Why expect Iran to cooperate when others do not?

I just finished reading an article in the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/world/mideast-africa/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12957301

The article is about whether or not Israeli shelling of civilian targets constitutes a war crime. The problem as the article states is with the difficulty of defining war crimes where sophisticated technology is involved: "But international law has found it easier to deal with low-tech mass killings at close quarters, as in the Rwandan genocide of 1994, than with the rights and wrongs of Western-style air campaigns. Civilians are repeatedly hit by NATO aircraft in Afghanistan, but there are only regrets, not court-martials." I would also add that genocide as a war crime is a particularly tricky issue, as seen with the case of Darfur recently. The law as formulated by the UN is geared more at internal genocide than an external one; the law was meant to allow intervention in nations where otherwise national sovereignty had to be respected.

But as fascinating as this is, I'd like to highlight another portion of the article: "Isreal...tends to be wary of outside investigation. It declined to co-operate, for instance, with a UN inquiry into a shelling incident that killed 19 civilians in Gaza in 2006." I am not particularly surprised by this in many ways, partly because of the limitation imposed by the Israeli government on the media, especially the lack of access to Gaza. Nonetheless, the non-co-operation of Israel emphasizes the hypocritical stance of Western nations towards Israeli actions when compared with those of, for instance, Iran. For example: the repeated complaints about Iran's non-co-operation with the UN as per weapons inspections. Now I don't think that the Iranian government is in any way doing the right thing but this manner of double standards is very dangerous and counter-productive in assuring Middle-Eastern/Muslim nations that any peace process will be fair and balanced. Quite frankly, it seems ludicrous to expect this. Moreover, why should we expect Muslim nations to come to the table when they are being examined far more critically than others? There have been protests all over the world about Israeli actions in Gaza but there has been little action taken to stop the shelling and even less official/governmental criticism of Israeli actions (the UNHCR and the IRC notwithstanding; both are non-legislative organizations) which cannot be blindly judged to have been entirely aboveboard. Let the international watchdogs in please.

The worth of a life

A life for a life? Is life beyond any measurement? How does one justify the taking of a life?

This past week has seen hundreds of deaths in Gaza and some in Israel. I've been mulling over these events for the past few days and something has been bothering me. Reading news reports, a lot of reporters focus on the large numbers of Palestinians dead, consciously or unconsciously comparing them to the admittedly far smaller numbers of Israeli casualties. I found myself doing something similar when talking to a friend about the situation. I was very quick to say that I did not think the Israeli deaths were any less tragic and significant, but that I thought the Israeli response was still excessive (in recent counts over 700 Palestinians and 14 Israelis are dead). Am I wrong? I don't think what Hamas does is acceptable but I can't help but feel extremely distressed by the deaths of so many in the Gaza strip.

It is interesting how many readers in the United States respond to this comparison by taking offence that the Gazan deaths are emphasized over those of Israelis because of the larger numbers. But shouldn't the larger number take precedence especially given the extreme disparity? I don't mean that people living in Israel within range of Hamas rockets are less important but simply that Israelis seem to be better protected than Palestinians in Gaza and that Israel's incursion is far more effective than Hamas rockets are and that says something (though I'm not quite sure what).

Thoughts?

Red Tape

On a recent trip to New York, I received jury summons in the mail (by the way, how did I, a citizen for just over two years get this while other long-time members of this public don't for years if at all?). The problem, of course, is that I don't reside in America right now. I [mistakenly it would seem] had thought I had taken care of this problem when I received a juror qualification questionnaire and indicated that very issue. It seems, however, that the New York County Clerk's Office is unable to understand its own paperwork. I realise that bureaucracy often implies that the right hand does not know what the left hand does/knows but this is the SAME BUREAUCRACY What makes it more hilarious is that I mailed my reply to the summons from Pakistan and indicated a Canadian address! Could it get any clearer that I don't live in the United States? Is anyone there using their brains?