Lemmygrad is a collection of Marxist communities, for memes, learning, news, discussion, media, or anything you like.

There’s a big chance that your instance blocks Lemmygrad, so the best way to interact with the community is either joining there or creating an account on an instance that doesn’t blocks us. You can check this on the instaces section of your instance. This is what it looks like for Lemmy, but you can basically add /instances to the URL and it will take you there.

Due to the huge influx of users after the Reddit debacle Lemmygrad got a lot of account requests so it takes time for approval, be patient.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      1·
      2 days ago

      Thanks, that’s better. I see condemnation of the horrible genocidal plan, yes, but no requests to China and Russia to veto it, which leads back to my core point: China’s foreign policy relies on respecting the sovereignty of states, not groups within states. When groups in MENA like Algeria back the plan, the PA backs the plan, and the US threatens to heighten the genocide if the deal isn’t backed, then China’s hand is extremely limited. Vetoing means the US gets a free excuse to cancel the already farcical ceasefire and ramp up the genocide in order to carry out the plan anyways.

      China and Russia breaking precedent and picking Hamas over the PA opens the door to the US backing seperatist groups in Taiwan in UNSC resolutions, ramp up the trade war, and more. Vetoing the plan wouldn’t meaningfully stop the plan, it would give free excuses to the US to abolish the already farcical “ceasefire,” which was their open threat at the table prior to voting. China and Russia condemning the plan, drafting an alternate resolution, and trying their best to appease both Hamas and the PA led them to abstention.

      Following the resolution, I have yet to see resistance groups specifically call out China and Russia, only condemning the UNSC plan and resolution. People highlighting the 2 that abstained over the dozen that voted gleefully for the plan and the countries that plan on actively participating and facilitating it are missing the core of the issue, the US Empire, Israel, and Europe.

      • Deceptichum@quokk.auEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        Interviewer : Has Hamas or the Palestinian resistance in general contacted any of the states that possess the veto power, such as Russia or China, to oppose the U.S. draft, or not?
        ‎ Hamdan : The Palestinian factions, including Hamas, have in recent days exerted great efforts in political communications to secure a resolution that would define the international force’s main mission as protecting the Palestinian people from aggression and preventing genocide from being repeated, and that such forces be deployed along the lines of contact around Gaza, between the Strip and the territories occupied in 1948.
        ‎ We conducted contacts with most members of the Security Council—both permanent and non-permanent members. We also communicated with the Arab and Islamic groups about this matter and submitted a detailed memorandum responding to this resolution or proposal at the time, clarifying its danger to the Palestinian cause and its negative repercussions on the international system and international law.
        ‎ We hope that what we and other factions have submitted will be reflected in the Council’s corridors before the vote, and that its impact will appear in a resolution that does justice to the Palestinian people and protects them from occupation and the genocide the Zionist entity has committed over the past two years.
        ‎ Interviewer : Have you received any positive responses, whether from Russia, China, the Arab group, or current Security Council members, about opposing the U.S. draft if it is presented in its current form?
        ‎ Hamdan : Let us not get ahead of events. I prefer to see the results of our efforts and communications in the Council session rather than speak about what we heard from various parties, because in the end, the decisive outcome is what happens in the Council, not what was said in the talks.
        ‎ Interviewer : But you have no specific expectation as to what will happen in the Security Council tonight?
        ‎ Hamdan : We do have expectations, but I am not in a position to speak about them.

        *MTL

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          2·
          2 days ago

          This is a case where I don’t really think machine translation does it justice, but taking the translation at its word:

          Hamdan : The Palestinian factions, including Hamas, have in recent days exerted great efforts in political communications to secure a resolution that would define the international force’s main mission as protecting the Palestinian people from aggression and preventing genocide from being repeated, and that such forces be deployed along the lines of contact around Gaza, between the Strip and the territories occupied in 1948. We conducted contacts with most members of the Security Council—both permanent and non-permanent members. We also communicated with the Arab and Islamic groups about this matter and submitted a detailed memorandum responding to this resolution or proposal at the time, clarifying its danger to the Palestinian cause and its negative repercussions on the international system and international law. We hope that what we and other factions have submitted will be reflected in the Council’s corridors before the vote, and that its impact will appear in a resolution that does justice to the Palestinian people and protects them from occupation and the genocide the Zionist entity has committed over the past two years.

          We have a few key problems here. The resolution that was drafted obviously does not protect the Palestinian people from aggression, and the alternative drafted by Russia and China is not being accepted by the western powers. Despite China and Russia’s efforts to change the resolution, including alternate proposals, the resolution that was decided by the western powers was what was voted on.

          Secondly, Hamas requested that they hoped what they and other factions submitted would be considered in the vote, and that is exactly what happened. The PA supported the resolution, and yet China and Russia did not vote to pass it. Instead, countries like Algeria voted for it alongside the US.

          Third, is the protection from genocide line. The US opened the talks with threats of heightened genocide should the resolution be vetoed. This isn’t an empty threat. The US made it clear, either they will bomb the shit out of Palestine, or they will proceed with the plan. Returning to point 1, the alternatives presented by China and Russia were denied, and the draft was rushed.

          In short, a veto would have resulted in escalated conflict, a vote for would have resulted in full acceptance and a commitment to the colonial project, and an abstention would have resulted in the resolution passing but with the express disapproval of China and Russia, alongside their soon to come alternative propositions. China and Russia maintain the position of the two state solution and China in particular has stated that Palestine must be governed by Palestinians, and is willing to step in and make that happen if consensus among those in charge of Palestine is reached.

          There was no easy, correct answer given the requests from MENA countries and PA, and the threats of the US to escalate the genocide after a hard fought ceasefire, however weak, was reached.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              2·
              2 days ago

              The PLO (also called the PA) has consistently been brought to the table, and rather than wanting destruction of the PLO, Hamas, the PFLP, etc all maintain their stance is to reform and democratize the PA as a national unity group. Strides have been made in that direction thanks to events like the 2024 Beijing conference, where all of the Palestinian resistance groups and the PA were brought together. The PA is also the internationally recognized state authority over Palestine. The idea that the PA doesn’t at all count is, so far, conjecture on your part, unless you can find a primary source indicating that it isn’t.

              I disagree with the PA’s decision, and I know they are compradors. However, the resistance doesn’t claim to be the authorities over Palestine, they maintain that the PA is, and that the PA needs to be reformed. Until that happens, the PA will always be seen as legitimate for the sake of UN resolutions.

              • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
                11·
                2 days ago

                Hamas has no problem handig over governance of Gaza. They have publicly stated they wish to continue only as an armed resistance group. At this point doing governance is a hindrance to them. The problem is that the resolution specifically attacks Hamas as an armed resistance group.

                They would never agree to any resolution to lay down their weapons without a Palestinian state, in which case they would simply merge into the army of said Palestinian state with their weapons. Which brings us to another meme

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  2·
                  2 days ago

                  Yes, so we have the PLO as the main authority in Gaza, and a resistance that will not disarm. The plan will not work to begin with, which is why China and Russia are drafting an alternative. Chinese nationalism has nothing to do with this, Hamas, the PFLP, etc will never disarm (nor should they) so the plan is a non-starter. China’s goal of factional unity within the PLO, and Hamas, the PFLP, etc goal of a reformed PLO are the angle China is trying to work in order to achieve Palestinian statehood as a significant lever to pull in ending the genocide permanently.

                  Don’t share that shitty strawman of my position, I’ve never once stated anything similar to that. You’re bigger than that, I hope.

                  • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
                    11·
                    2 days ago

                    The plan will not work to begin with, which is why China and Russia are drafting an alternative

                    China and Russia presented their alternative plan 2 days (iirc) before they passed the US resolution. The expectation was that they would veto the US resolution. With plenty of morally justifiable reasons, like the absence of a Palestinian state, they could easily present their own resolution as an alternative and win the moral highground.

                    They didn’t. They passed the US resolution instead.

                    You aren’t being strawmanned in any way.