A Test of the International System's Moral Compass: Robert Singer's Take on the Israel-Iran Conflict
History-Changing Decision for the United Nations: Is This the UN's Last Opportunity to Align with Humanity's Best Interests?
In the midst of the heated Israel-Iran conflict, Robert Singer, chairman of the Center for Jewish Impact, penned a stark assessment of the situation. He argues that this is not just another diplomatic crisis, but a trial of the international system's moral fortitude.
"War is the continuation of policy with other means," Carl von Clausewitz's chilling words resonate through the halls of power, revolution, and diplomacy. This quote is more than an intellectual philosophy; it's a roadmap for understanding the current paralysis of international institutions, specifically the United Nations, in the face of the Iranian nuclear threat.
Singer, who has spent much of his career working with UN bodies, has always viewed international organizations as crucial structures for upholding human rights, protecting civilians, and fostering cooperation. However, he observes with dismay that the UN has, once again, failed to uphold its moral mission.
The silence, or worse, the symmetry that dominates global discourse has rendered diplomacy ineffective. It appears as though a liberal democracy defending itself against an existential threat is no different from a theocratic regime calling for genocide. This lack of moral clarity has allowed the Iranian regime's threats against Israel, its proxies' murderous attacks on civilians, and its relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons to persist.
Singer is adamant that Israel has no aversion to diplomacy yet diplomacy must follow a clear demonstration that Iran cannot achieve its goals. In this context, Diplomacy becomes a tool, not a virtue. It must be wielded strategically, with foresight, as its value lies in the strength it carries and not in itself. Singer stresses that without the backing of strength, diplomacy becomes a charade designed to delay, deflect, and deceive.
Singer laments the growing tendency within the UN towards moral relativism, fear of action, and equivocation. Instructions like the UN that once symbolized a post-war global order built on the promise, "Never Again," have trampled upon that promise. He questions whether the UN can still stand against a regime that openly declares its intention to destroy a member state and a people.
In essence, Singer warns that if the UN fails to stand against Iran's aggression, it risks becoming irrelevant or even complicit in the face of such belligerence. Israel, according to Singer, has delivered a poignant lesson: for peace to prevail, it must be defended not only with words but with resolve and action.
Robert Singer, the chairman of the Center for Jewish Impact, is a former CEO of World ORT and the World Jewish Congress.
Footnotes
[1] Center for Jewish Impact. (n.d.). About Us. Retrieved from https://www.cjimpact.com/about/
[2] World Jewish Congress. (n.d.). Robert Singer. Retrieved from https://www.wjc.org/robert-singer/
- The international general-news landscape is affected by the Israel-Iran conflict, as recently pointed out by Robert Singer, the chairman of the Center for Jewish Impact, who asserts that this issue tests the moral compass of the international system.
- In his critique, Robert Singer, a former CEO of World ORT and the World Jewish Congress, argues that the UN's failure to uphold its moral mission in the face of the Iranian threat highlights a growing trend towards moral relativism within international organizations, a key player in politics.
