Why can’t the UN stop the massacre in Gaza?

In 1956, for the first time in history, armed UN peacekeepers were deployed. They were sent to the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip—then under Egyptian control—in response to a joint attack by Britain, France, and Israel against Egypt’s Suez Canal.

As Israel’s aggression in Gaza escalates and the UN prepares for its 80th session, many are questioning what the organization can do in Gaza now and why it is not taking stronger action.

Although the Suez Crisis was different from today’s situation in Gaza, the deployment of UN emergency forces at that time offers important lessons about what the UN can do in moments of crisis.

The United States has given unconditional support to Israel’s assault on Gaza. Many legal scholars and academics have described the attacks as genocide. Washington has used its veto power at least six times in the UN Security Council to block resolutions calling for a ceasefire and the delivery of aid to Palestinians.

However, in 1956 the Security Council was also blocked, as Britain and France—then among the aggressors—held veto power. The UN General Assembly responded by invoking the “Uniting for Peace” resolution adopted in 1950, authorizing the deployment of peacekeeping forces despite objections.

The UN Security Council holds the authority to deploy peacekeepers and impose sanctions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

A decisive factor in 1956 was the firm support of the United States. President Dwight Eisenhower opposed the Anglo-French-Israeli attack on Egypt.

Another key figure was the courageous UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld, who persuaded Assembly members not involved in the illegal attack to back the deployment of peacekeepers, which Egypt readily accepted.

But diplomats and experts note that neither Israel nor the United States wants the Gaza conflict to be internationalized in the same way.

“The lesson for Gaza today is that the General Assembly, if there is political will and skill, can bypass the Security Council. But in the end, its effectiveness depends on the readiness and resolve of its members,” specialists say.

Genocide

Overall, UN member states have shown a poor record in preventing genocide.

“At best, the record is mixed,” said Martin Shaw, professor emeritus at the University of Sussex and an expert on genocide.

In Rwanda and Bosnia, the UN formally recognized that genocide had taken place only after the atrocities occurred.

In Rwanda, the UN’s inaction was especially evident. The commander of the lightly armed UN peacekeeping mission, Roméo Dallaire, repeatedly warned of impending genocide, but the UN failed to respond.

According to Palestinian health officials, since October 7, 2023, Israel’s assault on Gaza has killed at least 65,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children.

The enclave has been left in ruins. Israel’s finance minister openly boasted about the bombings carried out by Israelis and the demolition of Palestinian homes, saying these actions cleared the way for construction projects and the “redevelopment” of Gaza.

On September 16, the UN’s highest-level investigative body on Palestine and Israel found Israel guilty of the crime of genocide in Gaza. It was the most authoritative conclusion issued to date.

Shaw noted that this marks a key difference between the genocide in Gaza and other modern genocides.

“Gaza is different because this time the UN did not delay in recognizing genocide. The key issue is that the United States has effectively become a participant, through weapons and political support,” he said.

Experts point to two main reasons the UN has repeatedly failed to stop genocides.

On one hand, both large and small states often lack interest in intervening in wars abroad. This was seen in the early 2000s in Darfur, where Sudan’s government and its Janjaweed allies carried out mass killings of non-Arab ethnic groups.

The US quickly recognized that genocide was taking place—in September 2004, it issued an official declaration. But Washington’s interest soon waned. This did not block intervention but also did not lead to meaningful support.

As major powers lost focus, it seemed like the UN had an opening to act.

Yet in late 2004, the African Union sent only a few hundred peacekeepers. The UN only formally approved a peacekeeping mission in 2006, after the worst killings had subsided.

Divided General Assembly

According to Alexandra Novosseloff, a UN peacekeeping specialist at the Centre Thucydide in Paris, past experiences with ethnic cleansing and UN intervention highlight the decisive role of nation-states.

“The issue is not the UN as an organization, but its member states. The UN offers the full spectrum of options—it can impose sanctions and build coalitions of volunteers for peacekeeping operations,” she said.

Novosseloff noted that as the destructive attacks on Gaza intensify, member states’ responses have been mixed.

Next week, the General Assembly is expected to debate one of the most significant issues regarding Palestine: a joint initiative by France and Saudi Arabia urging member states to recognize Palestine as a state.

“Of course, efforts on Gaza are being blocked by the threat of a US veto in the Security Council. But there is still the General Assembly. So far, however, no clear resolution has been put forward there,” she said.

The lesson from history is that without military intervention by major powers, the UN has little ability to stop genocides.

For example, after the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia in 1995, the US finally acted. The UN had already imposed an arms embargo on Serbia, but this failed to prevent the slaughter of Bosnian Muslims.

In 1995, the US and its allies began arming Christian Croats and Bosnian Muslims to fight the Serbs. NATO, backed by a Security Council mandate, then launched airstrikes against Serbia.

Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, argues that the blame for the atrocities committed by Israelis in Gaza lies not with the UN, but with Israel’s closest ally, the United States.

“The UN has no forces of its own. It could not stop the genocide in Rwanda, the mass killings in Sudan, or the bloodshed in Liberia. So it should not be expected to stop events in Gaza. Almost all the blame lies with the United States, because it provides Israel with weapons and support. Washington both finances Israel and blocks UN action,” he said.