Tag : Opinion - Asep Haryono | My Opinion on the US–Israel Attack on Iran: A Concern About War and International Law - Powered by Blogger

Disclaimer:
Hello my friend. How is it gong?.  Its been a while.   By the way this article is a personal opinion written from the perspective of an ordinary citizen. I am not a politician, a government official, or a foreign policy expert. I am simply a citizen of the world who is observing international events and sharing personal thoughts and concerns.

Thank you so much.

---

The world is once again watching rising tensions in the Middle East. Recent news reports about military strikes involving the United States, Israel, and Iran have raised serious concerns about the possibility of a wider conflict in the region.

For many people around the globe, events like these are deeply worrying. War in one part of the world can quickly affect many other countries, whether through economic instability, political tensions, or humanitarian crises.

As an ordinary citizen of The Republic of Indonesia, living far away from the Middle East, I can only follow the news and try to understand what is happening. However, like many others, I cannot ignore the serious questions that arise when military actions take place between sovereign nations.

The flags of Israel and the United States flying side by side with a military tank behind them, symbolizing military alliance among them

Rising Military Tensions
According to international news reports, the United States and Israel launched military strikes on targets inside Iran. These attacks reportedly focused on military facilities and strategic locations. In simple opinion.

The United States and Israel started a war. 

Supporters of these actions argue that such strikes are necessary for national security and self-defense. However, Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks, increasing the risk of a wider conflict.

When tensions escalate like this, the situation can quickly become dangerous not only for the countries involved but also for the entire region especially in the region of the middle east.


The Human Cost of War
History has repeatedly shown that the greatest victims of war are often ordinary people. Civilians or even school students can lose their homes, their safety, and sometimes their loved ones.

Beyond the battlefield, wars also create economic hardship, displacement, and long-term instability. These humanitarian consequences can affect generations.

For that reason, many people around the world feel deeply concerned whenever new military conflicts begin.


My Questions About International Law
Another important issue raised by this conflict is the question of international law. Iran is a sovereign nation, and the use of military force against another country often raises legal and ethical questions under international law.

The United Nations Charter, established after the Second World War, was designed to prevent countries from using force against each other except in limited situations. In general, military action is considered legitimate only in cases of self-defense or when authorized by the United Nations Security Council.

Because of this principle, some observers argue that attacks on another sovereign country without clear international authorization could be seen as a violation of international law. Others, however, believe the strikes may be justified as defensive measures.

These debates are complex and often involve political, legal, and security considerations.


The Need for Diplomacy
Despite these disagreements, one thing remains clear: war rarely brings lasting solutions. Diplomacy, dialogue, and negotiation are often the most effective ways to resolve international disputes. Many global organizations and leaders have repeatedly called for de-escalation and peaceful solutions.

In a world that is increasingly interconnected, conflict in one region can quickly affect the stability of many others.


The Role of the United Nations
Many people around the world are asking: Where is the United Nations in this conflict?

The United Nations was created after World War II with the main goal of maintaining international peace and preventing wars between countries. In situations like the current tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran, the UN is expected to encourage dialogue and reduce the risk of a wider conflict.

The United Nations Security Council can hold emergency meetings and discuss possible diplomatic solutions. The UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, has also urged all parties to avoid further escalation and to respect international law.

However, the UN has limitations. Decisions in the Security Council often depend on powerful member states, and disagreements among them can make it difficult to take strong action. Because of this, the UN’s role is often focused on diplomacy, mediation, and encouraging peaceful solutions rather than directly stopping conflicts.


My Final Reflection
As someone who lives far from the Middle East, I may not fully understand every political detail behind this conflict. But as a human being and a citizen of the world, it is difficult not to feel concerned when military actions escalate between nations.

History has shown that wars often begin with strong words and military actions, but they leave behind deep wounds that can last for generations.As ordinary citizens, we may not hold political power, but we can still hope and speak for peace, respect for international law, and dialogue between nations.

In the end, the future of our world should not be decided only by weapons and military power, but by wisdom, diplomacy, and the shared hope that humanity will choose peace over conflict.

I have a few questions by the way

I really have no idea what the President of the United States was thinking when he decided to bomb another sovereign country with Israel without approval from the United Nations.
Why is Trump so sure that the American people want this war? Why does he bring America into harm’s way and put the country in a dangerous position, possibly becoming isolated from the world?
Why does he send American troops to be sacrificed and die for Israel, a country whose citizens do not pay taxes to the United States?
Why does America, under the administration of President Trump, seem to prioritize Israel and put Israel first instead of Americans?

---

A Message From Asep Haryono

 

"Thank you so much for your time here. I really appreciate your precious moment here as well.  Please leave any comment down below.  Let me hear from you.  Greetings from Indonesia"

Tag : Keseharian, Opinion - Asep Haryono | Sejarah Singkat Perubahan Rezim yang Didukung Amerika Serikat - Powered by Blogger

Disclaimer 

This article reflects the author’s personal perspective and is intended solely for discussion and informational purposes. It does not promote hatred, violence, or discrimination in any form. On this occasion, the article is written in Indonesian for readers in Indonesia. International readers and fellow bloggers are welcome to use translation tools or translate the content into their preferred language.

Sejarah Singkat Perubahan Rezim yang Didukung Amerika Serikat

Pada 3 Januari 2026, Amerika Serikat melancarkan operasi militer di Venezuela, menyerang target-target di Caracas dan menangkap Presiden Nicolás Maduro serta istrinya, Cilia Flores, dalam sebuah operasi mendadak yang mengejutkan dunia. Keduanya diterbangkan ke New York, di mana mereka dihadapkan ke pengadilan federal dan menyatakan tidak bersalah atas tuduhan termasuk narkoterorisme dan perdagangan narkoba.

Operasi tersebut, yang diberi nama Operation Absolute Resolve, dibenarkan oleh pemerintah AS sebagai tindakan terhadap apa yang mereka sebut sebagai “negara narkoba.” Namun, langkah ini menuai kecaman luas dari banyak negara, pakar hukum, dan pengamat internasional karena dianggap sebagai pelanggaran serius terhadap hukum internasional dan kedaulatan Venezuela.

Bagi banyak pihak di luar Amerika Serikat, peristiwa ini memunculkan pertanyaan penting: Apakah ini tindakan yang luar biasa, atau hanya kelanjutan dari pola lama yang sudah sering terjadi?

Sejarah menunjukkan bahwa ini lebih merupakan pola yang berulang.

Ini bukan pertama kalinya Amerika Serikat bertindak secara sepihak tanpa mandat Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa untuk mencampuri urusan dalam negeri negara lain. Baik melalui operasi rahasia, sanksi ekonomi, perang melalui pihak ketiga, maupun intervensi militer langsung, AS berulang kali menempatkan dirinya sebagai aktor yang bertindak seolah berada di atas hukum internasional, dengan pembenaran atas nama keamanan, demokrasi, atau tanggung jawab moral.

Maka muncul pertanyaan lain: Apakah era perubahan rezim yang dipimpin Amerika Serikat sudah berakhir sejak Perang Dingin? Ataukah hanya berubah bentuk dan terus berlanjut hingga hari ini?

Dengan Amerika Serikat kini kembali aktif mengancam dan mengintervensi negara-negara lain setelah Venezuela, berikut adalah sepuluh contoh yang terdokumentasi dengan baik di mana Washington memainkan peran menentukan dalam menggulingkan pemerintahan asing sering kali tanpa menghiraukan hukum internasional.

1. 1953 – Iran
Perdana Menteri Mohammad Mossadegh terpilih secara demokratis dan mendapat dukungan luas rakyat Iran. Keputusannya untuk menasionalisasi industri minyak Iran mengancam kepentingan perusahaan Inggris dan dominasi Barat atas sumber daya Iran. Amerika Serikat, yang khawatir terhadap pengaruh Uni Soviet di tengah Perang Dingin, bekerja sama dengan Inggris mengatur kudeta melalui CIA.

Kudeta tersebut mengembalikan kekuasaan penuh kepada Shah yang pro-Barat. Selama lebih dari 26 tahun, pemerintahannya semakin otoriter hingga akhirnya Revolusi Iran 1979 meletus dan membawa Iran berbalik secara tegas melawan Amerika Serikat.

The United Nations headquarters in New York, a global symbol of diplomacy, international law, and efforts toward peace

2. 1954 – Guatemala
Presiden Jacobo Árbenz memperkenalkan reformasi agraria untuk mengatasi ketimpangan kepemilikan tanah yang ekstrem. Kebijakan ini mengancam kepentingan korporasi Amerika Serikat, khususnya United Fruit Company. Washington kemudian melabeli Árbenz sebagai komunis dan mendukung kudeta yang menggantikannya dengan rezim militer.

Yang terjadi setelahnya adalah puluhan tahun penindasan, perang saudara, dan genosida terhadap penduduk pribumi konsekuensi yang jarang dibahas dalam narasi resmi kebijakan luar negeri AS.

3. 1960 – Kongo
Perdana Menteri Patrice Lumumba, yang terpilih secara demokratis, berupaya membebaskan Kongo dari kontrol politik dan ekonomi Barat. Dipandang sebagai ancaman terhadap kepentingan Barat, Lumumba digulingkan dan dibunuh dengan keterlibatan Amerika Serikat.

Kematian Lumumba menjerumuskan Kongo ke dalam ketidakstabilan berkepanjangan. Saat ini, ia dikenang sebagai pahlawan nasional dan martir gerakan Pan-Afrika, simbol harga mahal dari perlawanan terhadap dominasi asing.

4. 1964–1973 – Amerika Latin
Di seluruh Amerika Latin, dari Brasil hingga Chili, pemerintahan sayap kiri digulingkan dengan dukungan Amerika Serikat. Periode ini memuncak dalam Operasi Condor, sebuah jaringan lintas negara di mana AS mendukung kediktatoran militer sayap kanan.

Rezim-rezim ini melakukan penyiksaan sistematis, penghilangan paksa, dan pembunuhan politik. Generasi demi generasi mengalami trauma atas nama anti-komunisme dan “stabilitas.”

5. 1983 – Grenada
Setelah terjadinya kudeta internal, Amerika Serikat menginvasi Grenada dan menggulingkan pemerintahan militer Marxis. Karena Grenada merupakan bagian dari Persemakmuran Inggris, Presiden Ronald Reagan kemudian meminta maaf kepada Perdana Menteri Inggris Margaret Thatcher karena tidak memberi pemberitahuan sebelumnya sebuah pengakuan langka atas sifat sepihak invasi tersebut.

6. 1989 – Panama
Manuel Noriega, yang sebelumnya merupakan sekutu AS, mulai menantang kendali Amerika Serikat atas Terusan Panama dan dituduh terlibat perdagangan narkoba. AS kemudian menginvasi Panama, menggulingkan Noriega, dan menggunakan perang psikologis termasuk memutar musik rock keras di luar Kedutaan Vatikan tempat Noriega berlindung untuk memaksanya menyerah.

Pesan yang disampaikan jelas: sekutu hanya diterima selama mereka tetap patuh.

7. 2001 – Afghanistan
Setelah serangan 11 September, Amerika Serikat meluncurkan “Perang Melawan Teror” dan menggulingkan Taliban karena melindungi al-Qaeda. Yang terjadi kemudian adalah 20 tahun perang, korban sipil dalam jumlah besar, dan pengeluaran triliunan dolar.

Pada tahun 2021, Taliban kembali berkuasa, memunculkan pertanyaan serius tentang tujuan dan hasil nyata dari intervensi tersebut.

8. 2003 – Irak
Saddam Hussein digulingkan berdasarkan tuduhan kepemilikan senjata pemusnah massal tuduhan yang kemudian terbukti tidak benar. Runtuhnya negara Irak memicu konflik sektarian, ketidakstabilan regional, dan kemunculan kelompok-kelompok ekstremis.

Dampak jangka panjangnya masih terasa hingga kini di Timur Tengah.

9. 2011 – Libya
Selama Arab Spring, serangan udara NATO yang didukung Amerika Serikat menggulingkan Muammar Gaddafi. Meski dibingkai sebagai intervensi kemanusiaan, Libya kemudian terjerumus ke dalam perang saudara, dengan berbagai milisi dan kekuatan asing berebut pengaruh.

Negara Libya pada akhirnya terpecah dan gagal membangun stabilitas baru.

10. 2026 – Venezuela
Kasus Venezuela mencerminkan pola yang sudah dikenal: sanksi ekonomi, perang ekonomi, isolasi diplomatik, operasi rahasia, dan akhirnya aksi militer langsung yang semuanya dibenarkan dengan narasi moral dan hukum yang ditolak oleh banyak pihak di komunitas internasional.

Penutup
Dan kini Amerika Serikat punya niat dengan Greenland yang merupakan bagian dari Denmark yang juga anggota NATO. Greenland kini semakin mendapat perhatian dari Amerika Serikat karena letaknya yang strategis di kawasan Arktik, kekayaan sumber daya alam, serta meningkatnya kepentingan geopolitik seiring mencairnya es di wilayah kutub.

Pada tahun 2019, Presiden AS saat itu, Donald Trump, secara terbuka menyampaikan ketertarikannya untuk “membeli” Greenland, sebuah gagasan yang langsung ditolak oleh Denmark dan pemerintah lokal Greenland.

Meskipun usulan tersebut menuai kritik luas dan dianggap tidak realistis, pernyataan itu mencerminkan ambisi strategis Amerika Serikat di kawasan Arktik, terutama terkait kehadiran militer, akses sumber daya, dan persaingan dengan Rusia serta Tiongkok. Apakah Amerika Serikat juga akan menggulingkan pemimpin Greenland seperti negara negara lainnya yang sudah dikendalikan oleh Amerika Serikat? Pertanyaan saya lucu, konyol tapi tidak apa karena ini pertanyaan yang ada dikepala saya

Jika dilihat secara keseluruhan, kasus-kasus ini menunjukkan sebuah strategi yang konsisten, bukan sekadar kejadian terpisah. Selama puluhan tahun dan di berbagai belahan dunia, Amerika Serikat berulang kali berupaya mengendalikan pemerintahan, mengamankan sumber daya strategis, dan membentuk tatanan dunia sesuai kepentingannya.

Bahasa dan pembenaran mungkin berubah dari anti-komunisme, perang melawan teror, hingga perang melawan narkoba namun logika dasarnya tetap sama. Pertanyaannya kini bukan lagi apakah sejarah ini benar-benar ada, melainkan apakah dunia akan terus menerimanya sebagai sesuatu yang normal.

Bagaimana dengan pendapat kalian? Silahkan tulis komentar kalian terhadap topik ini Perbedaan pendapat adalah hal yang biasa, dan setiap pendapat yang berbeda tentu diapresiasi dan dihargai

---

A Message From Asep Haryono

 

"Thank you so much for your time here. I really appreciate your precious moment here as well.  Please leave any comment down below.  Let me hear from you.  Greetings from Indonesia"

Tag : Keseharian, Opinion - Asep Haryono | Why Do Immigration Officers Use Lethal Force?. My reactions on the Minnesota Tragedy - Powered by Blogger

Disclaimer:
This article represents the author’s personal perspective and is intended for discussion and informational purposes only. It does not encourage hatred, violence, or discrimination in any form.

Happy weekend my friends.

The whole world, including me in Indonesia, have witnessed through social media platforms that In January 2026, an ICE agent in Minneapolis fatally shot Renée Nicole Good during an enforcement operation. Officials claim Good posed an imminent threat, but eyewitness videos show a different perspective, suggesting she was calm before the shooting.

The incident has led to protests and calls for an independent investigation. As of now, the investigation is ongoing, and the community is waiting for more clarity on what happened.

My question is simple. Why Do Immigration Officers Use Lethal Force?

Recently, a tragic incident in Minnesota shocked many people around the world. A woman was fatally shot during an immigration-related operation conducted by U.S. officers. This event has sparked serious attentions, not only about what exactly happened in that case, but also about how immigration enforcement is handled in the United States, and whether such extreme force is really necessary.

As an ordinary observer, I want to reflect on this issue from a human perspective, not a political one instead of I am not good at confrontation. I would like to find an answer to my question mentioned above. Why Do Immigration Officers Use Lethal Force? They are Civilian, Not a Criminal. You are not at war. Why did you do that?

Dramatic video purportedly shows the moment an ICE agent fatally opened fire on a woman in Minneapolis, who DHS says attempted to barrel her SUV into the path of an office.I marked with a circle to show you the guy's firearms.
Image courtesy of New Your Post Yputube Channel

One of the most important points to understand is this:Illegal immigrants are civilians, not armed criminals or terrorists. In most cases, they are unarmed people workers, parents, or families who entered or stayed in a country without proper documents. That is a legal issue, yes, but it is not the same as violent crime. I want to say one more time my friends/ My other big question is: Why do officers need to carry lethal weapons when dealing with unarmed civilians?

From a moral and humanitarian point of view, this feels deeply troubling. Immigration enforcement should be about administrative law, not battlefield tactics.

You guys said it was “Self-Defense”.
O come on. 

The U.S. government and law enforcement agencies often explain that officers are armed for self-defense. The argument is that officers never know what situation they will face and must be prepared for danger.But many people find this reasoning difficult to accept in immigration cases.

Self-defense usually applies when there is a clear and immediate threat. 

If the person being arrested is unarmed, surrounded by officers, and not committing violence, then using lethal force feels disproportionate. This is why many people describe such actions as excessive, unnecessary, and even cruel.

Militarization of Immigration Enforcement
Another my major concern is the militarization of immigration officers in the United States. Through many videos I have watched recently clearly showed that many ICE agents are equipped with: Firearms, Tactical gear and Military-style equipment. Just like at war zone

This creates an atmosphere of fear and intimidation, especially in immigrant communities. When officers look and act like soldiers, people naturally panic even if they have done nothing violent. Fear escalates situations. Panic leads to mistakes. And mistakes, when weapons are involved, can end in death.

I compare this with countries like Border Security Australia, the difference is striking. Australia also enforces immigration laws strictly. They search for undocumented immigrants and conduct operations. However, in many recorded cases, officers: Do not carry visible lethal weapons. Focus on questioning and verification. No bullet was fired

Use calm, firm communication. The emphasis is on control and procedure, not intimidation. This comparison shows that immigration enforcement does not have to involve deadly force.  I love that

As far as I am concerned, In the United States, immigration enforcement is deeply connected to race, history, and systemic inequality. Even when officers say race is not a factor, the outcomes often suggest otherwise.

Communities of color feel targeted. Immigrants feel hunted rather than protected by the law. This erodes trust and creates long-term damage to social cohesion.

After a fatal incident like the one in Minnesota, many people ask: I would like you guys to investiage this issue as soon as possible. We do not have to wait so long for justice even tough you will need more time for Investigations because multiple agencies are involved, Evidence must be reviewed carefully and Legal standards are strict. While this process is important to ensure fairness, long delays also create frustration, anger, and suspicion among the public. Transparency during investigations is essential. Silence only deepens mistrust.

Whether the case will go to trial depends on Evidence, Witness accounts, Body camera footage and Legal interpretation of “use of force”Justice is not guaranteed but public pressure, media attention, and independent investigations can play a crucial role in ensuring accountability. Justice is not just about punishment. It is also about acknowledging wrongdoing and preventing future tragedies.

POV : What the U.S. Government Should Do Next
If the U.S. truly wants to prevent similar tragedies, several changes are necessary like limit the use of lethal weapons in immigration operations, Prioritize de-escalation training, not tactical aggression, Separate immigration enforcement from criminal policing, Ensure independent oversight for any use of deadly force and Treat undocumented immigrants as civilians, not enemies

Immigration is a legal issue. It should not be handled like a war.

At the end of the day, this is not only about laws or borders. It is about human life. A person died. A family lost someone. A community was traumatized. No policy, no law, and no enforcement operation should forget that basic truth.  If governments want respect for the law, they must first show respect for human dignity.  A Human Issue, Not Just a Legal One

What are your thoughts on this issue?

Do you believe immigration enforcement should prioritize humanity and de-escalatio?
Feel free to share your perspective respectfully in the comments below

Happy weekend my friend

Stay safe.

Do not forget to be happy

---

A Message From Asep Haryono

 

"Thank you so much for your time here. I really appreciate your precious moment here as well.  Please leave any comment down below.  Let me hear from you.  Greetings from Indonesia"

Tag : Keseharian, Opinion - Asep Haryono | The U.S. Attack on Venezuela. Power, Law, and Precedent: Rethinking International Order. My Opinions and Prespective - Powered by Blogger

Disclaimer:

This article is an opinion-based analysis written using information available from international media reports, public statements, and open-source sources at the time of writing. It reflects the author’s personal perspective on international law and global governance and does not claim to represent definitive legal judgment or official positions of any government or institution.

When a powerful country can launch airstrikes inside another sovereign nation and forcibly remove its president without international authorization, the question is no longer about politics it is about whether international law still has meaning.

The recent United States military operation in Venezuela has sent shockwaves far beyond Latin America. Regardless of one’s opinion of Venezuela’s leadership, the act itself challenges the very foundation of the rules-based international order and raises an uncomfortable but urgent question: are some countries now operating beyond the reach of international law?

My friends

The recent reports surrounding a United States military operation in Venezuela involving airstrikes and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife have triggered intense global debate. Beyond political alignment or personal views of the Venezuelan leadership, the incident raises a far more important question: does international law still apply equally to all states, especially powerful ones?

For many observers, this event is not simply about Venezuela. It is about the credibility of the international legal order itself. If a powerful country can unilaterally use military force inside another sovereign state and remove its head of government without clear authorization under international law, then the rules designed to protect global stability are at serious risk.

International Law and the Use of Force
At the heart of this controversy lies the United Nations Charter, the cornerstone of modern international law. Article 2(4) clearly prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, except in two limited circumstances: self-defense against an armed attack or authorization by the UN Security Council.

In the case of Venezuela, critics argue that neither condition was clearly met. Venezuela did not launch an armed attack on the United States, and no explicit Security Council authorization was granted. From a legal perspective, this places the operation in a highly questionable position.

International law does not allow states to conduct military operations in another country simply to enforce domestic criminal charges or political objectives. Doing so risks transforming law enforcement into warfare a dangerous precedent that undermines sovereignty worldwide.

The Presiden Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, and his wife.
 Photo courtesy of KOMPAS Indonesia Official Youtube channel

Sovereignty and the Arrest of a Head of State
The forced capture of a sitting president inside his own country raises another serious legal issue: Sovereign immunity. While international law recognizes that heads of state may be held accountable for crimes, the process typically requires international courts, extradition agreements, or multilateral cooperation not unilateral military action.

When one country claims the right to arrest a foreign leader by force, it challenges the principle that states are legally equal. If this logic is accepted, then no government especially in smaller or weaker countries can feel secure.

This concern explains why many states react strongly, even if they strongly criticize the Venezuelan government itself. The issue is not about defending Maduro as a leader, but about defending the rules that protect all nations from coercion by force.

The Question of Double Standards
One of the most damaging consequences of such actions is the perception of double standards. International law is often presented as universal and neutral, yet in practice it appears selectively enforced.

Smaller or weaker states are frequently sanctioned, investigated, or condemned for violations, while powerful countries often face limited consequences. This inconsistency erodes trust in the international system and fuels accusations that international law is applied based on power, not principle.

Read also - Double Standards in Western Media

When the rules seem optional for the strongest players, they lose legitimacy for everyone.

Why the United Nations Struggles to Respond
Many people ask why the United Nations appears unable to respond decisively to such actions. The answer lies in the structure of the UN Security Council, where five permanent members including the United States hold veto power.

This veto allows any one of these states to block resolutions, including those condemning their own actions. As a result, the Security Council often becomes paralyzed precisely when decisive action is most needed.

The UN General Assembly may pass resolutions expressing concern or condemnation, but these are not legally binding. Without enforcement mechanisms, such responses remain symbolic rather than effective.

This structural imbalance has led many countries, particularly from the Global South, to argue that the veto system no longer reflects today’s world and is increasingly used as a political shield rather than a tool for peace.

The Dangerous Precedent
Perhaps the most serious implication of this incident is the precedent it sets. If one powerful state can justify military intervention to arrest a foreign leader, others may follow.

What happens if

• A regional power adopts the same logic?
• A rival state uses similar justification?
• Political disagreements become militarized?

History shows that once norms are weakened, instability follows. International law exists not because it is perfect, but because it helps prevent chaos. When those norms erode, the risk of conflict increases especially for countries without the means to defend themselves militarily.

Reconsidering the Veto System
This situation strengthens calls to rethink the UN veto system. Many countries now argue that while veto power may have made sense in 1945, it is increasingly incompatible with a world that claims to value equality, accountability, and rule-based order.

Proposed reforms include:

• Limiting veto use in cases involving clear violations of international law
• Requiring multiple vetoes instead of one
• Suspending veto power in cases of mass violence or aggression
• Increasing transparency and justification for veto decisions

While these reforms face political resistance, the growing number of crises blocked by vetoes suggests that reform is no longer optional it is necessary. Beyond Venezuela: A Global Issue

This issue goes far beyond Venezuela or the United States. It affects: 

• Small and medium-sized countries

• Developing nations 

• Regions with ongoing conflicts 

• The future credibility of international institutions

If international law is perceived as a tool of the powerful rather than a shield for the vulnerable, countries may increasingly turn to self-help, alliances, or force exactly what the UN was created to prevent.

Conclusion: Law Must Stand Above Power
The alleged U.S. attack on Venezuela and the capture of its president represent a critical moment for international law. The question is not whether the Venezuelan government is controversial or flawed. The real question is whether any country, regardless of power, should be allowed to act outside the rules that bind all others.

No state should be above the law. If international law is to survive as a meaningful system, it must apply consistently especially to the strongest actors.

This moment should serve as a wake-up call. The world must decide whether it wants an international order governed by rules, or one governed by power alone. The answer will shape global stability for generations to come.

What do you think about the future of international law and global accountability?

Share your thoughts respectfully in the comments and join the discussion.

---

A Message From Asep Haryono

 

"Thank you so much for your time here. I really appreciate your precious moment here as well.  Please leave any comment down below.  Let me hear from you.  Greetings from Indonesia"

Tag : Keseharian, Opinion - Asep Haryono | 9 Ideas for Welcoming 2026: Simple, Meaningful, and Budget-Friendly Family Traditions - Powered by Blogger

Hello my friends/ How is it going? As for me here, I am doing just fine.

As 2025 slowly comes to an end, many of us start to feel something special in the air. The last days of the year always bring mixed emotions , gratitude, relief, hope, and sometimes a little sadness. We think about what we achieved, what we failed to do, and what we want to improve in the coming year.

For many people, welcoming the New Year means big parties, fireworks, traveling, or spending a lot of money. But honestly, a meaningful New Year celebration does not have to be expensive as least for myself and family here in Indonesia. Some of the most beautiful moments are created at home, with family, simplicity, and sincere intention.

This year, as we welcome 2026, my family and I plan to celebrate in a calm, warm, and budget-friendly way. Here are some simple activities that anyone can do to welcome the New Year without spending too much money but with a lot of meaning.

Welcoming 2026 with hope and gratitude may the new year bring fresh opportunities, positive energy, and meaningful moments for us all. Photo Asep Haryono

1. A Family Reflection Night
Before the New Year arrives, we plan to sit together as a family and talk about the past year. This is one of the most important activities because it helps us slow down and reflect.

Each family member can share: One thing they are grateful for in 2025, One challenge they faced or One lesson they learned

This does not need to be serious or emotional all the time. It can be relaxed, honest, and even funny. Sometimes, laughing together while remembering old moments is more healing than we realize.

Reflection helps us appreciate how far we have come and reminds us that every year good or bad has value.

2. Writing Wishes and Goals for 2026
Another simple but powerful activity is writing wishes and goals. Each family member writes: One personal goal for 2026,One goal for the family, and One hope for the world

We can write them on small pieces of paper and put them in a jar, envelope, or small box. Next year, we can open them again and see how much has changed.

This activity is great for children too. It teaches them to dream, to plan, and to express their hopes in a positive way.

3. Cooking a Simple Special Meal Together
Food always brings people together. Instead of ordering expensive food or going out, we plan to cook at home.

It does not have to be fancy. It can be:A favorite family dish like Bakso, Nasi Goreng, Tofu and many Indonesian dishes, Simple homemade snacks. a small dessert everyone likes

The most important part is cooking together. When everyone helps even a little it creates teamwork and warmth. The kitchen becomes a place of laughter, stories, and togetherness.Sometimes, the memory of cooking together is more special than the food itself.

4. Celebrating Without Fireworks: A Safer and Kinder Choice
Fireworks are often seen as a symbol of New Year celebrations. The bright colors and loud sounds may look exciting, but fireworks can also be risky and harmful. Every year, accidents happen, especially to children, and pets often become stressed or frightened by the noise. Fireworks can also disturb neighbors and contribute to air and noise pollution.

Because of this, many families are now choosing to welcome the New Year without fireworks. Instead of loud explosions, they celebrate with simple and peaceful activities such as talking together, enjoying music, praying, playing games, or doing a quiet countdown at home. Welcoming 2026 does not require fire and noise starting the year safely and calmly with loved ones can be far more meaningful.

5. Movie Night or Story Time at Home
After dinner, a simple movie night is a great way to relax. We can choose: A family movie A comedy Or something inspiring

Another idea is story time. Parents can share stories from their childhood, or families can watch old photos and videos together. This helps younger family members understand their roots and appreciate family history.

No cinema tickets needed just a screen, some snacks, and time together.

6. Prayer and Gratitude to Start the New Year
For Muslim families just like my family members and relatives, starting the New Year with prayer and gratitude is deeply meaningful.

We plan to: Thank Allah for bringing us through 2025, Ask for guidance, health, and peace in 2026, and Pray for our family, friends, and the world. This moment reminds us that life is not only about plans and goals, but also about faith, patience, and trust. Beginning the year with gratitude helps set a calm and positive tone for the months ahead.

7. A Simple Midnight Countdown
When midnight comes, we don’t need fireworks or loud celebrations. A simple countdown at home is enough.

We can: Count down the last seconds of 2025 together Exchange smiles, hugs, and kind words and Say “Bismillah” as 2026 begins. This quiet moment often feels more sincere than crowded celebrations. It reminds us that the New Year is not about noise, but about new beginnings.

8. Cleaning and Resetting the House
Cleaning before the New Year is not just about tidiness it is symbolic.

By cleaning together, we Let go of the old year Create space for new energy and Start 2026 with a fresh environment. Even simple cleaning tasks can feel meaningful when done as a family. It also teaches responsibility and teamwork.

A clean home often brings a clearer mind.

9. Giving and Sharing, Even in Small Ways
Starting the year by giving is a beautiful habit. It does not require a lot of money. We can: Share food with neighbors Donate clothes we no longer use and Help someone in need, even with small kindness

Giving reminds us that happiness grows when it is shared. It is a powerful way to welcome a new year with compassion.

A Simple New Year, A Meaningful One
For all my family here in Indonesia, Welcoming 2026 does not need luxury or big expenses. What truly matters is intention, togetherness, and gratitude. Simple activities done with love can leave deeper memories than expensive celebrations.

As we say goodbye to 2025, let us remember that every year teaches us something. And as we welcome 2026, let us do it with hope, humility, and hearts full of gratitude.

Sometimes, the simplest celebrations are the most meaningful ones.

How do you and your family welcome the New Year? I’d love to hear your traditions and thoughts. Please share them in the comments below.

---

A Message From Asep Haryono

 

"Thank you so much for your time here. I really appreciate your precious moment here as well.  Please leave any comment down below.  Let me hear from you.  Greetings from Indonesia"

Tag : Keseharian, Opinion - Asep Haryono | One God, Many Beliefs: An Islamic Reflection on Christmas, Jesus, and Respect - Powered by Blogger

DISCLAIMER : This article reflects my personal beliefs as a Muslim and is written with respect for all faiths.

Every year when December comes, the world seems to slow down just a little. Streets light up, songs about peace and love play everywhere, and people greet each other with words like Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays. For many, it is a joyful time. For others, especially those of different faiths, it can also bring questions, reflections, and sometimes confusion.

As a Muslim, I often get questions like: Do Muslims believe in Jesus?Why don’t Muslims celebrate Christmas?Why does Islam reject the Trinity?

This blog post is not written to attack or convert anyone. It is simply a casual and friendly reflection from an Islamic point of view, while fully respecting other religions and beliefs. Faith is personal, and mutual respect matters more than winning arguments.

Jesus in Islam: Nabi Isa (Peace Be Upon Him)
Let’s start with something many people don’t realize: Muslims do believe in Jesus. In Islam, Jesus is known as Nabi Isa (عيسى عليه السلام), and he is one of the most honored prophets. Muslims believe that:

• He was born miraculously to Maryam (Mary), who is deeply respected in the Qur’an 

• He performed miracles by the permission of Allah 

• He preached worship of One God • He will return near the end of time

So when Muslims hear about Jesus during Christmas season, it does not feel foreign or strange. We respect him deeply. However, the difference lies in who Jesus is believed to be.Christians believe Jesus is divine the Son of God. Muslims believe he is a prophet, not God, and not the son of God. This difference is important, but it does not cancel out respect.

One God, many beliefs an illustration symbolizing respect, dialogue, and understanding between Islam and Christianity.
Illustration generated using AI for editorial purposes.

Why Muslims Do Not Celebrate Christmas
Many people assume that Muslims reject Christmas because they reject Jesus. That is not true.Muslims do not celebrate Christmas mainly because:

• The Qur’an does not mention a date for Jesus’ birth 

• Islam does not support celebrating religious events that are not part of its teachings 

• Christmas today is both a religious and cultural holiday, often centered around beliefs Islam does not share

This does not mean Muslims are against joy, family gatherings, or kindness. Islam encourages all of these but within its own religious framework. Many Muslims still say things like Happy Holidays or respond politely to Christmas wishes. That is about good manners, not religious agreement.

The Trinity: Why It Feels Confusing to Muslims
One of the biggest questions Muslims have about Christianity is the concept of the Trinity: God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Spirit Christians say this is one God in three persons.

From an Islamic point of view, this concept feels confusing and difficult to understand. Islam teaches absolute monotheism, known as Tawhid.This belief is clearly summarized in Surah Al-Ikhlas, one of the shortest but most powerful chapters in the Qur’an:

“Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born. And there is none comparable to Him.” (Qur’an 112)

For Muslims, this verse answers the question of God completely and clearly. Allah is One no division, no partners, no offspring. This is why Muslims respectfully disagree with ideas like the Trinity or the Son of God. It is not confusion it is a different theological foundation. Is Christmas “Made Up”?

Another common discussion point is whether Christmas is divinely commanded or human-made.Historically speaking: The Bible does not state December 25 as Jesus’ birth date The date was chosen centuries later Many Christmas traditions come from older cultural and seasonal customs

From an Islamic perspective, this reinforces the idea that Christmas is a human-established tradition, not a divinely mandated event. That said, this does not mean it is meaningless to Christians. Faith gives meaning to traditions, and people experience spirituality in different ways.

Respecting Differences Without Compromising Belief

Here is an important point: believing Islam is the truth does not require disrespecting others. Muslims are confident in their faith. Islam teaches clarity, consistency, and pure monotheism. At the same time, Islam also teaches adab good manners, humility, and respect.

The Qur’an itself says there is no compulsion in religion.

So when Muslims interact with Christians, Jews, or people of any other belief, the goal should not be to argue aggressively, but to: Explain beliefs honestlym Listen respectfully and Maintain peace

Disagreement does not equal hatred.

Why Interfaith Conversations Matter
In today’s global world, we interact with people from many cultures and religions online, at work, and in daily life. Misunderstandings happen easily. Someone may think Muslims reject Jesus. Someone else may think Christians worship three gods. These ideas usually come from lack of communication, not bad intentions. Talking openly but politely helps remove fear and stereotypes.

I can say: “This is my belief as a Muslim.”, “I respect your faith, even though mine is different.” And “We see God differently, and that’s okay.” These simple sentences can keep conversations peaceful and meaningful.

Conclusion
Faith is deeply personal. For Muslims, the message of One God as described in Surah Al-Ikhlas is complete and satisfying. It leaves no confusion about who Allah is.For Christians, Jesus and Christmas hold deep spiritual meaning.

We do not need to agree to respect each other. As a Muslim, I am confident in Islam as the truth. At the same time, I believe good character, honesty, and respect are just as important as belief itself.

If this reflection feels uncomfortable to some, that is understandable. Differences can be uncomfortable. But respectful dialogue is always better than silence or hostility. At the end of the day, peace begins with understanding and understanding begins with listening.

Happy holidays to those who celebrate, and peace to everyone. 

---

A Message From Asep Haryono

 

"Thank you so much for your time here. I really appreciate your precious moment here as well.  Please leave any comment down below.  Let me hear from you.  Greetings from Indonesia"

 

Tag : Keseharian, Opinion - Asep Haryono | Antisemitism - Powered by Blogger

Hello world. How is it going?
Hope you all got a fabulous day, right
Happy Tuesday my friends

As we all knew that on 14 December 2025, a terrorist-style mass shooting took place at a Hanukkah celebration near Bondi Beach in Sydney’s eastern suburbs during the first night of the Jewish festival. Around 1,000 people had gathered for the “Chanukah by the Sea” event when two gunmen, believed to be a father and son, opened fire from a footbridge beside Archer Park

Many media reported that by the end of the incident, 16 people were confirmed dead, including a 10-year-old girl, an 87-year-old Holocaust survivor, and community leaders at the event; dozens more were wounded, including children and police officers. One of the shooters was killed by police, and the other was wounded and taken to hospital in critical condition. A bystander was widely praised for tackling and disarming one of the attackers, likely saving many lives.

The attack began in the early evening and lasted about 10 minutes, with witnesses describing chaotic scenes as hundreds of people fled in panic. Authorities and international media quickly characterised the shooting as a targeted antisemitic terrorist attack.

Today article is not talking about the moslem guy as a genuine hero which got internationally attention by his bravery and widely praised for tackling and disarming one of the attackers. I am interested in discussing why people associated as a targeted antisemitic terrorist attack. 

The word “antisemitic” became widely known and internationally recognized during the Palestine–Israel confrontation

My friends......


The prejudice and discrimination against Jews, has a long and disturbing history that spans centuries. It is rooted in stereotypes, misinformation, and irrational fear, leading to widespread persecution and violence against Jewish communities.Antisemitism persists to this day and can manifest in various forms, including hate speech,

vandalism, exclusionary policies, and even acts of terrorism targeted specifically at Jews.Research has shown that exposure to hate speech and discriminatory attitudes can contribute to the normalization of antisemitism, leading to a decreased sensitivity towards its offensive nature and an increase in inter group contempt towards Jewish individuals.

Furthermore, societal factors such as media representations and political discourse can either perpetuate or challenge antisemitic beliefs.Jenkins and colleagues conducted a study to examine negative attitudes toward Arab-Americans.

Their research found that participants were less willing to interact socially with Arab-Americans compared to other ethnic groups, indicating a bias and discrimination towards this specific group. This supports the idea that discrimination and prejudice exist across various ethnicity and can impact different groups differently.

Antisemitism, the prejudice and discrimination against Jews, has a long and disturbing history that spans centuries. It is rooted in stereotypes, misinformation, and irrational fear, leading to widespread persecution and violence against Jewish communities.Antisemitism persists to this day and can manifest in various forms, including hate speech, vandalism, exclusionary policies, and even acts of terrorism targeted specifically at Jews.

Research has shown that exposure to hate speech and discriminatory attitudes can contribute to the normalization of antisemitism, leading to a decreased sensitivity towards its offensive nature and an increase in intergroup contempt towards Jewish individuals. Furthermore, societal factors such as media representations and political discourse can either perpetuate or challenge antisemitic beliefs.Jenkins and colleagues conducted a study to examine negative attitudes toward Arab-Americans.


You may also read - Why Don't American Leaders See the Horrible Things That Settlers and the IDF Do?


Their research found that participants were less willing to interact socially with Arab-Americans compared to other ethnic groups, indicating a bias and discrimination towards this specific group. This supports the idea that discrimination and prejudice exist across various ethnicities and can impact different groups differently.

Antisemitism is not only a form of hate speech but also a deeply ingrained prejudice and discrimination against Jewish people. It is characterized by negative stereotypes, scapegoating, and systemic oppression that have persisted throughout history.These biases and discriminatory behaviors not only marginalize and harm Jewish individuals but also contribute to the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes and the exclusion of Jewish communities from society.


You may also read.-Why Don't American Leaders See the Horrible Things That Settlers and the IDF Do?


In order to address this issue, it is important to educate individuals about the harms of antisemitism, promote inter group understanding and empathy, and actively work towards dismantling the structural and cultural factors that contribute to antisemitism. Antisemitism, a form of prejudice and discrimination against Jewish individuals, has a long-standing history marked by stereotypes, scapegoating, and systemicAntisemitism: A Historical and Present-day Issue Antisemitism: A Historical and Present-day IssueAntisemitism:


A Historical and Present-day Issue
Antisemitism, the prejudice and discrimination against Jews, has a long and troubling history that spans centuries. It is rooted in negative stereotypes, misinformation, and irrational fear, leading to widespread persecution and violence against Jewish communities (Brustein & King, 2004).

Historically, antisemitism has manifested - in various forms, including pogroms, expulsions, and the Holocaust, which saw the systematic murder of six million Jews during World War II. Today, antisemitism persists in different guises, from hate speech and vandalism to exclusionary policies and even acts of terrorism.

Research has shown that exposure to hate speech and discriminatory attitudes can contribute to the normalization of antisemitism, leading to a decreased sensitivity towards its offensive nature and an increase in inter group contempt towards Jewish individuals (The Surprising Way to Tackle Prejudice in the Real World, 2023). Furthermore, societal factors such as media representations and political discourse can either perpetuate or challenge antisemitic beliefs.

The impacts of antisemitism are far-reaching, as it not only harms Jewish individuals and communities but also undermines the values of diversity, inclusion, and human rights. To address this issue, it is crucial to educate individuals about the harms of antisemitism, promote inter group understanding and empathy, and actively work towards dismantling the structural and cultural factors that contribute to this form of prejudice and discrimination


What Happens Now
This is a complex and sensitive issue, and it’s important to separate criticism of a government’s policies from prejudice against an entire people or religion. Here’s a careful breakdown:

1. Protesting actions vs. attacking a people: Protests against the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza are usually aimed at specific policies or military actions, not at Jewish people as a whole. Criticizing a state’s military operations is not automatically antisemitic

2.   Allegations of antisemitism: Governments or officials sometimes label criticism as antisemitic to delegitimize protests or shift the narrative. While antisemitism is real and serious, it is important not to conflate legitimate political protest with hate speech against Jewish people. 

3. Global perspective: Around the world, people have the right to peacefully protest human rights violations. Accusing all protesters of antisemitism risks silencing important conversations about human rights and accountability. 

4.Nuanced approach: Each protest or statement needs to be examined individually. Are protesters targeting a state’s policies, or are they spreading hatred against Jews as a group? This distinction is crucial.

In short, while antisemitism is unacceptable, labeling all criticism of Israel as antisemitic oversimplifies a complex situation and risks undermining genuine human rights advocacy.

why this labeling happens politically and strategically?
And how it affects international responses.

. 

---