• Dr Nishant A.Irudayadason
  Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, Jnana-Deepa Institute of Philosophy & Theology, Pune.

The past year has witnessed a horrifying escalation in the conflict between Hamas and Israel, with Gaza bearing the brunt of a humanitarian catastrophe. Over 41,000 lives have been lost, including 14,000 children, raising troubling questions about the effectiveness of international diplomacy and law. Why, in an age of global governance and modern conflict resolution mechanisms, do we remain unable to halt this cycle of suffering? The failure to prevent these tragedies highlights the glaring disconnect between international legal structures and their enforcement in regions with entrenched historical conflicts. Despite the presence of laws meant to protect civilians and regulate the conduct of war, the violence continues unchecked, undermining faith in international institutions and exposing the human costs of political power struggles.

The roots of this violence lie in a complex and deeply embedded history of political, territorial, and ideological disputes. Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel that killed over 1,200 people and took 251 hostages. Israel retaliated with large-scale military strikes on Gaza, invoking its right to self-defence. While this right is enshrined in international law, it comes with limitations that require military action to be proportionate and necessary. However, the scale of Israel’s response, leaving thousands of civilians dead, raises serious questions about whether its military actions have crossed these legal thresholds. According to International humanitarian law, military actions must avoid unnecessary civilian harm, and attacks must not be indiscriminate. Yet, reports from humanitarian organisations and international observers paint a grim picture of the situation in Gaza. The deliberate or careless targeting of civilian infrastructure violates the principles of international humanitarian law, and the lack of accountability only exacerbates the suffering of Gaza’s population.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are meant to be the legal bulwarks that hold aggressors accountable. In January 2024, the ICJ expressed its deep concern over the situation in Gaza, issuing precautionary measures to prevent further harm, including a halt to military operations in Rafah in southern Gaza. However, action on the ground has not followed these legal orders. This highlights the gap between legal judgements and practical enforcement, a significant weakness in international law. Courts can issue rulings, but the lack of political will and international pressure renders these decisions powerless. Similarly, while the ICC has launched investigations into potential war crimes committed by both Hamas and Israeli leaders, any meaningful prosecution could take years. The slow pace of international justice and the complex political dynamics suggest that legal accountability, while crucial, is not an immediate solution to ending the violence.

So, why does the bloodshed continue if the legal frameworks are in place? Many experts argue that the problem lies not in the laws themselves but in the absence of political will to enforce them. The United States, in particular, wields significant influence over Israel but has consistently used its veto power in the United Nations Security Council to shield its ally from stronger condemnation or sanctions. The US’ geopolitical interests, coupled with the military-industrial complex that benefits from arms sales to conflict zones, complicate efforts to push for peace. Similarly, other powerful nations with economic and political stakes in the region’s instability maintain the status quo, preventing meaningful international intervention. The international community’s reluctance to impose meaningful pressure on the warring parties reflects a broader failure of global governance structures, where national interests often trump the pursuit of peace and justice.

As the conflict drags on, the toll on Gaza’s civilian population is nothing short of catastrophic. Israel argues that its military strikes are necessary to dismantle Hamas’s capabilities, but the cost of these strikes falls overwhelmingly on ordinary Palestinians, particularly children. Many civilians in Gaza have no connection to Hamas’s militant agenda. Still, they are forced to endure the consequences of the ongoing airstrikes, with limited access to food, clean water, or medical care. Even for those who oppose Hamas’ rule, there are few viable alternatives in a region trapped by blockade and poverty. Meanwhile, Israel’s claims that Hamas uses civilians as human shields add further complexity to the situation, but it is the civilians—especially children—who pay the ultimate price. The psychological scars inflicted on Gaza’s young population will likely fuel future cycles of violence as the children of today grow up surrounded by devastation, loss, and resentment. The longer the conflict continues, the more remote the chances of peace become, with extremism on both sides likely to shape the future of the region.