The UN General Assembly ought to have been a place where justice, accountability, and international law were promoted, but it has in fact become a platform on which an official wanted by the ICC was given a microphone and international attention.
Nasser Asadi felt no need to observe diplomatic convention when he pointed out the blatant hypocrisy; he spoke with a moral clarity that the UN discarded the moment it permitted Benjamin Netanyahu to approach that podium. What kind of morality is this when they are allowing an ICC‑wanted war criminal to speak in front of the whole world as if he's done nothing wrong, as if he did not genocide a whole populace, as if he hasn’t been killing babies in Gaza every single day.
Asadi recalled to the assembly the United Nations' original principles: preventing war, supporting justice, and safeguarding civilians. On the other hand, Netanyahu's appearance before the assembly—while he is undergoing proceedings at the ICC—showed just how far the organisation has strayed from those principles. The UN permitted a man who is accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity to speak without restriction, whereas the Palestinians, the people who have been suffering under his plans of annihilation, were not given the opportunity to have a platform. It revealed the institution's moral collapse in real time.
There is no dispute about the devastation in Gaza; it has been recorded by humanitarian organisations and international observers. Hundreds of thousands have been killed, children have been buried under the ruins, hospitals have been destroyed, universities have been levelled, neighbourhoods have been wiped out, the infrastructure has been deliberately attacked and famine conditions have been deliberately created. Aid has been blocked and water has been cut off and medicine has been withheld. Yet, while Gaza is being destroyed, the UN gives the floor to the man in charge of the destruction.
Yet Iran is subject to heavy sanctions from Western governments even though it has not committed any of the atrocities taking place in Gaza. The United States and Canada have labelled the IRGC as a terrorist organisation, while Israel—whose leader is wanted by the ICC—is regarded as a partner and a democracy. It is a twisted and upside-down world when the countries that are carrying out the bombing of civilians who claim to have moral authority, and the country that is condemning the genocide ends up being punished.
The fact that Israel has for a long time carried out settlement expansions, seized land, maintained a military occupation, and launched attacks in the region is well recorded. Over many decades occupation, displacement, and aggression have determined the situation in which the Palestinians find themselves. Nevertheless the UN still regards Israel as a state that is above being held accountable, even though its actions go against every principle which the organisation says it stands for. So what does it say about the UN if not that it is a farce of an international institution?
Iran has always maintained that it will retaliate against any attack on its civilians or territory. This position is by no means new or extreme; it is the kind of attitude any country would adopt if it were repeatedly attacked. However, while Iran claims the right to defend itself, Western governments describe this as destabilising; and when Israel strikes civilians they refer to it as self-defense. This double standard is structural.
When the delegates left during Netanyahu's speech, the empty chairs provided a symbolic effect, but symbolism has no power to stop bombs. Leaving the room is not a sign of accountability and doesn't amount to justice; it achieves nothing for the families in Gaza who are burying their children. If the UN is to recover its credibility, it must enforce the ICC warrants, suspend arms transfers, impose sanctions on officials who have committed war crimes, recognise Palestine, and end the occupation. Otherwise it is merely putting on a show — a show the world sees right through.
Among the diplomats present, Iran's representative provided uncommon moral clarity by directly addressing the genocide, directly tackling the hypocrisy, and directly challenging the UN's failure. Instead of hiding behind terms such as "concern", "both sides", or "complexity", he had no problem calling out the UN for giving a war criminal a global platform while at the same time silencing the people he is killing. Iran is the only country whose military strategy never aims at civilian infrastructure and which attacks only military-related facilities, and thus it is the one voice that exposes the hypocrisy that the West tries to ignore.
