The Age | Ben Saul | 17.10 23
The violence in Israel and Palestine has again inflamed bitter partisan divisions that have fuelled this conflict for so long.
International humanitarian law protects all civilians, without discrimination. It aims to deescalate spirals of savagery and dehumanisation by insisting on universal human values. As a party to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, Australia must ‘‘ensure respect’’ for the law everywhere.
Much of the law is simple, and Hamas should be held accountable for war crimes. Israel refuses to co-operate with the court, which thwarts one avenue of justice for Hamas’ atrocities, as well as for any Israeli crimes.
One stark Israeli violation is its ‘‘complete siege’’ of Gaza, with ‘‘no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel’’. Siege can be lawful to degrade an adversary, but it must not excessively harm civilians, impede life-saving humanitarian relief and medical care, or prevent civilians from finding safety.
A 16-year blockade has already debilitated Gaza. This latest turning of the screws is unlawful and could constitute the war crime of starving civilians.
Israel has also ordered 1.1 million people to move from northern Gaza to the south in 24 hours. The International Committee of the Red Cross, the custodian of the law, has called this order illegal. Israel then bombed one of the roads it declared ‘‘safe’’ for evacuees, killing 70.
The legality of the 6000 bombs Israel dropped on Gaza in one week is harder to assess.
Tragically, more than 2200 Palestinians have been killed and 8700 injured. Infrastructure damaged includes homes, hospitals, schools, Red Crescent centres, mosques, and water and sanitation facilities. Hundreds of thousands are homeless, and many more displaced.
The law requires Israel to ensure it attacks only military targets and not civilians, to avoid excessive civilian casualties. While Hamas hides among and under civilian areas, this does not absolve Israel of its duties. Nor does the failure of Hamas to evacuate or protect civilians. In densely populated areas, Israel must take heightened care.
The extent and patterns of destruction in Gaza raise questions about Israel’s compliance with the law. Buildings with reportedly no military value have been struck. Apartment blocks have been levelled when only parts were used by Hamas and civilian use was predominant.
Israel has used more and larger bombs than previously, and provided fewer warnings. The tempo of these air strikes increases the margin of error. That Israel has resorted to a starvation siege must ring alarm bells about its commitment to other rules protecting civilians. Its failure to anticipate Hamas’ attack raises questions about the reliability of its intelligence in targeting.
There is a risk that vengeance, not cool military calculus, could animate some attacks, where the zeitgeist is to finish Hamas for good, and Israel has a poor record of holding its soldiers accountable.
As the Red Cross says, the tragedy in Israel ‘‘cannot justify the limitless destruction of Gaza’’.
Sympathy for Israelis does not mean we should not sympathise with Palestinians, and vice versa. We can condemn Hamas’ war crimes while also holding Israel accountable. Australia should follow the US in demanding Israel respect international law.
Civilians on both sides have long suffered the burden of the belief that violence can resolve this dispute. While condemning Hamas’ terrorism, we must address the conditions which breed violence. Hamas did not rise in a vacuum. Palestinian selfdetermination and Israeli security are two sides of the same coin.
Ben Saul is Challis Chair of International Law at the University of Sydney.