As the United Nations General Assembly convenes its 80th session in New York on September 9, 2025, the credibility of the world body is once again under scrutiny. With the ongoing war on Gaza dominating international headlines, questions abound over whether the UN can rise to the occasion or remain paralyzed by geopolitical divisions.

To shed light on these pressing issues, the Tehran Times conducted an exclusive interview with Professor Alfred de Zayas of the Geneva School of Diplomacy, a renowned international law expert and former UN Independent Expert on International Order. In this wide-ranging conversation, de Zayas discusses Israel’s violations of the Geneva Conventions and the Genocide Convention, the complicity of Western powers, the failures of the ICC and ICJ, and the hijacking of human rights institutions.

He warns that unless the UNGA takes decisive action under “Uniting for Peace,” the UN risks forfeiting its authority in global governance.

Below is the full text of the interview:

President of the 80th session of the General Assembly is the former German Foreign Minister Analena Baerbock, a notorious warmonger whose record manifests serial violations of the UN Charter and apology of war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israel.How do you assess the application of international law, including the Geneva Conventions and the Genocide Convention, in the context of Israel's military actions in Gaza? To what extent do these actions constitute war crimes or genocide under international law?

As the General Assembly opens its 80th session on 9 September 2025, its authority and credibility are at stake. The first order of the day must be stopping the ongoing genocide against the Palestinians, but hitherto the UN has not been able to end Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity. Worse still, Israel still enjoys the support of the “collective West”, which is complicit in the crimes and is quite obviously in revolt against the UN Charter and international law. 

Yet, a new world order is emerging[1] thanks to the awakening of the “Global Majority”, which will no longer tolerate the imperialism and colonialism of the “collective West”.  The General Assembly should immediately adopt a “Uniting for Peace” Resolution[2] authorizing the use of military force to stop the genocide and demand civil and penal accountability from the perpetrators.

The State of Israel owes its existence to the United Nations.  However, the conditions set by the United Nations for Israel’s statehood and UN membership were violated since the start and continue being violated, as Israel defies international law and morals in total impunity.  Looking back to 1945, we recall that Israel actually emerged from terrorism committed by Zionist settlers against Palestinians, against the British (blowing up of the King David Hotel in 1946), against UN officials (assassination of UN envoy Count Fokke Bernadotte in 1948, for which Israel was duly condemned by the International Court of Justice in 1949[3]).  In a very real sense, Israel was born out of terrorism.

The culture of impunity of Israel has been sustained through the military, political, economic, diplomatic and propagandistic support of the United States and Europe, all of whom are complicit in the aggressions, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed by Israel. Security Council Resolution 242 of 22 November 1967 already demanded the withdrawal of Israel from the Occupied territories.

The Advisory Opinions of the International Court of Justice of 9 July 2004 and 19 July 2024 ruled that Israel was bound by the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 which in its article 49 specifically prohibits the forced transfer of the population of occupied territories and similarly prohibits the implantation of settlers.  This principle has been repeated in countless General Assembly Resolutions and in the report of the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human rights in 1997 (E/CN.4/Sub2/1997/2) and confirmed by the Commission on Human Rights in 1998. 

The 2024 Advisory Opinion specifically ruled that “that the State of Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful”, “that the State of Israel is under an obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities, and to evacuate all settlers from the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, and that “that all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by the continued presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”[4]

On 18 September 2024 the UN General Assembly endorsed the Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024 and gave Israel a period of 12 months to implement it.  Not only did Israel fail to implement the concrete provisions of the Advisory Opinion, it intensified the ongoing genocide, the mass expulsion of Palestinians and the implantation of settlers.

Israel is in open revolt against international law and the UN Charter and should be expelled pursuant to article 6 of the UN Charter.  The General Assembly is obligated to take action, and it should adopt a new resolution on 18 September 2025 imposing sanctions on Israel and urging UN member states to exercise their Responsibility to Protect[5] the Palestinian population.

Netanyahu is guilty of genocide under article 6 of the Rome Statute, guilty of crimes against humanity under article 7, guilty of egregious war crimes under article 8.  But there is no real effort to arrest him, and Netanyahu has been received in the United States, Hungary and other countries and given all the honours, instead of being referred immediately to The Hague.

What are the legal implications of Israel's claim to self-defense in Gaza, given its status as an occupying power under international law?

Israel’s claim has no validity in international law, because as repeatedly stated by the International Court of Justice, Israel is an occupying state, the occupation is illegal, and Israel is bound by international humanitarian law and international human rights law.  Moreover, UN rapporteurs, most recently by Professor Francesca Albanese[6], have explained that the right of self-defence laid down in article 51 of the UN Charter does not apply in the case of the Palestinians, because Israel is not defending itself against the aggression of another state, but it is committing genocide against an occupied population that has a recognized right of resistance. 

The situation in Gaza is akin to that of the Warsaw Ghetto in May 1945.  The Nazis, who were sieging the Warsaw Ghetto had no right of self-defence against the Jews being starved to death there, but it was the Jews in Warsaw who had a right of self-defence against the Nazis.  Had Israel been attacked by Iraq or Syria, it could have made an argument under article 51 UN Charter, but it cannot do so with regard to the Palestinians.

Article 7 of General Assembly Resolution 3314 is clear in affirming the right of an oppressed people to rebel against the oppressor: “Nothing in this Definition, and in particular article 3, could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter, of peoples forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination: nor the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and to seek and receive support, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and in conformity with the above-mentioned Declaration.”[7]

Under the Fourth Geneva Red Cross Convention, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Israel is under an obligation of special care vis-à-vis all populations under occupation.  Instead, it commits genocide, and the United States, United Kingdom and many European states are complicit in this genocide, civilly and politically liable pursuant to article III of the Genocide Convention and article 6 of the Statute of Rome.[8] 

How effective do you believe the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have been in addressing war crimes committed by Israel in Gaza? What reforms or actions are needed to end selective justice?

The International Court of Justice has issued judgments and advisory opinions of great legal significance.  It is currently seized with the case South Africa v. Israel, and it is to be expected that the Court will come down with a clear judgment in 2026 stating that Israel has committed and is committing genocide and serial violations of the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Convention against Racial Discrimination, the Convention against Apartheid, etc.  But ICJ pronouncements are not self-executing. 

There is a glaring implementation gap because the drafters of the UN Charter and of the Statute of the ICJ did not establish enforcement mechanisms.  As a result, the ICJ is a lame tribunal that determines what the law is, but cannot enforce it.  All States members of the United Nations are also bound by the Statute of the International Court of Justice and have a legal obligation to ensure their implementation. 

Here again, there is no mechanism to ensure enforcement.  The International Criminal Court is a different matter.  Essentially it is an ideologically penetrated and polluted tribunal that hitherto has been largely in the service of the “collective West” and has failed to act objectively and professionally, has failed to investigate crimes by Western leaders including Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Tony Blair, Jose Maria Aznar, Nikolas Sarkozy, Francois Hollande, Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, Olaf Scholz, Friedrich Merz and so many others. 

The ICC has been a Western tool for the former colonial powers and has concentrated on prosecuting ousted African politicians and military, and most recently the former President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte.  The great surprise was the warrants of arrest issued against Benjamin Netanyahu[9] and his former Minister of War Yoav Gallant on 22 November 2024. Was this more than just a “fig leaf”? Time will tell.  Of course, Netanyahu is guilty of genocide under article 6 of the Rome Statute, guilty of crimes against humanity under article 7, guilty of egregious war crimes under article 8.  But there is no real effort to arrest him, and Netanyahu has been received in the United States, Hungary and other countries and given all the honours, instead of being referred immediately to The Hague.  Here again, the credibility of the ICC – which was never very great – has suffered.  In fact, the authority and credibility of the entire UN system is very low in the present international disorder. 

The ICJ is a lame tribunal that determines what the law is, but cannot enforce it.

Your recent article highlights the "hijacking" of human rights institutions by political interests. How has this phenomenon affected the UN's ability to hold Israel accountable for violations in Gaza?

The institutions created to defend our rights have been penetrated by lobbies, ideologies, intelligence services.  In his Sixth Satire Juvenal posed the key question “quis custodiet ipsos custodes” (verses 347-48) who will guard over the guardians.  Well, the guardians have been betraying us for decades – most UN agencies have been in the service of the “collective West” and not in the service of humanity. 

Particularly hijacked have been the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the IAEA, ICAO, International Criminal Court and even the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.  That is why I wrote my book “The Human Rights Industry”[10], in which I recall that the CIA tried to recruit me as a mole on two occasions, and I think I do know who was recruited instead of me.  In any event, when the guardians betray us, only we can be the guardians of our own welfare.

The fact that the United Nations itself has been hijacked by the hegemonial “collective West” becomes all the more evident, when one realizes that the President of the 80th session of the General Assembly is the former German Foreign Minister Analena Baerbock, a notorious warmonger whose record manifests serial violations of the UN Charter and apology of war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israel. Again, Quis custodiet Ipsos custodes?  

Israel commits genocide, and the United States, United Kingdom and many European states are complicit in this genocide, civilly and politically liable pursuant to article III of the Genocide Convention and article 6 of the Statute of Rome.

In your article, you mention the selective weaponization of human rights rhetoric. How does this affect the credibility of human rights advocacy in conflicts such as Gaza?

 Slowly, ever so slowly, things are changing.  Precisely because of the flagrant selectivity and double standards, many in the system gradually realize that the scam is no longer sustainable.  More and more former defenders of Israel have stated quite gingerly to criticize Israel, some even dared to use the “G” word.  The weaponization of human rights has become so obvious, that the rhetoric has lost its sting. 

What is important is that even organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have dared to call a spade a spade, and refer to Israel’s crimes as “genocide”.  Most importantly, on 31 August 2025, the International Association of Genocide Scholars[11] adopted a resolution calling on Israel to stop the genocide.  The Resolution “Declares that Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide in Article II of the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948); Declares that Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity as defined in international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; calls upon the government of Israel to immediately cease all acts that constitute genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity against Palestinians in Gaza, including deliberate attacks against and killing of civilians including children; starvation; deprivation of humanitarian aid, water, fuel, and other items essential to the survival of the population; sexual and reproductive violence; and forced displacement of the population; calls upon the government of Israel to comply with the Provisional Measures orders of the International Court of Justice; calls upon the state parties of the International Criminal Court to comply with their obligations, cooperate with the Court, and surrender any individual subject to an arrest warrant; calls upon all states to actively pursue policies to ensure respect for their obligations under international law, including under the Genocide Convention, the Arms Trade Treaty and international humanitarian law, with regards to Israel and Palestine”.

What are the ethical and operational challenges faced by institutions like the UN Human Rights Council and OHCHR when dealing with politically sensitive situations like Gaza?

The ethics of the United Nations are enshrined in the UN Charter, and they can be summarized as a belief in the dignitas humana, in the equality of all members of the human family, a commitment to mutual respect, a political will to live together in peace, an agreement to solve problems through diplomacy, a rejection of the threat or the use of force, a pledge of international solidarity. Every provocation, every threat or breach of the peace entails an ethical challenge to the organization. 

Operationally it becomes manifest that the United Nations as an organization is incapable to enforcing its decisions.  It is not the UN -- as an organization or structure -- that will save the world, but only the member states.  If the members do not breathe the ethical spirit of the UN Charter, if they only give lip service to international law and human rights, the goals of the United Nations will never be achieved.

I was a senior lawyer with OHCHR and served as Secretary of the Human Rights Committee and Chief of the Petitions Section (registrar for the complaints addressed to the HR Committee, Committee Against Racial Discrimination, Committee against Torture, etc.). I was hired in 1980 by the then director of the Division of Human Rights, Professor Theo van Boven[12], a retired professor of international law (he is 91 and lives in Maastricht), who is a true professional and as such has and had no problem dealing with politically sensitive situations. That is why he was axed by the then Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cueller under massive pressure from the US. Van Boven was and is an intellectually honest scholar who became a role model to me. 

Until 1997 I had no problem carrying out my functions professionally and objectively, but by then OHCHR had become highly politicized and as a consequence, I endured several years of harassment from above, particularly because of my clear statements about the Nakba and other Israeli crimes.  Professionalism and intellectual honesty of this kind were not called for. 

The situation has gotten considerably worse ever since, and in 2023 my friend Craig Mokhiber[13], the head of the New York Office of OHCHR, resigned in protest against the failure of the UN to stop the Gaza genocide.  Even though the current High Commissioner has condemned Israeli crimes against Palestinians, I am not aware of Volker Türk ever calling it a genocide[14], and his statements are much too mild, much to wimpish in the light of the enormity of the crimes.

As the HR Council’s Independent Expert on International Order 2012-18, I issued 14 “politically incorrect” reports which earned me the hostility of a number of senior OHCHR officials. As I explained in my book The Human Rights Industry[15], the office refused to issue a dozen of my press releases, which I proceeded then to upload on my blog. The Office also denied me substantive and logistical support for my unpaid work, and when I travelled to Washington to interview senior officials of the World Bank and IMF, I went without any assistant whatever – no one to take notes, to call a taxi, to reschedule an appointment.  This kind of obstructionism on the part of OHCHR is quite entrenched and I know from five other rapporteurs that they have encountered similar problems.

Most UN agencies have been in the service of the “collective West” and not in the service of humanity. 

What practical steps can the international community take to ensure the protection of civilians in Gaza and uphold Palestinian rights under international law?

Rhetoric is not going to feed the Palestinians.  Recognition of the Palestinian State is appropriate, but it will not end the genocide.  The time has come for States to break commercial and diplomatic relations with Israel, to isolate it as a terrorist, genocidal State.  This may expose these States to unilateral coercive measures from the United States, but if those States make their positions clear in the UN General Assembly, a Resolution could be adopted declaring that because Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, all UN member States are obliged to take action against Israel pursuant to the principles of Responsibility to Protect and humanitarian intervention. 

If 50 or 100 States were to stop buying or selling from Israel and its complicit supporters, if, for instance, 50 or 100 States would pledge not to purchase any Israeli chips, any US automobiles, tractors, aeroplanes, that would impact the Israeli and US economies.  Bearing in mind that the US makes billions through sales of weapons, tanks, ammunition, F-16, F-35 and other fighter planes, it is high time that the Global Majority in Latin America, Africa and Asia cease purchases from the US and Israel. 

They should reduce, not increase, their military expenditures, and any purchases of weapons should then be from other countries that also produce state-of-the-art aeroplanes and tanks.

Given your expertise on the politicization of international institutions, how can global governance be reformed to protect the integrity and impartiality of human rights mechanisms?

There is a widespread lack of good faith in the collective West.  The habits of bullying and blackmailing international institutions are so ingrained, that they have become second nature in the US and Europe.  There is no quick fix, no silver bullet to solve the problems of global governance.  The best hope for humanity is the gradual expansion of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Belt and Road Initiative, etc. 

As a by-product of such economic expansion, we can expect that global governance will similarly evolve from the defunct unipolarism to a vigorous multipolarism based on mutual respect and multilateralism.  In my book Building a Just World Order, I formulated 25 Principles of International Order, which would enable a just and equitable global governance.  I proposed those Principles to the Human Rights Council in 2018, and, of course, there was no follow-up.

There is a widespread lack of good faith in the collective West.  The habits of bullying and blackmailing international institutions are so ingrained, that they have become second nature in the US and Europe. 

 How do Israel’s policies in Gaza reflect broader international power dynamics, particularly in regard to the military-industrial complex and Western geopolitical interests you discuss?

The Zionist experiment was an anachronism already when it was conceived at the end of the 19th century.  The idea of establishing a European colony in the Middle East, surrounded by Arabs and Muslims, was as offensive to human rights as the idea of the Dutch and British settlers to occupy and control all of South Africa, ignoring the rights of the indigenous African population. 

In desperation, the whites of South Africa invented the Bantustans and implemented a brutal Apartheid system that was condemned by the United Nations.  South Africa was placed under UN sanctions.  Israel should be placed under UN sanctions, because they are guilty not only of Apartheid, but of deliberate genocide.  Their idea of occupying Gaza and expelling the Palestinian population has no future.  It is an act of desperation.

In a broader sense, the United States and Europe too are becoming desperate – and dangerous – because they realize that they are losing their economic, political and media hegemony over the rest of the world. 

They realize that their European colony in the Middle East, the artificial construct called Israel, is not only an anachronism in the 21st century, it is a failed state and a threat to the peace and security of the world, within the meaning of article 39 of the UN Charter.  The US and Europe have lost all credibility in the world by becoming deeply involved in the genocide of the Palestinians. 

The US and Europe are morally bankrupt, even if they do not want to accept it.  Theirs are grave crimes under the Statute of Rome that should be investigated and prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.  But, as already stated above, the ICC is anything but an objective Tribunal.  It is a vestige of imperial tribunals established to serve the interests of the powerful and not of humanity or of the victims of atrocities.

One can draw some hope from the large number of competent analyses of the situation and the brilliant articles and books of Professors like Richard Falk, Jeffrey Sachs, Norman Finkelstein, Ilan Pappe, and the late Francis Boyle.  I also draw optimism in the rapid pace of the world transition to multipolarity.  As Arundhati Roy[16] said in 2010 at the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, “Another world is not only possible, she is on her way.  On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.”[17]

The idea of establishing a European colony in the Middle East, surrounded by Arabs and Muslims, was as offensive to human rights as the idea of the Dutch and British settlers to occupy and control all of South Africa, ignoring the rights of the indigenous African population.

What is the role of independent journalists and civil society in pushing back against misinformation and holding perpetrators accountable in situations like Gaza?

Independent journalists are heroes of our time.  We need them like air to breathe.

The level of manipulation of public opinion by the mainstream media is breathtaking. The brainwashing and indoctrination carried by the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, CNN, the Times, the BBC, Le Monde, Le Figaro, Die Zeit, der Spiegel, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, even the Neue Zürcher Zeitung cannot be ignored.  In order to save the world and civilization, we must win first and foremost the Information war. 

We need a new generation of journalists who have both courage and competence to tell the truth, to speak truth to power.  We also need many more whistleblowers like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden that will tell the world what crimes are being committed in our name. 

Civil Society must become much more active in pushing back against government dis-information, against the fake news, fake history, fake law disseminated by the mainstream media. I explain that in my book Countering Mainstream Narratives[18].  We should recommit to the humanistic values of the United Nations Charter and to the spirituality of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

As the General Assembly opens its 80th session and celebrates the entry into force of the UN Charter on 24 October 1945, let us as civil society and let all independent journalists insist that the General Assembly assert its authority to condemn the genocide in Gaza and demand accountability from Israel.  The first steps would be to adopt a Uniting for Peace Resolution and authorizing the use of force to protect Palestinian lives. 

The General Assembly and all UN agencies must ensure humanitarian support for the Palestinians and endorse the goals of the Flotilla.  This General Assembly should see more and more States recognize the State of Palestine and continue the struggle to make full Palestinian UN membership a reality.  In the absence of vigorous action, the UN will lose whatever little authority and credibility it still possesses.