Humanitarian Law Fails Palestine
Brief Background of International Humanitarian Law
Throughout the course of human history, war has been ruthless, often senselessly tearing apart families and livelihoods during callous power struggles between two belligerent parties who unnecessarily involve innocent people. It was not until fairly recently in human history that conventions occurred to attempt to make fighting more humane. Due to the lack of consensus on a war crime and the tendency of attacking forces to disregard human life, much less human dignity, the exact definition of a ‘war crime’ and ‘crimes against humanity’ remains elusive. Generally speaking, a war crime is a “serious violation of the laws or customs of war as defined by international customary law and international treaties,” and can apply to civilians and armed soldiers, while crimes against humanity apply to civilians (Penrose, 2022 & “Crimes Against Humanity”, n.d.).
The first attempt to establish customs of war arose in 1863 before the end of the American Civil War with the ‘Instruction for the Government of the Armies of the United States in the Field’ written by Francis Lieber and better known as the ‘Lieber Code’ (Mindrup, 2021). This Code established what was permissible during war and how the Union would prosecute the Confederacy, and European powers drew inspiration from it as well in the decades to come. Namely, the Code sought to ban forced servitude of the vanquished and ‘wanton violence’, which had historically been the norm (Penrose, 2022).
The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 were the first international efforts to establish war crimes, and they banned certain methods of fighting such as the use of poison (“War Crimes”, n.d.). The following scheduled conventions did not convene due to the breakout of World War I.
After World War I, representatives from the Allied Powers -- plus Poland, Belgium, Greece, Romania, and Serbia – met to create the Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties. This commission established the aggressors of the war and recommended a tribunal for the war criminals of the defeated parties, which was not implemented due to Germany’s refusal to participate (Kramer, 2017). These planned tribunals laid the groundwork for the tribunals after World War II.
Historical attempts at making war humane follow a similar pattern – they place the blame of human suffering solely on the vanquished party. They assume that war is between a just party and an unjust one, and as the saying goes, ‘history is written by the victors.’ In fact, when German representative requested that the Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties be written by a neutral power, the Allied Powers refused (Kramer, 2017). This is not to suggest that Germany was not a main aggressor of World War I, but to point out that the blame of the war was focused ‘first on Germany and Austria, secondly on Turkey and Bulgaria’, thus ignoring atrocities committed by the Allied Powers (Lansing et al, 1920).
Moreover, these supposed valued morals of fighting did not apply to the colonial spheres in which European powers engaged in asymmetric power struggles, yet still resorted to forced labor, amputation of the limbs of civilians, flogging, and many more atrocities (Kramer, 2017).
Ironically, these war crimes only applied to wars between two ‘civilized nations’ (Kramer, 2017). This selective application of morals is a prelude to our current view towards international atrocities.
One of the most influential meetings influencing modern policy is the 1949 Geneva Convention post World War II, which is the only customary law to be ratified by all member states of the United Nations (“War Crimes”, n.d.). The policies of this convention targets civilians and those no longer involved in fighting, i.e., wounded soldiers and prisoners of war (“The Geneva Conventions,” 2014). As will be discussed later, notable crimes include intentionally targeting civilians, destroying or seizing enemy property, starving civilians as a method of warfare, directing attacks towards personnel or buildings involved in humanitarian assistance, and unlawful deportation, transfer, or confinement (“War Crimes”, n.d.).
The 1949 Geneva Convention aims to move away from this historical bias and hold any aggressive party responsible, but the reality is, with the executive power of the UN relying on the United States, France, Russia, China, and the United Kingdom, the application of these laws continues to be selective. Of noteworthy discussion is how these laws have failed to protect Palestine.
How Humanitarian Law has Failed Palestine
“Palestine exists in a void – a place where [the] people who control it deny its very existence” (Sumina & Gilmore, 2018). As mentioned previously, some crimes put forth by the 1949 Geneva Convention include intentionally targeting civilians, destroying or seizing enemy property, starving civilians as a method of warfare, directing attacks towards personnel or buildings involved in humanitarian assistance, and unlawful deportation, transfer, or confinement (“War Crimes”, n.d.). Through their occupation, Israel has violated all these agreements – from bulldozing and seizing property for 600,000-750,000 illegal settlers, to targeting civilians in schools and during prayers, to cutting off water and food supply, denying citizenship, and more (Tahan, 2017 & “Israel Soldiers Fire...”, 2022). Despite a 1967 unanimous UN Security Council decision that Israel must return territories seized during the Arab-Israeli war, Israel continues to defy this decision with no consequences (Tahan, 2017). With restrictions on imports and exports, schools, agriculture, sanitation, housing infrastructure, and citizenship (which affects employment), Israel has guaranteed long-term ramifications to the Palestinian people that will take generations to overcome.
Moreover, the overall goal of these atrocities is to achieve a Jewish majority in Palestine, erase thousands of years of shared history, and institutionalize oppression – ethnic cleansing and apartheid are yet more violations of humanitarian law. Israeli leaders have made their goal blatant through their words and actions. Benjamin Netanyahu, Yoav Kish, Eli Ben Dahan, Avigdor Lieberman, Ayelet Shaked, Moshe Yaalon, Eli Yashai, and other Israeli politicians have brazenly embraced their support for an apartheid state and ethnic cleansing, although their vile direct quotes will not be included in this article.
So why isn’t anything being done? After the violent history that preluded the 1949 Geneva Convention, one would hope that these measures would be enforced. But change will certainly not come from the Israeli state – Prime Minister Bennett has made it clear he does not want to negotiate nor consider a peace process, as have the prime ministers before him (Youssef, 2022). The UN has also failed to formerly investigate these crimes through an international commission of inquiry, despite a 213-page Human Rights Watch Report declaring Israel an apartheid state with evidence in April. Further, the Security Council of the UN remains deadlocked, as the U.S. – one of the five permanent members of the council – has used its veto power 42 times (out of the 83 total times veto power has been used by the US) to protect Israel from accountability (Charbonneau, 2021). America also continues to support Israel through substantial military and financial aid. Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of American foreign assistance since World War II, totaling at about $236 billion, adjusted for inflation (CRS, 2022). This aid includes spyware, missiles, military vehicles and much more (CRS, 2022). We have stipulations when we give military aid to other countries, yet we write blank checks for Israel.
Change will not come from above. To support the Palestinian liberation movement, consider joining protests with local organizations (SJP, Dream Defenders etc.) and contact public officials to demonstrate solidarity and support for the H.R.2590 - Defending the Human Rights of Palestinian Children and Families Living Under Israeli Military Occupation Act. Uplift Palestinian businesses, stories, and voices. Hold your politicians accountable for supporting Israel through miliary and financial aid– concessions like a statement of regret will not bring change, only votes will. Hold corporations accountable for supporting Israeli occupation or building on Palestinian land – some noteworthy companies to boycott are Pillsbury, Sabra, Puma, and Ahava. Lastly, consider making a direct impact through monetary donation to local relief groups like ANERA, IMEU, and Medical Aid for Palestine.
These are the day-to-day solutions I could find that were endorsed by the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. It baffles me that humanitarian laws are not being used to protect today’s vulnerable populations. I do not know how to convince people that humans are to be treated as such, but I hope that by defying the unrelenting racist and Islamophobic rhetoric, something will be done. I hope to see a liberated Palestine in my lifetime.
References
Charbonneau, L. (2021). How the UN Can Help End Israeli Apartheid and Persecution. Foreign Policy in Focus, hrw.org/news/2021/05/19/how-un-can-help-end-israeli-apartheid-and-persecution.
Congressional Research Service (CRS). (2022). U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel. Congressional Research Service, sgp.fas.org/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf.
“The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols.” (2014, January 1). International Committee of the Red Cross, icrc.org/en/document/geneva-conventions-1949-additional-protocols.
“Israel Soldiers Fire Tear Gas at Palestinian School in Nablus”. (2022, September 16). Middle East Monitor, middleeastmonitor.com/20220916-israel-soldiers-fire-tear-gas-at-palestinian-school-in-nablus/.
Kramer, A. (2017, January 24). Atrocities. International Encyclopedia of the First World War, 1(1). encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/atrocities.
Lansing, R., Scott, J.B., Hewart, G., Polluck, E., Massey, W.F., Tardieu, M., et al. (1920). Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties. The American Journal of International Law, 14(1-2):95-154. doi:10.2307/2187841
Mindrup, A. H. (2021). The Lieber Code: A Historical Analysis of the Context and Drafting of General Orders No. 100. The Cardinal Edge, 1(27). doi: 10.18297/tce/vol1/iss1/27. Penrose, M. M. (2022, May 23). War Crime, Brittanica, britannica.com/topic/war-crime.
Sumina, S. & Gilmore, S. (2018). The Failure of International Law in Palestine. St. Mary’s Law Review on Race and Social Justice, 20(2). doi: commons.stmarytx.edu/thescholar/vol20/iss2/1/.
Tahan, Z. (2017, November 21). Israel’s Settlements: over 50 Years of Land Theft Explained. Aljazeera. interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/2017/50-years-illegal-settlements/index.html.
United Nations. (n.d.). “Crimes Against Humanity”. Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. un.org/en/genocideprevention/crimes-against-humanity.shtml.
United Nations. (n.d.). “War Crimes”. Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml
Youssef, H. (2022, February 17). The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: the Danger of ‘No Solution Messaging’. United States Institution of Peace, usip.org/publications/2022/02/israeli-palestinian-conflict-danger-no-solution-messaging.