Integrity is the distance between words and deeds, and between the declared principles and the contradiction with them through what we practice under the principles.
The Search for the World's Conscience: The "Mouse" Technique and Suspicious Integrity
Afrasianet - Hilal bin Salem Al-Zaidi - This article attempts to investigate the reality of integrity through the sensors of events that have occupied the world and confused the manifestations of the ethics of dealing, so how does the world go in search of the absent integrity by reviewing the accuracy of football goals, and not reviewing its conscience about the political and military injustice that is taking place in Gaza?
Do we need the VAR technique in political reality to review catastrophic decisions and revisit the victims' scene away from just the screens of operating rooms?
3 events that leak out of the story of the investigation of integrity, which human intelligence has not been able to achieve or confirm based on the facts that are taking place in the arena in its various caps, whether sports, political, or moral rights.
The first is the world's preoccupation with what is going on in the green rectangle, considering that sports are united and do not differentiate, and the state of confusion that relied on human estimates to control the rhythm of the competition, so that the issue turns to the video assistant referee or what is known as the "mouse technique", which still raises controversy in cases that rely on the referee's estimates, especially in physical fusion.
Second: The collapse of the truce between the United States and Iran in light of the divergent assessments of specialists about the state of escalation: Are it heading towards an all-out war as declared by Trump? Or are the two sides preparing for a long battle based on mutual pressure and the use of more deterrent and effective cards than military war, especially in the case of geographical positioning?
The third is that the shrouds in Gaza have run out as the number of martyrs continues to rise despite the ceasefire agreement, and the state of oblivion or ignorance that the world is experiencing about the first issue, the Palestinian cause, and the destruction, displacement and starvation carried out by the occupying entity, far from the estimates of integrity in the agreements concluded between the two parties.
The "mouse technique" intervenes to give the referee the opportunity to review his decision, without the technology controlling the decision, so the estimation returns according to the perception he deems correct, because the human eye is not enough to notice all the details.
Integrity is a separation between word and deed
Contradiction in the human context reaches its peak when values are formulated with a wide range of knowledge, and is matched by a frequent inability to adhere to them, so we talk about justice in depth, but at the same time we look for an exception that serves our interests, we raise our demands for transparency when we are harmed, we evade when we are benefited, we denounce, denounce, and condemn power when it falls on us, but we look for diluted names and terms when we apply it to others.
Integrity is the distance between words and deeds, and between the declared principles and the contradiction with them through what we practice under the principles of principles. According to human transactions, the individual is not tested in integrity when the desire corresponds to reality, but when the truth becomes a burden, and admitting a mistake is a degradation and a degrading one.
Human estimates are not enough!
Do the human estimates in the green rectangle correspond to an acceptable level of integrity away from emotion?
This is a question that arises in the midst of the prevailing disagreement about the professionalism of football referees in not being affected by what is going on outside that rectangle, as no matter how experienced the referee is and the strength of confidence he has, he remains a human being subject to limited vision, and his decision depends on his anchor point on the field, the angle of follow-up, and the speed of the game, which may affect his ability to estimate, so his decision is affected according to the context of the moment.
Therefore, the "mouse technique" intervenes to give the referee the opportunity to review his decision, without the technology being the controller of the decision, so that the estimation returns according to the perception that he deems correct, because the human eye is not enough to observe all the details, while emphasizing the philosophy that is based on the minimum intervention to achieve maximum justice without requiring the infallibility of the decision-maker, but rather his courage in speaking the truth away from the philosophy of exceptionalism.
This technique, although it is a recognized mathematical protocol, cannot do absolute justice, but rather requires human interpretations and integrity by which the evidence is read, considering that the mouse reveals the act and presents the image from different angles, but it does not purify the conscience and does not prevent selective emotion.
Politically, the majority of resolutions do not recognize independent refereeing, despite the existence of the international community, whose decisions resemble "fanfare without grinding", and does not pay the slightest attention to integrity in finding an impartial review, and does not have a binding rule to cancel the decision when it is clear that it is wrong, because the stronger party is the player, the referee, and the one who controls the broadcast, and it is the one who owns the decision to dissolve and contract the resolution.
This is where the real contradiction between a world that raises its voice and demands fairness in a 90-minute match, in which loyalties are shown with crude nervousness among the contenders' fans, pictures are raised, phrases are written and they reach cohesion off the pitch, while the world's eagerness and interest in demanding justice is diminished when the war machine decides to kill thousands, displace millions, threaten entire regions and plunder rights.
How can negotiations go in parallel with threats, sanctions, and military strikes? Is it fair for diplomacy to operate under the weight of rocket sounds?
America and Iran.. Crispy Peace
The integrity of the negotiations between the United States and Iran collapses each time, and is even bloodier by attacks and threats, suggesting that the truce was not to settle the roots of the conflict, but rather a temporary suspension of the order of ranks and the rhythm of force with the aim of repositioning without a moral obligation to end the war.
The impact of the confrontation ignited by the United States and the occupying entity against Iran has gone beyond the borders of the conflicting parties, and has spread to the Gulf countries with the impact of shipping and energy lines and the fluctuation of the global economy, and the American president often announces the end of dialogue and the stalled negotiations, so that the United States of America and Israel launch new strikes on Iran.
For its part, Iran carries out attacks targeting military sites linked to Washington's allies in response to what the U.S. and Israeli planes have done, so the collapse of the truce and the return to force reveal a diplomatic failure and a contradiction between the peace rhetoric and the practices of coercion.
How can negotiations proceed in parallel with threats, sanctions, and military strikes? Is it fair for diplomacy to operate under the weight of rocket sounds?
The negotiated truce, which allowed 60 days to find a settlement that has an impact on peace, has moved away from peace, because it was not accompanied by a change in the logic of the conflict, as the collapse went beyond the moment of launching the drone or the missile, but began from the moment of entering into negotiations and seeking recognition of the surrender of the other side and ignoring the settlement that preserves a minimum of dignity and security for all.
The reality of Gaza has exposed the state of the international system, which documents the violations but does not want to prevent them from continuing, it demands the protection of civilians and then only counts them after their deaths, it condemns displacement and then demands the provision of tents and aid without mentioning the act that must be stopped and the war criminals held accountable.
Gaza Out of the Scene
The Green Rectangle and the attack on Iran have stolen the spotlight from what is happening in Gaza, and now Gaza is pushing to be out of the scene, by igniting a new front that will retreat as a result of which the suffering and tragedy of the Palestinian people will recede, so that it will be an event that has expired, and give the entity the instrument of action and the legitimacy of carrying out terrorist acts.
The global political system has exaggerated the pain inflicted on Gaza's children between starvation and displacement and deprived rights, to the point of insulting dignity in providing shrouds, which is one of the forms of impartiality exercised by the international community.
The lack of shrouds and the difficulty of preparing the dead represent the ultimate collapse of the conditions of both life and death, and it is the greatest proof that the world's inability to achieve the dignity of the dead before the living have rights acquired by the instinct of human principles.
The reality of Gaza has exposed the state of the international system, which documents the violations but does not want to prevent them from continuing, it demands the protection of civilians and then only counts them after their deaths, it condemns displacement and then demands the provision of tents and aid without mentioning the act that must be stopped and the war criminals held accountable.
The danger lies in turning the tragedy of the Palestinian cause into a fixed background in the scene between renewed figures, repeated images, and statements condemning, denouncing and denouncing the killing situation, so that the world shifts towards the murder from less brutal to less sensitive.
Referee, Player and Interest
The human mind has been able to invent a technology that protects the football match from a somewhat discretionary error, but humanity has not been able to build a system that protects a people and civilization from a continuous political mistake, or from a force that has given itself to be the policeman of the world, and is not subject to binding revisions, and this is the contradiction in contemporary civilization, as we have precise tools to see injustice, but we lack the integrity required to stop it.
If we acknowledge, according to the binding protocol, that it is possible to stop the match, replay the shot, and call the referee to the screen, is there anyone politically who can summon the great powers to the review screen and ask the Security Council to review the scene without the right of veto?
The bitter truth is that some facts, no matter how clear, do not change the decision as long as the balance of power is the final arbiter, as the world is a witness from all angles, and all the scenes have been repeated with the testimony of numbers, reports and proofs, but the world suffers from a lack of integrity and a lack of will to look.
