Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) is a Sunni Islamist militant group primarily active in Syria, particularly in the rebel-held Idlib Province. Formed in 2017, it is an alliance dominated by Jabhat Fatah al-Sham, which was previously affiliated with al-Qaeda. The group took several key cities on December 7 and 8,ultimately leading to the downfall of the Assad regime after 53 years.
The directive explicitly forbids compelling women to wear specific clothing or interfering with their choice of attire, according to the newspaper, which published details of the announcement.
“The High Command categorically prohibits forcing women to wear particular clothing or interfering with their right to choose their attire or making claims regarding their appearance,” the newspaper quoted the opposition leadership as saying.
The hijab, a traditional head covering in Islamic culture that conceals the hair, ears, and neck, has been a subject of debate in many Middle Eastern nations regarding personal freedom and religious practice.
In a parallel move suggesting broader social reforms, the opposition command also issued strict prohibitions against the persecution of media workers, including employees of Syrian television, broadcasting agencies and social media platform owners.
“Any threats against these individuals are prohibited,” Al-Watan reported, citing the opposition’s statement.
The opposition leadership has established penalties for violations of these directives, with perpetrators facing up to one year in prison.
These measures come as the opposition works to establish its authority and define its governance approach in post-Assad Syria, particularly regarding personal freedoms and press rights.
In a later message by the opposition forces, they announced, “We are here now to build a new Syria that accommodates everyone without exception.
Published by Human Rights Without Frontiers https://hrwf.eu/syria-armed-opposition-leadership-bans-forced-wearing-of-hijab/
Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas adopta por abrumadora mayoría resolución sobre libre determinación del pueblo palestino
Por Nicolas Boeglin, Profesor de Derecho Internacional Público, Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR). Contacto: nboeglin(a)gmail.com
Este 17 de diciembre, con una abrumadora mayoría de 172 votos a favor y tan solo siete en contra, la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas adoptó su tradicional resolución sobre el derecho del pueblo palestino a la libre determinación (véase texto de la proyecto de resolución A/C.3/79/L.49).
Se trata de un ejercicio diplomático anual al que se someten los 193 Estados Miembros de Naciones Unidas: en el 2023, el 19 de diciembre se adoptó una resolución similar (véase texto de la resolución A/Res/78/192) con 172 votos a favor y cuatro en contra (Estados Unidos, Israel, Micronesia y Nauru), 10 Estados optando por la abstención (entre los cuales Guatemala y Paraguay) según el detalle de la votación.
El voto observado en breve este 17 de diciembre del 2024
El tablero de la votación de este 17 de diciembre del 2024 puede ser consultado en este video de YouTube: esta vez, Israel y su incondicional aliado norteamericano pudieron contar con los votos en contra de Argentina, Micronesia, Nauru, Paraguay, y Papua Nueva Guinea. Cabe precisar que se trata de votaciones en las que aliados tradicionales de Israel en este tipo de ejercicios como suelen serlo para otras resoluciones Austría, Australia, Canadá, Hungría o República Checa se desmarcan y no acceden a las solicitudes de Israel (y de Estados Unidos) de votar en contra.
La única actualización al texto del 2023, es una referencia que se añadió a la opinión consutiva de la Corte Internacional de Justicia (CIJ) del 19 de julio del 2024, confirmando el carácter ilegal de la colonización y ocupación del territorio palestino por parte de Israel. La Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas acogió esta opinión consultiva en una votación realizada el 18 de septiembre del 2024 y optó por declarar ilegal dicha colonización (véase comunicado oficial de Naciones Unidas).
Con relación a América Latina, Argentina (así como Paraguay) están en este año 2024 sustituyendo a las pequeñas islas del Pacífico tradicionalmente muy atentas a las solicitudes de Israel (Islas Fidji, Islas Marshall, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua Nueva Guinea), conformando desde varios años en Naciones Unidas la única “coalición” para acompañar a Israel y a Estados Unidos en este tipo de contiendas diplomáticas (Nota 2). Por su parte, Ecuador y Panamá optaron por abstenerse, siendo los únicos dos Estados de América Latina en escoger esta opción, conjuntamente con seis otros Estados.
No está de más recordar un hecho bastante inusual observado en Naciones Unidas (y en Argentina…) cuando las actuales autoridades argentinas optaron el pasado 30 de octubre por destituir a su máxima autoridad diplomática, al haber instruído a su delegación en Naciones Unidas a votar en favor de un proyecto de resolución también anual (véase texto) que solicita levantar el embargo contra Cuba (véase nota de ElPais/España): en esta ocasión solamente Estados Unidos e Israel votaron en contra, al tiempo que 182 votaron a favor (véase comunicado oficial de Naciones Unidas). Idéntica “oposición ultra minoritaria” se observó en noviembre del 2023 con 187 votos a favor (véase comunicado oficial de Naciones Unidas).
El aislamiento de Israel en el seno de la comunidad internacional
Este nuevo informe de Human Rights Watch dado a conocer este 19 de diciembre del 2024 detalla el uso del faltante de agua como arma de guerra en Gaza por parte de Israel, confirmando para los investigadores de esta reconocida ONG su intención genocida en Gaza.
Al respecto, el pasado 4 de diciembre, el genocidio en curso en Gaza iniciado desde la tarde noche del 7 de octubre del 2023 fue confirmado en un contundente informe de otra reconocida ONG Amnistía Internacional, antecedido en octubre por el informe de la Relatora Especial de Naciones Unidas titulado “El genocidio como supresión colonial “, precedido de su informe de julio titulado “Anatomía de un genocidio”: la poca difusión en medios de prensa internacionales de estos informes plantea interrogantes muy válidas.
Adicionalmente a ello, las acciones militares en el Líbano por parte de Israel desde mediados de septiembre, así como en Siria desde hace dos semanas parecieran responder a un intento bastante sutil para desviar la atención medática internacional sobre lo que ocurre en Gaza y en Cisjordania.
El último informe de Naciones Unidas sobre la situación en Cisjordania (al 19 de diciembre) está disponible en este enlace. A su vez, con relación a Gaza, el último informe sobre la situación al 17 de diciembre realizado por Naciones Unidas (véase informe) detalla cómo el ritmo de muertos y de heridos y de destrucción por parte de Israel se ha mantenido ininterrumpido, con un ensañamiento en contra de la población civil palestina de Gaza raramente observado (y pasado por alto por buena parte de los medios de prensa internacional). Al dramático saldo de víctimas palestinas que supera ya las 45.000 personas, se puede leer además que:
“Israeli bombardment from the air, land and sea continues to be reported across the Gaza Strip, resulting in further civilian casualties, displacement, and destruction of civilian infrastructure. In the North Gaza governorate, the Israeli military has been carrying out a ground offensive since 6 October 2024, with fighting reported between Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups. Israeli forces have continued to impose a tightened siege on Beit Lahiya, Beit Hanoun and parts of Jabalya and humanitarian assistance has been largely denied for more than 10 weeks (see data below). Rocket firing by Palestinian armed groups towards Israel was reported.
Between the afternoons of 10 and 17 December, according to the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza, 273 Palestinians were killed and 853 were injured. Between 7 October 2023 and 17 December 2024, at least 45,059 Palestinians were killed and 107,041 were injured, according to MoH in Gaza.
Between the afternoons of 10 and 17 December, two Israeli soldiers were killed in Gaza, according to the Israeli military. Between 7 October 2023 and 17 December 2024, according to the Israeli military and official Israeli sources cited in the media, more than 1,586 Israelis and foreign nationals were killed, the majority on 7 October 2023 and its immediate aftermath. The figure includes 386 soldiers killed in Gaza or along the border in Israel since the beginning of the ground operation. In addition, 2,488 Israeli soldiers were reported injured since the beginning of the ground operation. As of 17 December, it is estimated that 100 Israelis and foreign nationals remain captive in Gaza, including hostages who have been declared dead and whose bodies are withheld in Gaza.
Attacks on schools sheltering internally displaced people (IDPs) in Gaza continue to be reported, with nine such incidents documented so far in December 2024 by the UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR). According to the Education Cluster, between 6 October and 15 December 2024, 95 incidents involving attacks on school buildings, mostly serving as IDP shelters, were documented, including 61 incidents in North Gaza governorate. On 14 and 15 December alone, four schools were hit, as follows:
– On 14 December, two schools-turned shelters were reportedly hit in Gaza city, resulting in the killing of seven Palestinians, including three children, and the injury of tens of others, according to Palestinian Civil Defense (PCD).
– On 15 December, Israeli troops reportedly surrounded and raided Khalil Owaidah School sheltering IDPs in ‘Izbat Beit Hanun, in North Gaza, where it was reported that male IDPs were detained while women and children were forced to move southwards. Tens of people were reported killed, but the exact circumstances remain unclear. Citing IDP testimonies, PCD reported that fatalities included 10-15 people who were incinerated, and the school was destroyed.
– On 15 December, the third floor of an UNRWA school sheltering IDPs in Al Mawasi, in Khan Younis, was hit. Within minutes, the emergency department of the nearby Nasser Medical Complex was flooded with casualties, most of them women and children. Many were severely injured and died on site or en route to the hospital, reported international doctors from Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) operating in the facility as part of a joint Emergency Medical Team (EMT) with the International Rescue Committee. An internal medicine and emergency care consultant counted at least 18 people dying in the emergency department, including 12 children under the age of 12. The first patient arrived in the facility was “a three-year-old girl who had the left side of her forehead torn open by shrapnel fragments which had penetrated her skull,” and who, due to shortages of painkillers and anaesthetics, had to be treated “with very little access to medications,” added the consultant. A plastic surgeon also noted that his first patient was a 12 to 14-year-old boy whose face was entirely burnt, and who had open wounds on his chest and on both of his legs.
Other deadly incidents reported between 10 and 15 December include:
– On 10 December, at about 23:00, 22 Palestinians were reportedly killed and others injured when a three-story building was hit near Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahiya in North Gaza.
– On 12 December, at about 00:30, seven Palestinians including children and women were reportedly killed and others injured when two apartments in a residential tower were hit in northwestern Gaza city.
– On 12 December, on two occasions at about 00:01 and 00:55, 22 Palestinians were reportedly killed and others injured when people were hit in Khan Younis and Rafah. According to the Government Media Office (GMO), fatalities included 15 people tasked with securing the movement of aid trucks, raising the number of people killed while securing aid trucks to 720 so far.
– On 12 December, at about 02:00, 15 Palestinians including at least one woman and seven children were reportedly killed, and several others injured, when a house sheltering IDPs was hit in western An Nuseirat refugee camp in northern Deir al Balah.
– On 12 December, at about 20:30, at least 34 Palestinians were reportedly killed and 40 others injured, when two residential buildings were hit in central An Nuseirat refugee camp, in Deir al Balah, according to PCD. According to the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), at least eight children were among the fatalities (see below). Extensive damage of the residential block was also reported.
– On 14 December, at about 13:45, 12 Palestinians, including at least two girls, one woman and the mayor, were reportedly killed and others injured when Deir al Balah Municipality in central Deir al Balah was hit.
– On 15 December, at about 21:05, at least ten Palestinians were reportedly killed and others injured when a house was hit in Ash Shuja’iyeh neighbourhood in eastern Gaza city.
– On 15 December, six people were reportedly killed and others injured when a PCD centre was hit in An Nuseirat refugee camp, in northern Deir al Balah. Fatalities reportedly included a cameraperson and four PCD staff and volunteers. The cameraman is among four journalists reported killed in Gaza between 11 and 15 December, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). As of 17 December, the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate reported that 188 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza”.
Con relación a los 188 periodistas asesinados deliberadamente por Israel desde el 7 de octubre del 2023 en Gaza (a un ritmo de más de 11 profesionales de la comunicación asesinados por mes…), se espera siempre que el Colegio de Periodistas de Costa Rica externe alguna expresión de pesar y de condena al actuar de Israel: tuvimos hace poco (8 de diciembre) la ocasión de externarlo desde un medio costarricense, durante la emisión radial de Interferencia de Radio UCR titulada “Gaza / Israel y el cerco de la justicia internacional que se cierra” (véase enlace).
A modo de conclusión
Más allá de la extraña omisión de círculos usualmente muy atentos a la suerte que puedan correr profesionales de la comunicación en su labor informativa, esta votación acaecida el 17 de diciembre en Nueva York confirma el pronunciado aislamiento de Israel en el seno de la comunidad internacional: en América Latina, dos Estados en este 2024 logran no obstante maquillar esta situación, a saber Argentina y Paraguay. Es de notar que en el caso de otro Estado que se mostró sumamente cercano a Israel en años recientes (Brasil), sus servicios de inteligencia descubrieron la existencia de una nube electrónica albergada en un servidor en Israel con datos privados de más de 30.000 brasileños (véase nota de prensa de ElDiario /Argentina, de enero del 2024): se trata muy probablemente de uno de los efectos de la denominada “asociación estratégica” con Israel anunciada en el 2018 por el entonces mandatario brasileño (véase nota de France24).
Se reproduce a continuación el texto en inglés y en español de la resolución adoptada este 17 de diciembre del 2024, dada la poca difusión hecha a la misma en los medios de prensa internacionales: una tendencia que se observa cada vez que las diplomacias israelí y norteamericana fracasan de manera estrepitosa en Naciones Unidas.
Con relación a la justicia internacional (otro ámbito en el que la prensa internacional pareciera bastante omisa), nótese que este 18 de diciembre, la Sala de Apelaciones de la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) acordó un pequeño plazo para la presentación de escritos por parte del Fiscal de la CPI ante una tardía solicitud hecha por Israel. Esta última intenta restarle válidez a las órdenes de arresto contra dos de su máximas figuras, confirmadas el 21 de noviembre por la Sala de lo Preliminar de la CPI luego de 6 largos meses de examen: véase decisión de la CPI del 18 de diciembre del 2024 pasada prácticamente desapercibida en la prensa internacional.
Finalmente, con relación a otra jurisdicción internacional también situada en La Haya, Israel y su incondicional aliado se prepararon para una votación en la que no escatimaron en sus esfuerzos en aras de obtener un número significativo de votos en contra: se trata de una iniciativa de Noruega para emplazar a la CIJ a dictaminar una nueva opinión consultiva luego de la del 19 de julio del 2024, en cuya votación acaecida en diciembre del 2022, Costa Rica votó en contra (Nota 3). Esta iniciativa de Noruega que fue oficialmente anunciada el 29 de octubre del 2024 en Oslo (véase comunicado oficial), se votó este 19 de diciembre del 2024, con una amplia mayoría de 137 votos a favor y 12 en contra, con lo cual, las presiones ejercidas por Israel y Estados Unidos se limitaron a recoger 10 votos en contra únicamente, entre los cuales los previsibles de Argentina, Hungría, Paraguay y República Checa (Nota 4). El detalle del voto puede revisarse en este video de YouTube. Entre los 22 Estados que optaron por la abstención figura únicamente por América Latina, Panamá.
En la propuesta de Noruega que circulaba desde varias semanas en Naciones Unidas (véase texto del proyecto A/79/L.28/Rev.1), se lee el punto 10 de la siguiente manera:
“10. Decide, de conformidad con el Artículo 96 de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, solicitar a la Corte Internacional de Justicia, de conformidad con el Artículo 65 del Estatuto de la Corte, con carácter prioritario y con la máxima urgencia, que emita una opinión consultiva sobre la cuestión que se indica a continuación, teniendo en cuenta las normas y principios del derecho internacional, en particular la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, el derecho internacional humanitario, el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos, las prerrogativas e inmunidades aplicables en virtud del derecho internacional a las organizaciones internacionales y a los Estados, las resoluciones pertinentes del Consejo de Seguridad, la Asamblea General y el Consejo de Derechos Humanos, la opinión consultiva de la Corte de 9 de julio de 2004 y la opinión consultiva de la Corte de 19 de julio de 2024, en que la Corte reafirmó el deber de la Potencia ocupante de administrar el territorio ocupado en beneficio de la población local y afirmó que Israel no tiene derecho a la soberanía sobre ninguna parte del Territorio Palestino Ocupado ni puede ejercer poderes soberanos en él debido a su ocupación:
¿Cuáles son las obligaciones de Israel, como Potencia ocupante y como miembro de las Naciones Unidas, en lo que respecta a la presencia y las actividades de las Naciones Unidas, incluidos sus organismos y órganos, otras organizaciones internacionales y terceros Estados en el Territorio Palestino Ocupado y en relación con él, incluida la garantía y facilitación de la provisión sin trabas de los suministros que se necesitan con urgencia y son esenciales para la supervivencia de la población civil palestina, así como de servicios básicos y asistencia humanitaria y para el desarrollo, en beneficio de la población civil palestina y en apoyo del derecho del pueblo palestino a la libre determinación?”
Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas adopta por abrumadora mayoría resolución sobre libre determinación del pueblo palestino
Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas adopta por abrumadora mayoría resolución sobre libre determinación del pueblo palestino
Nicolas Boeglin, Profesor de Derecho Internacional Público, Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR). Contacto: nboeglin(a)gmail.com
Este 17 de diciembre, con una abrumadora mayoría de 172 votos a favor y tan solo siete en contra, la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas adoptó su tradicional resolución sobre el derecho del pueblo palestino a la libre determinación (véase texto de la proyecto de resolución A/C.3/79/L.49).
Se trata de un ejercicio diplomático anual al que se someten los 193 Estados Miembros de Naciones Unidas: en el 2023, el 19 de diciembre se adoptó una resolución similar (véase texto de la resolución A/Res/78/192) con 172 votos a favor y cuatro en contra (Estados Unidos, Israel, Micronesia y Nauru), 10 Estados optando por la abstención (entre los cuales Guatemala y Paraguay) según el detalle de la votación.
El voto observado en breve este 17 de diciembre del 2024
El tablero de la votación de este 17 de diciembre del 2024 puede ser consultado en este video de YouTube: esta vez, Israel y su incondicional aliado norteamericano pudieron contar con los votos en contra de Argentina, Micronesia, Nauru, Paraguay, y Papua Nueva Guinea. Cabe precisar que se trata de votaciones en las que aliados tradicionales de Israel en este tipo de ejercicios como suelen serlo para otras resoluciones Austría, Australia, Canadá, Hungría o República Checa se desmarcan y no acceden a las solicitudes de Israel (y de Estados Unidos) de votar en contra.
Con relación al texto como tal, la única actualización con relación al texto del 2023 es una referencia que se añadió a la opinión consutiva de la Corte Internacional de Justicia (CIJ) del 19 de julio del 2024, confirmando el carácter ilegal de la colonización y ocupación del territorio palestino por parte de Israel. Cabe recordar que cuando la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas acogió esta opinión consultiva en una votación realizada el 18 de septiembre del 2024 y optó por declarar ilegal dicha colonización (véase comunicado oficial de Naciones Unidas), Costa Rica optó por abstenerse sin dar explicaciones de su voto a las demás delegaciones presentes en Nueva York, como sí lo hizo por ejemplo Alemania. La justificación del voto en cambio apareció posteriormente en un comunicado oficial colgado por el aparato diplomático costarricense: véase al respecto una nota nuestra (Nota 1) publicada en LaRevista.cr, en el acápite “Algunas breves acotaciones con respecto a la ‘justificación’ aportada oficialmente por la diplomacia costarricense”. De manera a no causar mayor sonrojo al ya causado, omitiremos reeditar dichas acotaciones.
Con relación a América Latina, Argentina (así como Paraguay) están en este año 2024 sustituyendo a las pequeñas islas del Pacífico tradicionalmente muy atentas a las solicitudes de Israel (Islas Fidji, Islas Marshall, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua Nueva Guinea), conformando desde varios años en Naciones Unidas la única “coalición” para acompañar a Israel y a Estados Unidos en este tipo de contiendas diplomáticas (Nota 2). Por su parte, Ecuador y Panamá optaron por abstenerse, siendo los únicos dos Estados de América Latina en escoger esta opción, conjuntamente con seis otros Estados.
No está de más recordar un hecho bastante inusual observado en Naciones Unidas (y en Argentina…) cuando las actuales autoridades argentinas optaron el pasado 30 de octubre por destituir a su máxima autoridad diplomática, al haber instruído a su delegación en Naciones Unidas a votar en favor de un proyecto de resolución también anual (véase texto) que solicita levantar el embargo contra Cuba (véase nota de ElPais/España): en esta ocasión solamente Estados Unidos e Israel votaron en contra, al tiempo que 182 votaron a favor (véase comunicado oficial de Naciones Unidas). Idéntica “oposición ultra minoritaria” se observó en noviembre del 2023 con 187 votos a favor (véase comunicado oficial de Naciones Unidas).
El aislamiento de Israel en el seno de la comunidad internacional
Este nuevo informe de Human Rights Watch dado a conocer este 19 de diciembre del 2024 detalla el uso del faltante de agua como arma de guerra en Gaza por parte de Israel, confirmando para los investigadores de esta reconocida ONG su intención genocida en Gaza.
Al respecto, el pasado 4 de diciembre, el genocidio en curso en Gaza iniciado desde la tarde noche del 7 de octubre del 2023 fue confirmado en un contundente informe de otra reconocida ONG Amnistía Internacional, antecedido en octubre por el informe de la Relatora Especial de Naciones Unidas titulado “El genocidio como supresión colonial “, precedido de su informe de julio titulado “Anatomía de un genocidio”: la poca difusión en medios de prensa internacionales de estos informes plantea interrogantes muy válidas.
Adicionalmente a ello, las acciones militares en el Líbano por parte de Israel desde mediados de septiembre, así como en Siria desde hace dos semanas parecieran responder a un intento bastante sutil para desviar la atención medática internacional sobre lo que ocurre en Gaza y en Cisjordania.
El último informe de Naciones Unidas sobre la situación en Cisjordania (al 19 de diciembre) está disponible en este enlace. A su vez, con relación a Gaza, el último informe sobre la situación al 17 de diciembre realizado por Naciones Unidas (véase informe) detalla cómo el ritmo de muertos y de heridos y de destrucción por parte de Israel se ha mantenido ininterrumpido, con un ensañamiento en contra de la población civil palestina de Gaza raramente observado (y pasado por alto por buena parte de los medios de prensa internacional). Al dramático saldo de víctimas palestinas que supera ya las 45.000 personas, se puede leer además que:
“Israeli bombardment from the air, land and sea continues to be reported across the Gaza Strip, resulting in further civilian casualties, displacement, and destruction of civilian infrastructure. In the North Gaza governorate, the Israeli military has been carrying out a ground offensive since 6 October 2024, with fighting reported between Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups. Israeli forces have continued to impose a tightened siege on Beit Lahiya, Beit Hanoun and parts of Jabalya and humanitarian assistance has been largely denied for more than 10 weeks (see data below). Rocket firing by Palestinian armed groups towards Israel was reported.
Between the afternoons of 10 and 17 December, according to the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza, 273 Palestinians were killed and 853 were injured. Between 7 October 2023 and 17 December 2024, at least 45,059 Palestinians were killed and 107,041 were injured, according to MoH in Gaza.
Between the afternoons of 10 and 17 December, two Israeli soldiers were killed in Gaza, according to the Israeli military. Between 7 October 2023 and 17 December 2024, according to the Israeli military and official Israeli sources cited in the media, more than 1,586 Israelis and foreign nationals were killed, the majority on 7 October 2023 and its immediate aftermath. The figure includes 386 soldiers killed in Gaza or along the border in Israel since the beginning of the ground operation. In addition, 2,488 Israeli soldiers were reported injured since the beginning of the ground operation. As of 17 December, it is estimated that 100 Israelis and foreign nationals remain captive in Gaza, including hostages who have been declared dead and whose bodies are withheld in Gaza.
Attacks on schools sheltering internally displaced people (IDPs) in Gaza continue to be reported, with nine such incidents documented so far in December 2024 by the UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR). According to the Education Cluster, between 6 October and 15 December 2024, 95 incidents involving attacks on school buildings, mostly serving as IDP shelters, were documented, including 61 incidents in North Gaza governorate. On 14 and 15 December alone, four schools were hit, as follows:
– On 14 December, two schools-turned shelters were reportedly hit in Gaza city, resulting in the killing of seven Palestinians, including three children, and the injury of tens of others, according to Palestinian Civil Defense (PCD).
– On 15 December, Israeli troops reportedly surrounded and raided Khalil Owaidah School sheltering IDPs in ‘Izbat Beit Hanun, in North Gaza, where it was reported that male IDPs were detained while women and children were forced to move southwards. Tens of people were reported killed, but the exact circumstances remain unclear. Citing IDP testimonies, PCD reported that fatalities included 10-15 people who were incinerated, and the school was destroyed.
– On 15 December, the third floor of an UNRWA school sheltering IDPs in Al Mawasi, in Khan Younis, was hit. Within minutes, the emergency department of the nearby Nasser Medical Complex was flooded with casualties, most of them women and children. Many were severely injured and died on site or en route to the hospital, reported international doctors from Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) operating in the facility as part of a joint Emergency Medical Team (EMT) with the International Rescue Committee. An internal medicine and emergency care consultant counted at least 18 people dying in the emergency department, including 12 children under the age of 12. The first patient arrived in the facility was “a three-year-old girl who had the left side of her forehead torn open by shrapnel fragments which had penetrated her skull,” and who, due to shortages of painkillers and anaesthetics, had to be treated “with very little access to medications,” added the consultant. A plastic surgeon also noted that his first patient was a 12 to 14-year-old boy whose face was entirely burnt, and who had open wounds on his chest and on both of his legs.
Other deadly incidents reported between 10 and 15 December include:
– On 10 December, at about 23:00, 22 Palestinians were reportedly killed and others injured when a three-story building was hit near Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahiya in North Gaza.
– On 12 December, at about 00:30, seven Palestinians including children and women were reportedly killed and others injured when two apartments in a residential tower were hit in northwestern Gaza city.
– On 12 December, on two occasions at about 00:01 and 00:55, 22 Palestinians were reportedly killed and others injured when people were hit in Khan Younis and Rafah. According to the Government Media Office (GMO), fatalities included 15 people tasked with securing the movement of aid trucks, raising the number of people killed while securing aid trucks to 720 so far.
– On 12 December, at about 02:00, 15 Palestinians including at least one woman and seven children were reportedly killed, and several others injured, when a house sheltering IDPs was hit in western An Nuseirat refugee camp in northern Deir al Balah.
– On 12 December, at about 20:30, at least 34 Palestinians were reportedly killed and 40 others injured, when two residential buildings were hit in central An Nuseirat refugee camp, in Deir al Balah, according to PCD. According to the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), at least eight children were among the fatalities (see below). Extensive damage of the residential block was also reported.
– On 14 December, at about 13:45, 12 Palestinians, including at least two girls, one woman and the mayor, were reportedly killed and others injured when Deir al Balah Municipality in central Deir al Balah was hit.
– On 15 December, at about 21:05, at least ten Palestinians were reportedly killed and others injured when a house was hit in Ash Shuja’iyeh neighbourhood in eastern Gaza city.
– On 15 December, six people were reportedly killed and others injured when a PCD centre was hit in An Nuseirat refugee camp, in northern Deir al Balah. Fatalities reportedly included a cameraperson and four PCD staff and volunteers. The cameraman is among four journalists reported killed in Gaza between 11 and 15 December, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). As of 17 December, the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate reported that 188 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza”.
Con relación a los 188 periodistas asesinados deliberadamente por Israel desde el 7 de octubre del 2023 en Gaza (a un ritmo de más de 11 profesionales de la comunicación asesinados por mes…), se espera siempre que el Colegio de Periodistas de Costa Rica externe alguna expresión de pesar y de condena al actuar de Israel: tuvimos hace poco (8 de diciembre) la ocasión de externarlo desde un medio costarricense, durante la emisión radial de Interferencia de Radio UCR titulada “Gaza / Israel y el cerco de la justicia internacional que se cierra” (véase enlace).
A modo de conclusión
Más allá de la extraña omisión de círculos usualmente muy atentos a la suerte que puedan correr profesionales de la comunicación en su labor informativa, esta votación acaecida el 17 de diciembre en Nueva York confirma el pronunciado aislamiento de Israel en el seno de la comunidad internacional: en América Latina, dos Estados en este 2024 logran no obstante maquillar esta situación, a saber Argentina y Paraguay. Es de notar que en el caso de otro Estado que se mostró sumamente cercano a Israel en años recientes (Brasil), sus servicios de inteligencia descubrieron la existencia de una nube electrónica albergada en un servidor en Israel con datos privados de más de 30.000 brasileños (véase nota de prensa de ElDiario /Argentina, de enero del 2024): se trata muy probablemente de uno de los efectos de la denominada “asociación estratégica” con Israel anunciada en el 2018 por el entonces mandatario brasileño (véase nota de France24).
Se reproduce a continuación el texto en inglés y en español de la resolución adoptada este 17 de diciembre del 2024, dada la poca difusión hecha a la misma en los medios de prensa internacionales: una tendencia que se observa cada vez que las diplomacias israelí y norteamericana fracasan de manera estrepitosa en Naciones Unidas.
Con relación a la justicia internacional (otro ámbito en el que la prensa internacional pareciera bastante omisa), nótese que este 18 de diciembre, la Sala de Apelaciones de la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) acordó un pequeño plazo para la presentación de escritos por parte del Fiscal de la CPI ante una tardía solicitud hecha por Israel. Esta última intenta restarle válidez a las órdenes de arresto contra dos de su máximas figuras, confirmadas el 21 de noviembre por la Sala de lo Preliminar de la CPI luego de 6 largos meses de examen: véase decisión de la CPI del 18 de diciembre del 2024 pasada prácticamente desapercibida en la prensa internacional.
Finalmente, con relación a otra jurisdicción internacional también situada en La Haya, Israel y su incondicional aliado se prepararon para una votación en la que no escatimaron en sus esfuerzos en aras de obtener un número significativo de votos en contra: se trata de una iniciativa de Noruega para emplazar a la CIJ a dictaminar una nueva opinión consultiva luego de la del 19 de julio del 2024, en cuya votación acaecida en diciembre del 2022, Costa Rica votó en contra (Nota 3). Esta iniciativa de Noruega que fue oficialmente anunciada el 29 de octubre del 2024 en Oslo (véase comunicado oficial), se votó este 19 de diciembre del 2024, con una amplia mayoría de 137 votos a favor y 12 en contra, con lo cual, las presiones ejercidas por Israel y Estados Unidos se limitaron a recoger 10 votos en contra únicamente, entre los cuales los previsibles de Argentina, Hungría, Paraguay y República Checa (Nota 4). El detalle del voto puede revisarse en este video de YouTube. Entre los 22 Estados que optaron por la abstención figura únicamente por América Latina, Panamá.
En la propuesta de Noruega que circulaba desde varias semanas en Naciones Unidas (véase texto del proyecto A/79/L.28/Rev.1), se lee el punto 10 de la siguiente manera:
“10. Decide, de conformidad con el Artículo 96 de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, solicitar a la Corte Internacional de Justicia, de conformidad con el Artículo 65 del Estatuto de la Corte, con carácter prioritario y con la máxima urgencia, que emita una opinión consultiva sobre la cuestión que se indica a continuación, teniendo en cuenta las normas y principios del derecho internacional, en particular la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, el derecho internacional humanitario, el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos, las prerrogativas e inmunidades aplicables en virtud del derecho internacional a las organizaciones internacionales y a los Estados, las resoluciones pertinentes del Consejo de Seguridad, la Asamblea General y el Consejo de Derechos Humanos, la opinión consultiva de la Corte de 9 de julio de 2004 y la opinión consultiva de la Corte de 19 de julio de 2024, en que la Corte reafirmó el deber de la Potencia ocupante de administrar el territorio ocupado en beneficio de la población local y afirmó que Israel no tiene derecho a la soberanía sobre ninguna parte del Territorio Palestino Ocupado ni puede ejercer poderes soberanos en él debido a su ocupación:
¿Cuáles son las obligaciones de Israel, como Potencia ocupante y como miembro de las Naciones Unidas, en lo que respecta a la presencia y las actividades de las Naciones Unidas, incluidos sus organismos y órganos, otras organizaciones internacionales y terceros Estados en el Territorio Palestino Ocupado y en relación con él, incluida la garantía y facilitación de la provisión sin trabas de los suministros que se necesitan con urgencia y son esenciales para la supervivencia de la población civil palestina, así como de servicios básicos y asistencia humanitaria y para el desarrollo, en beneficio de la población civil palestina y en apoyo del derecho del pueblo palestino a la libre determinación?”
On the occasion of Latvia’s 106th Independence Anniversary, the Latvian Embassy in the Netherlands organized a memorable reception and concert at the stunning Nieuwe Kerk in The Hague. H.E. Ambassador Solvita Āboltiņa, marking her first National Day celebration in the Netherlands since her accreditation in March, delivered an inspiring speech highlighting Latvia’s achievements, shared values with the Netherlands, and the strength of their bilateral partnership.
A Warm Welcome and Reflection on Shared Experiences
Ambassador Āboltiņa welcomed attendees with warmth and gratitude. Reflecting on her experiences in the Netherlands, she remarked on the Dutch passion for cycling and the stunning variety of flowers that connect with Latvians’ love of planting and nature.
Latvian Ambassador Ms Solvita Āboltiņa, welcoming her guests.
Security and Shared Global Values
The Ambassador’s speech emphasized the importance of security as a cornerstone of Latvia’s international engagement. She marked the 1000th day since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine with a moment of silence, honoring the courage of the Ukrainian people.
She highlighted Latvia’s 20-year membership in NATO and the European Union, as well as the 10th anniversary of adopting the euro, underscoring how these strategic choices have bolstered Latvia’s security and credibility. “Latvia and the Netherlands share common values and a deep understanding of the Russian aggression’s threat to European and global security,” she stated, reaffirming unwavering support for Ukraine.
The Ambassador also recognized the Netherlands’ contributions to NATO’s Multinational Brigade in Lithuania and expressed gratitude for the alliance’s collective commitment to deterrence and defense. She reiterated shared concerns regarding the Middle East, advocating for dialogue and peacebuilding efforts.
Economic Partnerships and Sustainability Initiatives
Turning to economic collaboration, Ambassador Āboltiņa celebrated the partnership between Latvia and the Netherlands. She noted the Netherlands’ position among Latvia’s top trading and investment partners, a reflection of the mutual trust and synergy between the two nations.
Latvia’s diverse exports, from anti-reflective glass protecting Dutch museum artworks to high-reliability routers and food products, were highlighted as contributions to the Dutch market. Ambassador Āboltiņa also acknowledged Dutch companies thriving in Latvia, such as Brabantia, Pharmeko, and Royal Legro, praising their role in creating a strong business ecosystem.
Sustainability emerged as a key theme, with examples of innovative projects such as:
Van Oord’s collaboration with Liepāja to develop a port for offshore wind energy projects.
Fokker Next Gen’s partnership with Latvia to pioneer emission-free air travel.
Ingka Investments’ expansion in Latvia, focusing on sustainable forest management.
“It is the shared spirit of small countries achieving grand things that truly connects us,” the Ambassador remarked, celebrating the potential for future collaboration.
Concluding her speech, Ambassador Āboltiņa underscored the determination of the Latvian people, with music serving as a beacon through challenges. She introduced the evening’s performers, Latvian-Ukrainian musicians Katrīna Gupalo and Edgars Vilcāns. Katrīna, a celebrated composer, pianist, and singer, is known for her captivating performances, including her participation in Latvia’s Eurovision selection. Edgars, a distinguished jazz pianist and producer, has used his music to support Ukraine since relocating to Latvia following the Russian invasion.
Latvian-Ukrainian musicians Katrīna Gupalo and Edgars Vilcāns during the Latvia National Day 2024 The Hague.
The evening concluded with a moving performance by the duo. The Ambassador’s closing remarks in Latvian, addressed to the Latvian community in the Netherlands, further highlighted the importance of unity and shared identity.
Under the motto Glorious November, loyalty and Renewal
The Embassy of Algeria to the Netherlands hosted a commemorative reception on November 6, 2024, in The Hague to honor the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the National Liberation War.
The event drew a large crowd, filling the venue to capacity. Attendees included representatives from Dutch official institutions, the diplomatic corps, and international organizations based in The Hague, alongside members of the Algerian diaspora in the Netherlands, including prominent figures from government and academia.
H.E. Mr. Mifougo Youssouf Diarrassouba, Ambassador of Ivory Coast, H.E. Ms. Ramatoulaye Ba Epse Faye, Ambassador of Senegal, H.E. Ms. Salima Abdelhak, Ambassador of Algeria, H.E. Ms Caroline Chipeta Kitana, Ambassador of Tanzania, H.E. Hon Halima Yussuf Mucheke, Ambassador of Kenya and H.E. Ms. Isabelle Ndahayo, Ambassador of Burundi.
During the reception, Ambassador H.E. Mrs. Salima Abdelhak delivered a speech emphasizing the historical significance of the National Liberation War both nationally and globally.
“On November 1, 1954, driven by the quest for freedom and dignity, the Algerian people embarked on a long and difficult struggle following the call by the National Liberation Front (FLN). This struggle led to Algeria’s independence after 132 years of occupation, becoming a universal symbol of courage and sacrifice that inspired many nations in their own paths to independence.”
Among people on the picture, H.E. Mr. Ammar M.B. Hijazi, Chief of Palestinian Mission and H.E. Ms Sahar Ghanem, Dean of the Diplomatic Corps and Ambassador of Yemen.
Ambassador Abdelhak also highlighted Algeria’s progress in economic, social, and political fields, focusing on the recent presidential elections. She underscored the reforms initiated by President Abdelmadjid Tebboune, who secured a second term to further these advancements.
H.E. Ms Madeleine Liguemoh Ondoua, Ambassador of Cameroon, H.E. Mr. Alvaro Gonzalez Otero, Ambassador of Uruguay, Algerian artist Manal Gherbi, H.E. Ms Salima Abdelhak, Ambassador of Algeria, Dr Mayelinne De Lara, Diplomat Magazine’s publisher and Dayana Perez Fernandez, Embassy of the Dominican Republic.
“Algeria has reaffirmed its democratic commitment by re-electing President Tebboune for a second term. Building on his first mandate’s achievements—modernizing the economy, enhancing the business climate, boosting employment, and improving rural living conditions—President Tebboune aims to advance institutional modernization, strengthen the rule of law, and diversify the economy through agriculture, industry, and tourism. Algeria also maintains its role as a reliable European energy partner while advancing renewable energy initiatives, including green hydrogen.”
On bilateral relations, Ambassador Abdelhak noted the strong ties between Algeria and the Netherlands at both bilateral and multilateral levels.
“Algeria and the Netherlands enjoy excellent bilateral relations built on mutual respect, friendship, and cooperation. Our countries share a common vision of the importance of multilateralism and adherence to international law. We collaborate in sectors such as agriculture, energy, water management, and higher education, and we are confident this partnership will continue to grow.”
She also recognized Algeria’s constructive contributions to international organizations headquartered in the Netherlands.
“Algeria reiterates its unwavering support for the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as an essential tool for resolving disputes and addressing global challenges. Similarly, my country closely follows the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is currently addressing the situation in Palestine, offering hope for the Palestinian people.”
Ambassador Abdelhak highlighted Algeria’s commitment to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), emphasizing its vital role in global disarmament and peace.
Patricia van Oordt, Ambassador Abdelhak and Fernando Arias, OPCW Director General.Dr Dilruba Nasrin and spouse H.E. Sheikh Mohammed Belal, Managing Director of CFC and H.E. Ms Salima Abdelhak, Ambassador of Algeria.
“The OPCW is crucial for international peace and security. Algeria remains dedicated to implementing the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and recently achieved a significant milestone with the designation of the National Institute of Criminology and Criminalistics of the National Gendarmerie (NICC/GN) as an OPCW-designated laboratory. This reinforces Algeria’s efforts and provides Africa with its own specialized laboratory.”
Addressing the Algerian community in the Netherlands, Ambassador Abdelhak expressed pride in their contributions to Dutch society and their role in representing Algeria positively.
“I reaffirm that the Embassy is always at your service, ready to assist in facilitating your contributions to development efforts. Your achievements enhance Algeria’s image and deepen the cultural and human ties between our two peoples.”
The reception also celebrated the richness and diversity of Algerian culture. Guests enjoyed a outstanding performance of classical and folk music by Algerian artist Manal Gherbi and her ensemble. The event concluded with a sumptuous dinner, embodying the spirit of Algerian hospitality, leaving all attendees with a deeper appreciation for the country’s cultural and historical heritage.
Ambassador Abdelhak together with Algerian artist Manal Gherbi and her ensemble.
Prior to Donald Trump’s anticipated second term in office, indications of his potential actions over the next four years are already emerging. The United States is currently navigating a complex geopolitical landscape, where the American people face the looming threat of nuclear conflict—a nuclear incidence might have happen if Trump does not play a prominent role in global politics.
It can be argued that Trump has not only safeguarded the United States but also the entire world from the specter of nuclear warfare by exerting control over the situation in Ukraine. The peace-loving citizens of Europe are likely experiencing a sense of relief following Trump’s electoral success. However, the reality for those European nations that have incited Zelensky to engage in conflict with Russia are now face multiple crisis as they are now grappling with the influx of Ukrainian refugees.
If NATO become embroiled in military hostilities with Russia, the populations of the involved countries could confront the harrowing prospect of a nuclear disaster before any resolution is achieved. In the aftermath of such devastation, NATO leaders might declare their victory to the world, standing amidst the ruins of countless civilian and military lives lost.
Recognizing the severe implications of the United States’ involvement in a European conflict, Trump has shifted his stance regarding the Ukraine war, opting to avoid further provocation. His proposed resolution to the conflict is unlikely to be favorable for Zelensky, a former comedian, as it does not guarantee the return of territories lost to Russia.
Once the conflict concludes, the Ukrainian people will begin to assess the gains and losses incurred. Zelensky suspended elections under the guise of wartime necessity, he will ultimately be compelled to conduct elections in post-conflict era. If he should choose to abstain from participating in those elections, then too, he will then bear the burden of war, potentially facing charges as a war criminal. Aware of this precarious future, Zelensky is now pursuing NATO and European Union membership, actively advocating for the deployment of European troops in Ukraine—an action that he could present to Ukrainian people as a reward for their sacrifices during the war.
If the war ends in favor of Russia, the leaders of France, Germany, and the UK, who support this war, will also face extreme disaster, just like Zelensky. Russia will also remain a threat to NATO. The question is why does Trump want to put his NATO allies in this disastrous situation? Why his affection to Putin? These are some of the questions that have arisen in December. This month, Ukraine has been in extreme danger on the battlefield. At the same time, Trump has taken a stand against the use of US missiles on Russian soil. Donald Trump has said he is “strongly” opposed to Ukraine using US long-range missiles in Russia, while vowing not to abandon Kiev.
According to an article published by Time magazine, Donald Trump wants to back down from Joe Biden’s decision to authorize long-range strikes with US weapons on Russian territory.
Under Trump’s pressure, Israel has agreed to a ceasefire with Hezbollah. At the same time, Syrian rebels have come to over through Assad. It is noteworthy that Putin has not shown any activity to save Assad at this time. On the contrary, he has called Assad to Moscow before anyone understands anything and given him political asylum. This retreat of Russia has put Assad’s ally Iran in a terrible predicament. On the other hand, Trump has to withdraw his hands from Ukraine. Now Zelensky has no choice but to make a peace deal with Russia. Just as Russia has retreated in Syria, the United States is going to withdraw from the Ukraine war. It can be said that in exchange for Ukraine, the United States has been able to remove Putin from the Middle East.
Now let’s see why the Middle East is so valuable to the United States than Ukraine? The first reason is Israel’s position in the Middle East, and Ukraine is not as important to the United States as Israel. The war that has been going on for the past year, against Hamas and Hezbollah, has exposed many of Israel’s weaknesses. In other words, the so-called Iron Dome has failed to make Israel safe. The source of weapons for the Houthis in Yemen or Hezbollah or the anti-Israel fighters in Iraq is Russia. These weapons are going to the anti-Israel fighters through Iran with Russian technical assistance. Now if Russia stops all these supplies, then Putin will have to get something big in return.
A large part of Ukrainian land occupied by Russia. Zelensky will have to make a peace treaty with Russia by giving this land to Russia.
Israel’s interests are great precious for Trump. During this term, Trump will do everything possible for Israel’s long-term security and occupation. Saudi Arabia, once the United States’ biggest ally, has dangerously moved into Putin’s circle during Biden’s term. It has formed an alliance with the United States’ biggest enemy, Iran. In which another enemy of the United States, China, has played a role. During Trump’s previous term, Saudi Arabia was almost at the stage of normalizing relations with Israel. During Biden’s term, Saudi Arabia has moved to an anti-Israel position.
Trump will now apply various pressures on Saudi Arabia so that Saudi Arabia is able to establish normal relations with Israel – and withdraw from the demand for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. To keep Saudi Arabia under pressure, Iran must be weakened by any means. Now, by removing the Iranians from Syria, the United States has done the most important thing to remove Iran from the region of influence.
A large part of Syria has been occupied by Israel. Israel has destroyed almost all the Assad forces’ positions through airstrikes. Surprisingly, the ruling group in Syria is not saying anything against the Israeli attack. Perhaps they have accepted the Israeli attack. The question remains whether a pro-Israel government has come to power in Syria. After the Syrian incident, the United States and Israel are again hinting at an attack on Iran. Perhaps a terrible attack on Iran will soon occur and Iran will become a weak state. If Iran is punished, Saudi Arabia will return to the US sphere of influence.
About the author:
Sazzad Haider, Photographer Habib Raza.
Sazzad Haider is Writer & journalist, lives in Dhaka, Bangladesh. He is Editor-in-Chief of Diplomatic Journal.
The Indus Water Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960 and mediated by the World Bank, is a key water-sharing agreement between India and Pakistan. The Treaty allocates the use of the Indus River system, which includes six rivers flowing through the region. It allocates the Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan and the Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India.
The Treaty is considered one of the most successful transboundary water-sharing agreements, as it has survived various political and military tensions between the two neighbouring nations. However, on 25 January 2023, India issued a notice to Pakistan seeking modification of the Treaty, citing Pakistan’s alleged intransigence as the primary concern. Subsequently, on 30 August 2024, India issued another notice, highlighting fundamental and unforeseen changes in circumstances as grounds for reviewing and modifying the Treaty. These notices raise significant concerns regarding their potential legal implications for the treaty. This insight delves into the legal analysis of the notices by examining the relevant provisions of international law and customary norms.
The notices sent by India to Pakistan are merely a precursor to a negotiation process and do not unilaterally modify the Treaty.
Tensions arose between the two countries over the design features of the Kishanganga (330 MW) and Ratle (850 MW) hydroelectric power plants located in India on tributaries of the Jhelum and Chenab Rivers. While the Treaty permits India to build hydroelectric facilities on these rivers, it requires compliance with design constraints and Pakistan’s approval. In 2016, Pakistan approached the World Bank, requesting the formation of a Court of Arbitration (CoA) to address its concerns over the power plants’ designs. India, however, insisted on appointing a Neutral Expert. To settle such disputes, the treaty establishes a comprehensive framework through the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), which consists of a commissioner from each country. It categorises issues into three distinct levels: “questions” to be addressed by the Commission, “differences” to be resolved by a Neutral Expert, and “disputes” to be referred to as a CoA. This structured approach ensures that disagreements regarding the usage of shared rivers are systematically handled.
However, the countries remain divided on which dispute resolution process to follow. In response, the World Bank initiated both processes simultaneously. However, India chose not to participate in the CoA proceedings, and in 2023, it issued a formal notice to Pakistan seeking to modify the Treaty.
From India’s perspective, Pakistan has bypassed the Treaty’s graded dispute resolution mechanism, constituting a material breach of the agreement. Furthermore, India contends that the World Bank, under persistent pressure from Pakistan, initiated two parallel dispute resolution processes—the CoA and the Neutral Expert—which risks producing conflicting outcome, which can potentially complicate the resolution of the issue.
On the other hand, Pakistan asserts that the hydroelectric power plants being constructed by India violate the Treaty, arguing that this issue constitutes a “dispute” rather than a mere “difference”. Pakistan contends that the design conflict is not solely a technical matter but also requires interpretation of the Treaty. Therefore, referring the matter to the CoA rather than a Neutral Expert, who is limited to technical assessments, is crucial. In contrast, the CoA addresses both legal and technical aspects. As a result, Pakistan maintains that the CoA is the appropriate forum for resolving this issue, as stipulated by the Treaty.
In response to India’s first notice, Pakistan’s Attorney General’s office confirmed that on April 5, 2023, Pakistan formally replied, expressing its willingness to address New Delhi’s concerns. Pakistan proposed that these discussions should occur within the framework of the PIC, demonstrating its commitment to resolving the matter through dialogue while upholding the Treaty’s provisions.
On 30 August 2024, India issued another notice to Pakistan, citing ‘fundamental and unforeseen circumstances’ that necessitate a reassessment of the IWT. India’s concerns include population demographic shifts, environmental challenges and the ongoing impact of cross-border terrorism. In response, Pakistan expressed its willingness to engage in discussions. Foreign Office Spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch clarified Pakistan’s position, emphasising the desire to address India’s concerns through the existing framework of IWT.
It is essential to understand that India’s notice or request for modification does not ipso facto annually amend or modify the Treaty. The Treaty itself provides a framework for modification under Article XII. It explicitly states that modification or alteration cannot occur without the agreement of both parties. Therefore, any modification to the IWT must be negotiated, drafted, and ratified by both countries to have legal standing. The Treaty’s structure ensures that no unilateral modification is possible.
Regarding annulment, customary international law supports the view that treaties of indefinite duration, such as the IWT, cannot be unilaterally terminated by one party without violating international law. Any such withdrawal would not only breach the terms of the Treaty but also constitute a gross violation of international law, as treaties of this nature are binding unless both parties agree to terminate them.
Regarding India’s claim that Pakistan has materially breached the Treaty, this can be assessed under Article 60(3) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). Article 60(3) defines a material breach as: “(i) a repudiation of the treaty not sanctioned by the present Convention; or (ii) a violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty.” In this context, Pakistan’s decision to pursue the CoA over a Neutral Expert does not meet this definition. While the choice of dispute resolution mechanism is contested, it does not violate any provision essential to fulfilling the Treaty’s objectives. Therefore, the issue remains a procedural disagreement rather than a breach of the Treaty’s core provisions.
Moreover, in its second notice, India’s claim regarding fundamental changes in circumstances can be addressed through dialogue at the PIC. However, India cannot use these claims as grounds for withdrawal from the treaty. Under Article 62(1) of the VCLT, the principle of pacta sunt servanda—the obligation to uphold treaties—prevails, even if unforeseen circumstances arise, unless the treaty’s provisions become an undue burden on one of the parties. Currently, there is no evidence that these circumstances have created such a burden on either party.
The notices sent by India to Pakistan are merely a precursor to a negotiation process and do not unilaterally modify the Treaty. Both nations must uphold their international responsibilities and collaborate within the IWT framework to address their concerns. This landmark agreement on transboundary river systems has withstood numerous challenges and should not be altered or annulled based on political changes or personal preferences. It is essential that India and Pakistan honour their commitments and work together to preserve the Treaty’s integrity, ensuring continued cooperation and stability in their bilateral relations.
About the author:
Maham Ayaz
Maham Ayaz is a Research Associate at the Centre of Excellence for International Law (CEIL), ISSRA, NDU, specializing in Public International Law and International Humanitarian Law.
Her current work focuses on the legal aspects of transboundary water disputes, including the Indus Waters Treaty, contributing to research on complex international issues.
The Embassy of Uruguay, together with the Hispanic Association of The Hague, co-organized an event dedicated to the work of Uruguayan writer Cristina Peri Rossi, winner of the prestigious International Cervantes Prize in 2021.
The conference was very well attended, filling the room with over 70 guests, including the Ambassadors of Argentina, Chile, and Costa Rica, as well as diplomats from the Embassies of Venezuela, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador. Among the attendees were Judge Graciela Gatti Santana, President of the United Nations Residual Mechanism, and Dr. Mayelinne De Lara, Director of Diplomat Magazine.
Edith Bergansius, Prof Gabriel Inzaurralde and the Ambassador of Uruguay.
The keynote speaker was Gabriel Inzaurralde, a prominent Uruguayan professor of Latin American literature at Leiden University in the Netherlands.
The event opened with remarks from Ambassador Álvaro González Otero, who emphasized the importance of encouraging cultural dialogue as a cornerstone for promoting international peace. “Wars are born in the minds of men, and it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed,” he said, quoting the UNESCO Constitution.
Ambassador González Otero also highlighted the remarkable career of Cristina Peri Rossi and expressed gratitude to Professor Inzaurralde. He gave special recognition to the Hispanic Association of The Hague for its continuous efforts to promote the Spanish language and Latin American culture in the Netherlands.
“In the same vein,” said the Ambassador, “I wish to highlight the tremendous work of our dear Edith Bergansius, President of the Hispanic Association of The Hague. Her tireless dedication is fundamental for the promotion of Hispanic culture in the Netherlands. For over three decades, Edith has championed a wide variety of cultural and educational activities.” Bergansius has been the recipient of significant awards, including one from the Embassy of Spain and another from the Mayor of The Hague, on behalf of the King, marking the centenary of the association and recognizing her presidency since 2006.
The Ambassador of Costa Rica, H.E. Arnoldo Brenes Castro, Edith Bergansius, Presidenta de la Asociacion Hispanica de La Haya, Prof. Gabriel Inzurralde, H.E. Alvaro Gonzalez Otero, Ambassador of Uruguay and Dayana Perez Fernandez, Diplomat from the Dominican Republic.
Professor Inzaurralde, delivering his tenth conference on Latin American writers for the association, offered a thorough and engaging analysis of the life and works of Cristina Peri Rossi.
The Uruguayan writer Cristina Peri Rossi was forced to leave her country for political reasons in 1972 and never returned to live in Uruguay. Her writing initially presents itself as an effort against transience—a record that captures moments, treasures memories, and resists oblivion. At the same time, Peri Rossi crafts her words to create an alternative space for the circulation of desire. In the concept of exile, both tendencies converge: memory and dissident eroticism. Drawing on excerpts from her novels and short stories, and by exploring her poetic and political work, Professor Inzaurralde discussed themes of travel and distance, sex and despair.
Born in Montevideo in 1941, Peri Rossi has lived in exile in Spain since 1972 following the rise of the dictatorship in Uruguay at the time. True to his engaging lecture style, Professor Inzaurralde involved the audience in a dynamic exploration of Peri Rossi’s career, personal journey, and literary works, including La nave de los locos. Thought-provoking discussions arose: How did exile and her sexuality influence Peri Rossi’s life? Would these same conditions impact a writer today? Can exile, love, and memory coexist in our contemporary world?
“According to the World Bank,” the ambassador quoted in his speech, “Uruguay stands out in Latin America for being an egalitarian society, for its high per capita income and for its low poverty levels. In relative terms, its middle class is the largest in the Americas and the Caribbean and represents 60% of its population. It is known for being the country of the mate, for the excellence of its meats and wines, and for being the place where the first soccer world cup was held and for having the longest carnival in the world”. He closed his speech by inviting those present to visit Uruguay.
The event concluded with a lively reception, where the Embassy of Uruguay treated attendees to empanadas, alfajores, and excellent Uruguayan wines. The gathering provided an excellent opportunity for participants to share reflections and express appreciation for both the Embassy of Uruguay and the Hispanic Association of The Hague for organizing such a captivating and enriching event.
The international political magazine Diplomat Magazine, based in the Netherlands, recognized the notable work of the Dominican Ambassador, H.E. Juan Bautista Durán, during his tenure in the country from 2021 to 2024.
In a special ceremony, Ambassador Durán was awarded the Certificate of Merit for his significant contribution to strengthening bilateral ties between the Dominican Republic and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, as well as for promoting multilateralism in international institutions based in The Hague. These institutions include the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Arbitration, and the Hague Conference on Private International Law, where the Dominican Republic achieved notable participation under his leadership.
In the realm of bilateral relations, Ambassador Durán excelled in supporting the private sector by facilitating meetings between Dominican and Dutch business leaders. His consistent support and engagement with Dominican citizens and community associations in the Netherlands also earned him respect and trust. Among his numerous initiatives, he organized tournaments, symposiums, conferences, vocational courses, commercial and folkloric events, as well as traditional religious and patriotic celebrations.
Diplomat Magazine’s editor-in-chief Roy Lie Atjam, H.E. Juan Duran and Publisher Dr. Mayelinne De Lara.
During a solemn ceremony held at the Dominican Embassy, attended by diplomats and distinguished guests, representatives of Diplomat Magazine, led by its editor-in-chief Roy Lie Atjam and Dr. Mayelinne De Lara, expressed their gratitude for the valuable support provided by Ambassador Durán and the Dominican Embassy to the diplomatic corps and media in the Netherlands.
For 11 years, Diplomat Magazine has been awarding the Certificate of Merit to ambassadors who distinguish themselves during their missions in the Netherlands. Past recipients of this recognition include representatives from Japan, Vietnam, Canada, Israel, Guatemala, Peru, South Africa, Cameroon, Tunisia, France, and other countries, however Ambassador Duran is the first Dominican Republic Ambassador receiving the award.
By H.E. Dr. Artemis Malo, Ambassador of Albania to Canada
Today, as we commemorate Albania’s 112th Independence Day, we honor not only the perseverance and determination of the Albanian people but also the timeless relationships Albania has cultivated globally, including its growing partnership with Canada. This occasion reminds us of our shared values of freedom, democracy, and mutual respect, which have been the cornerstones of Albania’s journey toward sovereignty and progress.
On November 28, 1912, Albania declared its independence from the Ottoman Empire, reclaiming its identity after centuries of foreign rule. This historic moment marked the birth of modern Albania, a nation of courage, culture, and deep-rooted traditions. The road since then has been one of trials and triumphs, but our commitment to self-determination has never wavered.
Albania today stands as a proud member of NATO, a demonstration of its strategic importance and steadfast commitment to global peace and security. Since joining the alliance in 2009, Albania has contributed to various peacekeeping missions, reinforcing its role as a reliable partner on the international stage. Furthermore, Albania continues its efforts toward full membership in the European Union, aligning its policies with EU standards to strengthen governance, economic reforms, and human rights.
In this context, the partnership between Albania and Canada has blossomed into a relationship of mutual benefit and shared goals. The Albanian diaspora in Canada serves as a bridge, promoting cultural exchanges and contributing significantly to Canadian society. Canada’s multiculturalism, openness, and the value placed on diversity reflects the essence of Albanian beliefs.
Together, we have laid the groundwork for collaborations in education, technology, and trade, with significant potential for further development.
Economically, Albania has made remarkable strides. Its strategic location in Southeast Europe, coupled with a commitment to reforms, has attracted investment in sectors such as energy, tourism, and agriculture. Canada, as a leader in innovation and sustainable practices, can play a fundamental role in Albania’s economic transformation. Canadian expertise in clean energy aligns with Albania’s vast hydroelectric potential, while shared interests in fostering green economies present opportunities for bilateral cooperation.
Politically, Albania has been a staunch advocate for regional stability and integration. Its leadership in promoting dialogue in the Western Balkans exemplifies its dedication to a peaceful and united Europe. These efforts align closely with Canada’s foreign policy goals, which emphasize global cooperation and conflict resolution.
Albania National Day, Ottawa Canada 2024. H.E. Dr. Artemis Malo, Ambassador of Albania to Canada during her speech.
As we commemorate this Independence Day, it is essential to acknowledge the contributions of other nations and allies, like Canada, that have supported Albania’s journey. The values that underpin our diplomatic ties—freedom, equality, and a vision for a better future—are the same values that inspired Albania’s independence over a century ago.
Fellow ambassadors have often spoken of Albania’s rich cultural heritage, from the ancient ruins of Butrint to the traditions of folk music and dance. Albania is a land of unparalleled beauty, where the Adriatic and Ionian seas meet the rugged mountains, and its people are known for their warmth and hospitality. These qualities are the soul of our nation, shared generously with friends and allies.
Looking ahead, Albania and Canada are poised to achieve even greater milestones together. By deepening our collaboration in key sectors and embracing opportunities for cultural and economic exchange, we honor not just the spirit of Albania’s independence but also the principles of partnership and unity that guide our nations.
Ms. Julie Dabrusin
As an ambassador of Albania, it is with immense pride and gratitude that I reflect on this day. Let us continue to celebrate the strength of our people, the friendships we have forged, and the bright future that lies ahead. Together, we embody the enduring promise of independence and international cooperation, striving always for a world that values freedom and prosperity for all.
This article was written to commemorate Albania’s Independence Day on November 28,highlighting the historical significance of the day, Albania’s international partnerships,and the strong ties between Albania and Canada.
A joint operation in Brazil and Italy has led to the arrest of 23 members of a cocaine trafficking network linked to mafia families in Italy. The three criminal groups running the drug smuggling operation used cargo ships and private aircraft to transport large quantities of cocaine to Europe. Eurojust and Europol supported the investigations and the action day on 10 December.
Following the arrest of two members of an Italian mafia family in Brazil in 2019, investigations were launched into the links between Brazilian and Italian criminal groups. The investigations revealed strong ties between the Italian mafia and Brazilian criminal organisations involved in coordinating cocaine shipments to Europe from the Port of Paranaguá. Throughout the investigations, authorities documented over 1 500 kg cocaine trafficked to Europe.
The international criminal group linked to the ‘Ndrangheta in Piedmont concealed the cocaine shipments in cargo ships destined for various European ports. Drugs were also transported by air in private aircraft. Their activities generated huge profits for the criminal organisation. The multi-million euro profits were laundered through an intricate network of individuals and companies.
Italian and Brazilian authorities worked together on the complex investigation through a joint investigation team (JIT) set up at Eurojust in 2020. The JIT allowed the authorities to exchange information in real time and plan the arrests and searches, which took place simultaneously in Brazil and Italy. Europol supported the investigation by coordinating the exchange of information between EU Member States and Brazil, and providing EU authorities with intelligence packages. These files allowed affected countries to finalise their investigations. Before the action day, Europol welcomed two Brazilian experts to its headquarters in The Hague, who worked hand-in-hand with affected EU Member States.
The four-year investigation culminated in a large-scale operation on 10 December in Italy and Brazil. Italian and Brazilian authorities disrupted the activities of the criminal groups by arresting 23 suspects, 5 in Italy and 18 in Brazil. Searches were carried out at several addresses across Brazil.
The following authorities were involved in the actions:
Italy: Public Prosecutor’s Office of Turin – District Antimafia Directorate; Italian National Antimafia Prosecutor’s Office; Carabinieri of the ROS (Special Operational Group) and of the Provincial Command of Turin; Italian Central Anti-Drug Directorate
Brazil: Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office of Brazil; Federal Police of Brazil through the Special Group for Sensitive Investigations of Paraná; Federal Police of the State of Paraíba, Authotities of the States of Curitiba and Joao Pessoa
