Connect with us

Features

Reflections on the Israel-Hamas War

Published

on

By Uditha Devapriya

Israel’s Western allies, the US in particular, believe that any investigation into Israeli war crimes in the Gaza Strip will “exacerbate tensions” and “undercut efforts to advance a negotiated two-state solution.” I am quoting Antony Blinken’s response to a request made by the Palestinian Authority to the International Criminal Court in 2021. As Jacobin noted in a recent article, however, such statements ignore the fact that Israel’s colonisation of Gaza is what stands in the way of any long-term, meaningful solution.

The US liberal establishment are with Israel over its war with Hamas. On the face of it, it’s hard not to agree with their view. Hamas led the attack, after all, and Israel responded. But where are the critiques of the scale of Israel’s response, of the reasons for the attacks? Does the liberal establishment ever see the Gaza Strip? They see Taiwan, they see Hong Kong, and they see Ukraine. Are the dispossessed of Gaza not worthy enough? When asked about the refugee crisis in Ukraine, Ukraine’s Prosecutor General told the BBC it saddened him to see people with “blue eyes and blond hair… being killed every day.” Is this why the dispossessed of Gaza have been ignored: because they don’t have blue eyes?

The West likes to impose its vision on the world on the Global South: it condemns human rights violations and asks governments to investigate them. When an Al-Jazeera journalist was killed by Israeli Defence Forces last year, and the Israeli government responded to calls for investigations by stating that it would never allow its military to be put on trial, however, Washington did not see it fit to condemn, even comment. To date, the killing of a journalist, an incident that would have compelled a flurry of condemnations had it occurred elsewhere, especially in countries like ours, has not led to any investigation.

It’s not that human rights bodies have ignored Gaza. They have not. Amnesty International, for instance, calls it “dispossession.” The numbers speak for themselves. Since 1967, Israeli governments, Labour and Likud, has appropriated more than 100,000 hectares of land, demolished more than 50,000 homes, and forced restrictions down the throats of five million Palestinians. In an Advisory Opinion in 2004, the International Court of Justice stated that Israel was obliged “to return the land, orchards, olive groves and other immovable property” seized from Palestinians. But Israeli forces control what Palestinians see, where they visit, the food they eat, the water they drink. This week they declared a state of siege: what Palestinians have been living under for the last 50 years.

If there is any tangible, flesh and blood example for the banality of evil, the Gaza Strip is it. Yet celebrities choose not to see Gaza. Some of them happen to be goodwill ambassadors for refugee and human rights bodies. Most of them parade themselves as harbingers of peace and unity. Like the US government, however, they issue one-sided statements and remain tone-deaf to the root causes of the conflict in Palestine and Israel: ironic, given how they emphasise root causes behind conflicts elsewhere. They haven’t realised that the people of Gaza see Israel as an occupying force to be resisted. Very few see it beyond the surface. When the First Intifada unfolded, Edward Said called it “the most impressive and disciplined anti-colonial insurrection in this century.” He was right.

Not surprisingly, more so than Ukraine, it is solidarity with Palestine that has set the Global North apart from the South. China and Russia may be careful in wording press releases – both have called for de-escalation, though certain officials have called for a resolution of the Palestinian Question – but the rest of the Global South see Israeli forces as Palestinians see them.

All too often this cuts across political divisions: when violence broke out in the region in 2021, the Sri Lankan government and the Opposition both condemned Israeli occupation of Gaza. Barring right-wing Sinhala nationalist groups which frame Hamas’s recent attacks, wrongly, as Islamist violence, and pro-separatist political outfits which tweet in support of Israel – no doubt seeing it, again wrongly, as a minority state in need of defence – Sri Lanka has embraced solidarity with Palestine. This is as it should be.

Israel has historically been a beneficiary of US aid. That has propped it up as a technological hub in the region, a fact not lost on the US or its allies. Even China has entered the picture: Israel is a hidden spoke in the BRI (Belt and Road Initiative) wheel. But there are deeper dimensions to the conflict, going beyond the geopolitics and the security implications. The roots of the crisis lie in the West’s inability to see Palestinians as equals to the Israelis, though the balance of power has always been in the latter’s favour. It is certainly easy to view Israel as the encircled State. But throughout its history it has taken the upper hand. The Western liberal establishment has in nine cases out of 10 looked askance at these realities. When someone from that circle takes a different line, he or she tends to be shut down.

The Western political establishment’s inability to call out on Israeli atrocities in the Gaza Strip is surprising to say the least. At a time when the Israeli government is turning Hamas’s attacks into an excuse for barricading Gaza, Europe is debating the most unhelpful point ever: whether to withhold aid to Palestine. To their credit, France and Spain have opposed such actions, drawing a line between the Palestinian people and outfits like Hamas. But that the EU considered such measures, even for a moment, when it has been forthcoming if not generous about its aid to Ukraine, should disturb everyone.

We can choose to be on the right side of history here. Powerful states pursue their interests, and they impose these on other states on the pretext of promoting certain values. Yet they keep mum whenever those values clash with their own interests. The West’s silence over the Palestinians is thus not surprising. But as one official after another speaks for the Israeli State, and pontificates on its right to exist, the people of Gaza continue to be bombarded into submission. For half a century, they have lived under siege. As Tariq Ali writes, “Western civilization seems willing to stand by while they are exterminated.” This cannot go on for any longer. If Israel has a right to exist, then Palestinians have a right to resist.

The writer is an international relations analyst, independent researcher, and freelance columnist who can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com.



Features

US withdrawal from UNHRC, a boon to political repression and ultra-nationalism

Published

on

President Trump in a meeting with President Putin. The New York Times

The US’ reported withdrawal from the UNHRC and some other vital UN agencies could be seen as a fillip to anti-democratic and ultra-nationalistic forces worldwide. Besides, the stark message is being conveyed that the developing regions of the world would from now on suffer further impoverishment and powerlessness.

The UNHRC needs to be more effective and proactive in bringing to book those states that are lagging in upholding and implementing human rights standards. But thus far it has been notable in the main in only ‘naming and shaming’ periodically those countries that stand accused of human rights and associated violations. More states and their rulers who have proved notorious violators of International Law, for instance, need to be brought to justice.

Hopefully, the UNHRC would be more dynamic in carrying out its responsibilities going forward but it needs material, moral and financial sustenance in increasing measure as it goes about trying to implement its brief. By withdrawing its support for the UNHRC at this juncture the US has further weakened the body and thereby provided a stimulant to the forces of repression worldwide.

What ought to be equally disquieting for the ethically-conscious is the withdrawal of US support for the WHO, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees or the UNRWA and the Paris Climate Agreement. With these actions the US under President Donald Trump has forfeited all claims to being the world’s foremost democracy. It could no longer lead from the front, so to speak, in championing human rights and democratic development.

It is no coincidence that almost at the time of these decisions by the US, President Trump is meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. At the time of writing what transpired at these talks is not known to the public but it is plain to see that under the ultra-rightist Israeli Prime Minister, there would be no easy closure to the Middle East conflict and the accompanying blood-letting.

This is in view of the fact that the hawkish Trump administration would be hand-in-glove with the Netanyahu regime right along. There would be no political solution in the foreseeable future nor could it be guaranteed by the main stakeholders to the Middle East question that the current ceasefire would continue.

As mentioned in this column before, Israel would need strong security guarantees from the Palestinian camp and its supporters before it sits earnestly at the negotiating table but a policy of repression by the Israeli state would in no way help in resolving the conflict and in ushering even a measure of peace in the region. With the staunch support of the Trump administration the Netanyahu regime could stave off Palestinian resistance for the time being and save face among its supporters but peace in the Middle East would continue to be a lost cause.

The issues in focus would only be further compounded by the US decision to cease support for the rehabilitation and material sustenance of Palestinian refugees. This policy decision would only result in the further alienation and estrangement of Palestinians from the Western world. Consequently, Intifada-type uprisings should only be expected in the future.

As should be obvious, the US decision to pull out of the WHO would further weaken this vital agency of the UN. A drop in material, medical and financial assistance for the WHO would translate into graver hardships for the suffering civilians in the world’s conflict and war zones. The end result could be the alienation of the communities concerned from the wider international community, resulting in escalating law and order and governance issues worldwide. Among other things, the world would be having on its hands aggravating identity politics consequent to civilian publics being radicalized.

Considering the foregoing, the inference is inescapable that the US is heading in the direction of increasing international isolation and a policy of disengaging from multilateral institutions and arrangements geared to worthy causes that could serve world peace. As matters stand, it would not be wrong to conclude that the Trump administration is quite content with the prevailing ‘international disorder’.

One of the most negative consequences of the US decision to pull out of the UNHRC is the encouragement the forces of repression and ultra-nationalism could gain by it. In almost all the states of South Asia, to consider one region that is notable from this viewpoint, the forces of ultra-nationalism and majoritarian chauvinism could be said to be predominant.

Unfortunately, such forces seem to be on the rise once again in even post-Hasina Bangladesh. In Sri Lanka these forces are somewhat dormant at present but they could erupt to the surface, depending on how diligently the present government guards against their rise.

However, the government of Sri Lanka could not be said to be going the extra mile currently to blunt the appeal of ultra-nationalism, whether it is of the Southern kind or of the Northern kind. Crunch time for the Sri Lankan state would come when it has to seriously cooperate with the UNHRC and help bring those accused of war crimes in Sri Lanka to justice. On whether it could cooperate in this exercise would depend the democratic credentials of the present regime.

The cumulative result of the Trump administration weakening the UN and its agencies would be the relentless rise of anti-democratic, fascistic and repressive regimes the world over. Given this backdrop, one could expect the war in the Ukraine and those wasting civil wars in Africa to rage on. In the case of the Ukraine, the possibility of the US and NATO not being of one mind on ways of ending the war there, could render closure of the conflict any time soon impossible.

However, waiting on the US with the expectation that it would be pulling itself together, so to speak, before long and addressing the issue of international law and order would be tantamount to handing over the world to a most uncertain future. It is highly unlikely that the Trump administration would prove equal to the challenge of bringing even a measure of order out of the current global chaos, given the primacy it would be attaching to what it sees as its national interest.

Rather than wait in suspense, democracy oriented sections the world over would do well to come together in a meeting of minds, with the UN playing a catalytic role in it, to figure out how they could pool all the resources at their command to bring about a world order that would be more respectful of International Law in word and spirit.

Continue Reading

Features

‘The Onset: A Short Story’: A philosophical drama attempting to redefine perception and cinema

Published

on

A scene from the movie with Hannah Brennen and Matt Heakes

Debut filmmaker, Thevin Gamage, presents a bold challenge to the time-honoured conventions of cinema. Through his daring short film, Thevin invites audiences to reconsider ‘the truth’ of cinematic rules. The 180-degree rule is broken with seamless subtlety, and a fresh perspective is offered on breaking the fourth wall.

This 13+ minute dialogue-driven drama, ‘The Onset: A Short Story’ featuring two actors and created with the collaboration of a debut cinematographer, was shot entirely in his living room—a testament to ingenuity and creative audacity.

The film not only aims to redefine the language of cinema but also thematically contests one of Plato’s most renowned teachings—The Allegory of the Cave. Thevin offers a fresh lens to examine ‘truth’ blending bold cinematic innovation with a philosophical exploration of perception, arrogance, and enlightenment.

At its heart, this story reflects the universal tension between belief and truth, highlighting the cost of breaking free from illusions. His debut is both a defiant act of rebellion and a bold invitation to shape the evolution of future cinema, leaving audiences with as many questions as answers.

Born into a family of artists in Sri Lanka, Thevin, grew up surrounded by a legacy of creativity yet confined by the traditional expectations of society. His parents achieved success as actors and later as entrepreneurs.

For Thevin, questioning the rules was not rebellion for its own sake—it was a search for freedom, truth, and new perspectives. This drive began in childhood, where strict parental expectations collided with his innate creativity. Movies became his escape, a lens through which he experienced life, love, and possibility.

Yet it wasn’t until his late twenties, after years of academic success and professional detours that he finally embraced his calling as a filmmaker. His audacious short film bridges his personal journey with his artistic vision. By breaking the 180-degree rule and redefining the fourth wall, the film demonstrates that cinematic rules can evolve—not as acts of rebellion, but as purposeful explorations of storytelling.

In the spirit of art and its boundless novelty, Thevin Gamage seeks to induct exactly that: originality.

His debut film is a bold exploration of cinematic boundaries and philosophical inquiry, redefining two foundational principles of cinema. This film invites audiences to experience a narrative that subtly bends the historical rules of the 180-degree rule and the fourth wall—often without them even realizing it.

This debut dares you.

It’s a resolute challenge to tradition and a provocative reminder that “rules” are just a few letters that form a word.

****

About young filmmaker

Thevin Gamage

Thevin Gamage is a South Asian filmmaker whose journey reflects both a profound reverence for tradition and an unrelenting desire to transcend it.

Born into a family of artists in Sri Lanka, Thevin was shaped by a legacy of creativity and resilience. His grandfather, Sri Lanka’s first film makeup artist, pioneered his craft with remarkable dedication, laying the foundation for a family deeply rooted in the arts. Though Thevin never met him, his grandfather Regie de Silva’strailblazing work ethic and passion for storytelling helped shape the family ethos, inspiring Thevin’s mother and, in turn, Thevin himself. Reggie was the first Sri Lankan makeup artist. He went to India for his studies in makeup artistry and was active during the era when B.A.W. Jayamanne and Rukmani Devi pioneered the Sri Lankan film industry.

Thevin’s mother, Kumudumali De Silva, a celebrated Best Supporting Actress winner two decades ago and recent Lifetime Achievement Award honoree for her contributions to the wedding industry, met his father, Nihal Gamage, while on set. Together, they transitioned from the entertainment industry to entrepreneurial success, founding a wedding photography and bridal dressing business. Their ventures flourished, even leading to the publication of their own wedding magazine, providing a middle-class life of success and recognition.

Despite these creative roots, societal expectations in Sri Lanka compelled Thevin to pursue academics. After excelling at the University of Toronto with a degree in Political Science, Economics, and Psychology, Thevin still yearned for storytelling. In his late twenties, after years of professional detours, he enrolled in film school and committed fully to his craft.

Operating outside the framework of traditional film production companies, Thevin embraced the challenges of independence. From conceptualization to execution, his debut film is a testament to his determination, ingenuity, and unwavering commitment to his vision. His journey as an independent filmmaker exemplifies the power of creative freedom to challenge norms and shape unique perspectives.

Thevin’s work invites audiences to question, reimagine, and ultimately transform their understanding of storytelling. His journey is not just one of artistic pursuit but an act of defiance—an effort to inspire others to embrace the power of the arts and forge paths beyond traditional norms.

Continue Reading

Features

Top three at 40th Mrs World pageant

Published

on

Mrs World – South Africa: Tshego Gaelae (L) / First Runner-up – Sri Lanka: Ishadi Amanda (M) / Second Runner-up – Thailand: Ploy Panperm (R)

While South African model Tshego Gaelae becomes the first Black woman to win the Mrs. World title in its 40-year history, we, too, were in the spotlight, at the finals.

Ishadi Amanda took the No. 02 slot, being the first runner-up at the prestigious pageant, held in Las Vegas, USA, from 29-30 January, 2025.

Thailand’s Ploy Panperm was placed third, as the second runner-up.

Sri Lanka’s Ishadi had support from the audience when her name was announced as one of the three finalists.

The Mrs World pageant winner, from South Africa, expressed her thanks on Instagram, saying, “To God be the glory. Thank you so much for the love and support, I am beyond grateful and elated! My beautiful South Africa, the crown is coming home,” she shared with her followers, encapsulating her elation and gratitude.

The Mrs World pageant, established in 1984, stands as the first international beauty contest solely for married women, providing a platform for married contestants to showcase not just their beauty, but also their intellect and community outreach efforts.

Before being picked as the winner, Mrs South Africa was asked: “What is the biggest challenge you have faced and achieved?” And her answer was brilliant:

Rosy Senanayake: Mrs World 1984

“I was so stressed on social media. Social media people should use it to share knowledge and good things. But it’s used to stress people out. But I stood up for myself without that social media pressure. I used the same social media that stressed me out to share good thoughts and hope to get to the victorious place I am today.”

Gaelae’s success is a testament to the ideals celebrated by the pageant, where diversity and empowerment take centre stage.

Gaelae balances her roles as a devoted mother, wife, labour relations manager, and model.

Being the first black woman to clinch the title at the Mrs World pageant has ignited a sense of pride and celebration among South Africans.

The Mrs South Africa Organisation, which played a crucial role in supporting Gaelae’s remarkable journey, also expressed their pride through a statement: “From Soweto to Vegas and now the World, @mrsworldpageant The Crown is Coming Home! Thank you to everyone who supported our queen on her incredible Journey.”

Gaelae returned home to a triumphant celebration fit for a queen.

At the airport to welcome her were her family, friends, church community, the Mrs South African team board and alumni, and the Executive Mayor of Johannesburg.

The crowning of the 40th Mrs World winner

And, guess what? Gaelae is now in touch with me!

Second Runner-up Mrs Thailand Ploy Panperm is quoted as having said: “I believe that modern married women have the potential to excel in multiple roles – as wives, mothers and even as beauty queens – embodying intelligence, talent and beauty.”

For the record, it was our very own Rosy Senanayake who brought Sri Lanka fame at this pageant … being crowned Mrs World at the very first Mrs World pageant, in 1984.

Continue Reading

Trending