legal system, this constitutes premeditated murder: if an individual is accused of crimes within the correct jurisdiction, they can be arrested and tried, possibly leading to the death penalty if the law so provides. No legal system provides that a person can be killed on sight; if the suspect resists arrest or is committing other crimes, the police can use the level of violence permitted by law. But if the accused is not in the territory under the jurisdiction of the person seeking them, extradition procedures must be followed. All of this is tied to the concept of the rule of law. If one can kill whomever one wishes, then we are within the realm of criminal custom, not law. In this specific case, given that there was an international arrest warrant, there were legal grounds for arresting the individuals in question, provided they were in the territory of a State party to the Tribunal – which State should have arrested them.
Several states that are members of the International Criminal Court have also declared that they would not arrest Netanyahu if he set foot on their territory, which constitutes a clear violation of the Treaty on which the Court is founded and demonstrates that all the declarations of these states regarding international legality are empty and without any foundation.
top of pageOn June 13, 2025, Israel launched an air strike against Iran, ostensibly aimed at destroying its nuclear weapons program. The issue was not new, as Iran's nuclear weapons program had been discussed for decades.
Again, it is not our purpose to trace the history of this topic. An important point is that there were international negotiations, involving the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China) plus Germany, which led to the 2015 agreement known by its acronym JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action). According to this agreement, Iran committed not to enrich uranium for weapons purposes, to destroy its stockpiles of enriched uranium, and to submit to the inspections of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The US president was Obama. In 2018, the new president, Trump, then in his first term, decided to unilaterally withdraw the United States from the agreement. The United States reinstated the sanctions against Iran that it had removed following the agreement.
If there was no agreement now, the blame therefore fell on the unilateral actions of the United States. There was never an objectively demonstrable Iranian violation, as detected by the inspectors, who, however, were constantly accused by the US of being biased and fooled. This is another example of what I said above: the same criterion by which the ICTY is good if it condemns the enemies of the West, is bad if it condemns the West itself: the so-called West constantly and systematically applies a double standard, thus never accepting the judgment of a third party. For the West, impartial is anyone who is pro-West.
I would like to point out that in 2003, the United States and the United Kingdom attacked Iraq on the grounds that it was acquiring "weapons of mass destruction." The accusation was later proven false, and the so-called evidence was revealed to be fabricated.
Before the Israeli attack, negotiations were underway between the United States and Iran on the issue of nuclear weapons. The fact that Iran was given 60 days to respond to the latest proposals, followed by the attack, simply shows that it was a classic ultimatum from those wanting to start war and not a real negotiation.
There is no reason to consider Israel's attack any different from any other military aggression, of which, unfortunately, there is no shortage of examples. It is a flagrant violation of the UN Charter and an action no less illegal and criminal than Russia's attack on Ukraine. Iran responded to the massive air strike, conducted using the American-designed technique called COMAO (Combined Air Operation), by launching missiles at Israel. There is no doubt as to who started the conflict; otherwise, once fighting begins, the logic of war takes hold.
Israeli actions include the assassinations of numerous members of the Iranian armed forces and the Pasdaran, as well as several scientists. These individuals were identified individually and attacked individually, their homes being targeted. As I noted above, this was premeditated murder, not an act of war but a purely criminal act, essentially similar to the methods employed by organized crime.
Lacking adequate weapons to strike Iran's heavily fortified and underground nuclear sites, Israel requested and ultimately obtained direct intervention from the United States, which employed B2 bombers capable of carrying the gigantic MOAB bombs (13 tons each), which could not be used by the aircraft at Israel's disposal.
The Israeli attack had already disabled Iranian defenses, achieving unchallenged air superiority. Israel was in no danger; in fact, it was already largely winning the battle, even though a few Iranian missiles had caused damage on its territory. The US intervention was simply intended to complete the work of destruction begun by Israel.
In conclusion, Israel and the United States are guilty of armed aggression against another country, unrelated to either hostile actions or threats received—in fact, they were attempting to reach an agreement. This is simply an exercise of brute force, which demonstrates, as I explained in the previous paragraph, that the rationale is not that of the rule of law, but rather that of confrontation between criminal organizations.
I am not arguing here that the regime in power in Iran has not committed crimes against others and against its own people, but that the logic of "Western" intervention reflects the same logic applied by so-called "authoritarian regimes."
Among other countries, the United Kingdom has given its support to Israel and the United States quite visibly. Germany has given its support in words, with disconcerting statements from Chancellor Merz, who claimed that "Israel is doing our dirty work ." In short, he supports Israel's actions but is not directly involved, so as not to get his hands dirty: a masterpiece of moral poverty. European Commission President von der Leyen declared that "Israel has the right to defend itself ." This is a topsy-turvy world, given that the attacked country is Iran, and if this kind of statement needs to be made about what is happening, it should be that " Iran has the right to defend itself . "
The West's leading leaders are increasingly deceitful and biased, excusing every act of violence and crime on flimsy pretexts. The Italian government, which is not a leading one, has preferred not to make any serious comments, perhaps unwilling to align itself with the shameless lies of other governments, nor to distance itself from them, for fear of repercussions.
top of pageAs of this writing, a fragile truce appears to have been reached between Iran and Israel, amid mutual accusations of violations and President Trump's attempts to salvage the ceasefire. It's impossible to predict; I'm certain that Israel will attempt to rekindle the conflict, given that Prime Minister Netanyahu can only survive politically in a state of permanent war.
In any case, the enormity of what Israel has done and is still doing in the Palestinian territories, especially in Gaza, but let's not forget the West Bank, must not be ignored. Humanitarian organizations trying to assist the population are reporting horrendous events. The Israeli government is absurdly trying to deny what cannot be denied, and is determined to eliminate every trace of Palestinian presence from the territory between the Jordan River and the sea.
I am reporting the link to the short article by Giuseppe Cucchi: Israel must be sanctioned , because it is the summary made by a competent person, with whom I agree to a large extent even if not completely: for me the word genocide can be applied, but the substance does not change, because the facts are that:
The aim, therefore, is to deny the Palestinians their very existence as a people. I note that the concept of "ethnic cleansing," however horrendous, implies forcibly displacing people to a place where their people are present. Here, the Palestinians' homeland is Palestine, and the aim is to deport them to places completely unrelated to it, with the clear intention of erasing their identity as a people, which is, in effect, being denied. This is precisely the aim of erasing the Palestinians as a people.
In the absence of Italian or European sanctions, I believe that we ordinary citizens must do what we can.
First of all, some essential points:
I mentioned Russia in the third point because absurd things happened after the invasion of Ukraine, such as the ban on the performance of music by Russian composers, the cancellation of theater performances by Russian authors, and conferences on Russian culture. I totally dissociate myself from these kinds of actions, whether they concern Russians, Jews, or anyone else in the world.
I would now like to copy the points of Emergency's appeal, to which I also refer directly: you can find it here, with images of the demonstration on June 21st .
We ask the Italian government:
1. To formally request the government of Israel, in all diplomatic and public forums, to allow desperately needed humanitarian aid to enter the Strip and be distributed to the civilian population;
2. To immediately activate a diplomatic commitment for a ceasefire and for respect for international humanitarian law;
3. Not to renew, as a form of pressure, the memorandum of understanding for military cooperation between Italy and Israel, scheduled for June 8;
4. To stop the trade of weapons and weapons systems to and from Israel;
5. To support the suspension of the Association Treaty between the European Union and Israel, as 17 countries have already done due to ongoing human rights violations.
We demand that this be done NOW.
I have no confidence in Western governments, including the Italian one, which continue to support Israel except for a few empty humanitarian appeals.
Therefore, I will list some of the "personal sanctions" that can be applied:
I therefore put the link to the initiative No to Israeli products .
I don't like initiatives with even moderately hostile content, but now we can't remain inactive.
Alberto Cavallo - June 25, 2025
top of page
All content on the Eurinome.it website is published under a Creative Commons License , unless otherwise indicated. The images on this page are taken from files available online that may not be covered by this license.