There is no itch-guard for fingering!

Raju Korti
Of the entire complex human anatomy, it is always the big players that hog the limelight -- the heart, the liver, the pancreas, the lungs -- et al, basking in their glow. The poor little finger hardly gets the nod. Nobody even thinks of writing an ode, forget a sonnet, for the finger. No one waxes poetic about its nimble dexterity or pointed poking. Little wonder, the finger suffers from a constant itch, a rebellion against its underappreciated existence. 

A GIF image

The finger, however, has its moments in the anatomy spotlight. All it has to do with its obtrusive personality is to is to tinker and probe posteriors. Except its owner's. So here is to the "finger" that does what comes best to its owners -- fingering. A tribute to the unsung hero and warrior vying for a place in human strife!

The finger, that diminutive, restless digit, has taken upon itself -- with understandable vengeance -- to get an itch for interference. All fingers have their roles, but the finger -- the one that can't sit still -- is uniquely equipped to poke, prod and stir with an almost hypnotic insistence. It has an inbuilt radar for naughtiness, trained to find the precise spot to press for maximum effect. You know what that spot is. I call it the G-spot.      

The finger is multi-talented and versatile. It is both a tool and a weapon, subtle yet relentless, with an itch that only intensifies with each jab. It has an innate ability for an unquenchable urge, forever in search of something -- or someone -- to butt in and justify its sadistic existence. The noble art of fingering transcends languages, cultures and generations. The itch turns the tool into a weapon by those who must poke and prod to keep the world buzzing with their unsolicited guidance.

The finger is "others' envy, owner's pride." You know their types. The itch inspires them for a mental nudge that leaves others scratching from their heads to their G-spot. The Finger Masters of the universe know there is no lotion to cure the irritation caused by them. Finger is a baton that can create a symphony of interruptions. More the chaffing, the sleeker it gets. Watching everyone squirm is their (seats, where else?) cherished sport and pastime.

The finger, like the terrorist, has no religion. It can be secular, liberal and conservative.  It is high time fingering is considered an international sport. With so many ardent practitioners and compulsive competitors, it should be given an Olympic status. Finger-waggers (my coinage, before you unleash your finger at me) deserve a special place in the hall of fame. If the cosmos has any sense of humour, it will bring a cutting edge to a competition where the war will will be fought with a finger of one hand while the other is busy shielding its own backside.              

While we live in a world where Finger Maestros reign supreme, ruling not with a heavy hand but a nimble finger, we must also understand that without them, life would be just a bit too finger(ing) free. So keep fingering. Ungli salaamat toh ...... 

Here is my ode to the finger and fingering.

Oh, the noble finger, restless and bold,
Forever itching, forever cold,
Heart and brain steal all the acclaim
You poke and prod your way to fame.
You ruffle feathers, you stir the broth
A reminder to all: I am here too.

Israel's UN rebuke, a growing rift in global diplomacy!

Raju Korti
Israel's decision to bar United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres from entering the country marks a significant diplomatic confrontation. It can be interpreted as a challenge to the UN's international standing. The move has come after Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz accused Guterres of being patently biased against Israel, calling him a 'persona non grata', a serious diplomatic term that signals a complete rejection of an individual's presence or involvement.

Antonio Guterres (un.org)

Guterres has expressed concerns regarding Israel's actions in recent conflicts, calling for humanitarian considerations and cautioning about civilian casualties. In the eyes of Israeli officials, these statement are one-sided, given the broader context of the conflict with Palestinian groups. By barring Guterres, Israel is sending a strong message that it will not tolerate what it perceives as unfair scrutiny, so what even if it came from the world's purported highest diplomatic office.

The recent escalation in the Israel conflict with Iran and Palestinian groups stems from a combination of long-standing regional tensions and more immediate triggers. Iran's support for Palestinian militant groups, particularly Hamas and Islamic Jihad, through funding, arms, and training, has intensified Israel's security concerns. Additionally, Israel's expanding settlements in the West Bank, coupled with military operations in Gaza, have provoked Palestinian groups, leading to retaliatory rocket attacks. Iran's broader regional strategy. aimed at countering Israeli influence through proxy forces across the Middle East, further fuels the conflict, creating a volatile cycle of provocations and military responses. This dynamic is compounded by failed peace negotiations and deep political divisions on both sides.      

While the move to bar the United Nations chief is being dubbed as a bold political manoeuvre, it is not entirely unprecedented for the countries to clash with UN chiefs. However, such a direct barring of Secretary-General is very rare. I do not know if this has happened ever before. Previous instances of tension between countries and the UN leadership have typically and conventionally played out through diplomatic channels or through public criticisms, but formal bans like this?

Israel believes that this is the Secretary General who has yet to denounce the massacre and sexual atrocities committed by Hamas murderers, nor has he led any efforts to declare them a terrorist organization. "A Secretary-General who gives backing to terrorists, rapists and murderers from Hamas, Hezbollah, and now Iran -- the mothership of global terror -- will be remembered as a stain on the history of UN. Israel will continue to defend its citizens and uphold its national dignity with or without Antonio Guterres". That is as unequivocal as it can get when diplomatically worded statements leave a lot for interpretation.   

This decision has broader implications for the UN's status as an impartial global body. The Secretary-General's role is to mediate conflicts and address issues impartially, but barring him from entering Israel undermines the UN's ability to act as an unbiased peace broker. Furthermore, this could set a precedent and encourage other nations with grievances against the UN to adopt similar tactics, potentially weakening the organization's influence. The UN as it is, doesn't have much sway and has been known to be a stooge of the US, which is even more befuddling.

In the broader geopolitical context, such actions risk deepening international divisions and further complicating efforts for peace in conflict zones. I feel this could be viewed both a symbolic and practical blow to the UN's authority on the global stage. The UN holds significant authority on the world stage stage as a central forum for international diplomacy, conflict resolutions, and humanitarian efforts. It brings together 193 member states to address global challenges like peacekeeping, climate change and human rights. However, its influence is often constricted by the competing interests of its most powerful members, particularly the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5) -- United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom , and France -- who wield veto power. Among these, the US has traditionally held sway due to its financial contributions, military might, and diplomatic leverage.

The pitch is queered by other P5 members like China and Russia who often challenge US influence, particularly on issues related to international security, reflecting the geopolitical power dynamics that shape the UN's capacity to act. As a result, the UN has only moral authority and a broad mandate, and its practical influence is often shaped by the interests of these global powers.