The UN’s Inaction on Human Rights Violations in IIOJK: A Stark Parallel to Palestine

The United Nations (UN) has long been considered the ultimate global body for preventing human rights violations (HRVs) and addressing the crises that arise when states fail their citizens. Yet, when it comes to the ongoing human rights abuses in Indian-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), the UN’s response has been muted at best. This failure to act decisively echoes similar inaction in other major global crises, notably the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the systemic persecution of the Rohingya people in Myanmar. These cases expose the UN’s deep-seated dysfunctionality, raising the question: Can the UN truly fulfill its mandate when powerful states are involved?

Kashmir, often referred to as the “world’s most militarized zone,” has been the site of a brutal conflict for decades. The region has long suffered under Indian military occupation, where reports of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and sexual violence have become all too common. The situation worsened in August 2019, when India unilaterally revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s special status, further tightening its grip on the region, thereby escalating the rights violations. Despite widespread international condemnation and calls for the protection of Kashmiri civilians, the UN’s response has been weak and largely symbolic, consisting of vague statements and promises of dialogue that have failed to materialize into any meaningful action.

This inaction is not just an oversight—it reflects a broader geopolitical paralysis. The UN’s ability to hold India accountable is undermined by the country’s geopolitical significance, particularly its status as a strategic partner of major Western powers, including the United States. India’s diplomatic clout has effectively shielded it from meaningful pressure or sanctions, despite the clear evidence of human rights abuses in Kashmir. This dynamic starkly mirrors other instances of UN impotence, such as its inability to stop Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories.

The Palestinian question has been at the heart of global diplomacy for over seven decades. Despite numerous resolutions passed by the UN Security Council condemning Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories, the situation remains unchanged. Israel’s military occupation, alongside the systemic denial of Palestinian rights, has persisted with little consequence. In stark contrast to the UN’s swift action in other international crises, such as imposing sanctions on Iran or North Korea, its response to the Israeli occupation has been marked by prolonged diplomatic stalemate and a reluctance to apply punitive measures.

The Security Council’s paralysis on Palestine can be traced to the influence of key players like the United States, which has consistently vetoed any resolution that threatens Israel’s policies. This institutional dysfunction within the UN has allowed Israel to continue its occupation with impunity, while millions of Palestinians continue to suffer under conditions of military rule, restricted mobility, and severe economic deprivation.

Similarly, the plight of the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar highlights another glaring failure of the UN. The 2017 military-led crackdown, which included mass killings, rapes, and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Rohingya, was widely condemned as ethnic cleansing or even genocide. Despite mounting evidence and calls for justice, the UN’s response has been tepid. While the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has taken some steps to hold Myanmar accountable, the broader UN framework has largely failed to protect the Rohingya from ongoing persecution.

The lack of meaningful intervention in Myanmar, like the situation in IIOJK and Palestine, can be attributed to the UN’s deep structural limitations. In Myanmar, geopolitical considerations have played a major role in stymying decisive action. China, a key ally of Myanmar, has exercised its veto power in the Security Council, preventing any forceful intervention or sanctions. This political paralysis, much like the UN’s inaction on Kashmir and Palestine, underscores the difficulty of pursuing human rights when powerful nations are involved.

The common thread that runs through these three crises is the UN’s inability to effectively address human rights violations when geopolitical interests are at stake. The international system, particularly the UN Security Council, is deeply flawed. The veto power wielded by its five permanent members has rendered it nearly impossible to pass resolutions that would hold major powers accountable for their actions. The question remains: Is the UN truly equipped to handle crises where global powers are implicated, or is it doomed to remain a bystander in the face of egregious human rights violations?

It is clear that the UN’s credibility is at an all-time low, and its failures in IIOJK, Palestine, and Myanmar are symptomatic of a broader crisis of governance in international institutions. Reforms are urgently needed to make the UN more responsive to human rights concerns and less susceptible to the influence of powerful states. This includes limiting the veto power in the Security Council and expanding the role of international human rights bodies to independently investigate violations and hold perpetrators accountable.

Until these changes are made, the UN will continue to fail the very people it was created to protect, leaving millions to suffer in silence, their cries drowned out by the geopolitics of power. The human rights crises in Kashmir, Palestine, and Myanmar are tragic reminders that the UN’s failures are not mere footnotes in history—they are ongoing, life-and-death struggles that demand urgent action.