MENSEN DRINKEN BRAK WATER!!!!!” en wat daaronder staat.
Geachte Directie
Geacht Management,
Zoals u zich wellicht kunt herinneren, heb ik u in de loop
der Tijden een aantal keren bestookt met mailbrieven met de
eis, geen producten uit Israel meer te verkopen!
Mijn laatste mail aan u dateert van 23 april 2023!
Zie noot 1
Meestal ging dat om [tenminste, dat heb ik bij een bezoek
aan uw filiaal in Amsterdam Zuid-Oost geconstateerd] om mango’s
en/of avocado’s, die in de aanbieding waren [2]
Nu dacht ik eerlijk gezegd, dat u uw Leven gebeterd had, omdat ik
na mijn Brandmail van 23 april jongstleden [3], althans in uw
filiaal Amsterdam Zuid-Oost, geen avocado’s uit Israel meer
gezien had.
”YES!”, dacht ik
Eindelijk is de boodschap bij VOMAR aangekomen [hopelijk ben
ik namelijk niet de enige, die u hierover heeft aangeschreven] en
beseft de VOMAR, dat zij met de verkoop van producten uit Bezettings
en Apartheidsstaat Israel [4] moreel medeverantwoordelijk is
voor diens wandaden en bloed aan haar handen heeft.
Wie schetst mijn Woede en Verbazing toen ik gisteren [dd woensdag
1 november 2023] bij een bezoek aan weer uw filiaal Amsterdam
Zuid-Oost constateerde, dat u het heeft bestaan om in uw aanbiedingen
folder van 29 october tot 4 november [5] avocado’s in de aanbieding had
[en op dit moment van schrijven dus nog heeft] : twee pakken voor 4 euro en WEER afkomstig uit Israel!!
Ik had al een pakje gepakt [avocado’s zijn voor mij een delicatesse] en
toen ik zag, dat zij uit Israel kwamen, vol walging weer teruggezet.
Ik zeg het u eerlijk:
Als het geen voedsel was geweest maar een ander product, had ik het
op de grond gesmeten!!
Want dat u geen gehoor gegeven hebt aan mijn eis/oproep [en waarschijnlijk ook van anderen] om uw verkoop van Israelische
producten te staken [6] is Een Ding.
Dat u het Lef hebt om juist op dit dramatische Moment
van de Geschiedenis door te gaan, met droge ogen, Israelische
producten te verkopen, is ronduit schokkend
WAAROM JUIST NU?
Moet ik het u nog uitleggen?
Dat ga ik wel doen, al is het meer dan weerzinwekkend, dat het nog nodig is, sinds het feit, dat Israel een bezettings en apartheidsstaat is, die zich in
de loop der jaren heeft schuldig gemaakt aan onderdrukking, foltering,
administratieve detentie en apartheid [7] al genoeg zou moeten zijn.
Blijkbaar niet voor u!
MISDADIGE ISRAELISCHE INVALLEN IN GAZA
Sinds de verwerpelijke en bloedige 7 october aanval van
Palestijnse verzetsbeweging Hamas [8] heeft Bezettingsstaat Israel als reactie Gaza gebombardeerd [wat trouwens nog steeds doorgaat], waarbij
waarbij
niet alleen Witte fosfor is gebruikt [kijk maar goed wat
Human Rights Watch daarover meldt, noot 9] maar ook geen enkel onderscheid is gemaakt tussen combatanten [militairen
en strijders] en non combatanten [burgers] [10], wat tot duizenden burgerslachtoffers
geleid heeft
Meer dan 7000, volgens de Israelische mensenrechtenorganisatie
Btselem! [11]
En dat was een Btselem bericht van 27 october! [12]
Ondertussen zijn er veel meer doden bijgekomen, vooral ook
in vluchtelingenkamp Jabalia! [13]
Helaas zijn wij met deze Praktijken bij Israelische militaire
invallen in Gaza bekend [14]
Willekeurige militaire aanvallen, een groot aantal burgerdoden [15]
UITHONGERING BURGERBEVOLKING
MENSEN DRINKEN BRAK WATER!!!!!
Maar wat dit alles hier nog monsterachtiger maakt is, dat het hier niet
bij blijft!
Want wat Israel ook heeft gedaan als reactie op de7 october Hamas aanval is een totale Blokkade van Gaza instellen, wat betekent, dat de
burgerbevolking geen gas, water, brandstof en medicijnen ontvangt! [16]
Moet ik uitleggen, dat dit monsterachtig is.
Moet ik uitleggen, dat dit kwaadaardig is?
Moet ik uitleggen, dat dit als ”collectieve straf” internationaalrechtelijk
verboden is? [17]
Dat uithongering van een burgerbevolking een oorlogsmisdaad is?
[18]
Weet u, dat Gazanen wegens gebrek aan water BRAK WATER drinken
[19], wat natuurijk levensgevaarlijk is?
EPILOOG
Meer hoef ik er niet aan toe te voegen.
U verkoopt nog steeds, ondanks talloze opropoen,
dat niet te doen [20] producten uit een Staat, die sinds 1967 de
Palestijnse gebieden bezet, onderdrukt, zich schuldig maakt
aan foltering, administratieve detentie, landdiefstal via illegale
nederzettingen, apartheid.
En nu wordt de burgerbevolking in Gaza uitgehongerd, van toegang tot water, electriciteit, medicijnen en voedsel afgesneden, mensen
drinken brak water [21] en u hebt het Lef, nog steeds Israelische
producten te verkopen.
Walgelijk vind ik het en ik maak het overal bekend, daarop
kunt u rekenen, digitaal en anderszins.
Stop er dus direct mee, als u niet medeplichtig wilt
zijn aan het faciliteren van Bezettings en Uithongeringsstaat Israel.
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Astrid Essed stelt VOMAR opnieuw aan de kaak over de gecontinueerde verkoop van avocado’s uit Israel/VOMAR, hoe lang blijft u Bezettings en Uithongeringsstaat Israel nog steunen?
MENSEN DRINKEN BRAK WATER!!!!!” en wat daaronder staat.
Geachte Directie
Geacht Management,
Zoals u zich wellicht kunt herinneren, heb ik u in de loop
der Tijden een aantal keren bestookt met mailbrieven met de
eis, geen producten uit Israel meer te verkopen!
Mijn laatste mail aan u dateert van 23 april 2023!
Zie noot 1
Meestal ging dat om [tenminste, dat heb ik bij een bezoek
aan uw filiaal in Amsterdam Zuid-Oost geconstateerd] om mango’s
en/of avocado’s, die in de aanbieding waren [2]
Nu dacht ik eerlijk gezegd, dat u uw Leven gebeterd had, omdat ik
na mijn Brandmail van 23 april jongstleden [3], althans in uw
filiaal Amsterdam Zuid-Oost, geen avocado’s uit Israel meer
gezien had.
”YES!”, dacht ik
Eindelijk is de boodschap bij VOMAR aangekomen [hopelijk ben
ik namelijk niet de enige, die u hierover heeft aangeschreven] en
beseft de VOMAR, dat zij met de verkoop van producten uit Bezettings
en Apartheidsstaat Israel [4] moreel medeverantwoordelijk is
voor diens wandaden en bloed aan haar handen heeft.
Wie schetst mijn Woede en Verbazing toen ik gisteren [dd woensdag
1 november 2023] bij een bezoek aan weer uw filiaal Amsterdam
Zuid-Oost constateerde, dat u het heeft bestaan om in uw aanbiedingen
folder van 29 october tot 4 november [5] avocado’s in de aanbieding had
[en op dit moment van schrijven dus nog heeft] : twee pakken voor 4 euro en WEER afkomstig uit Israel!!
Ik had al een pakje gepakt [avocado’s zijn voor mij een delicatesse] en
toen ik zag, dat zij uit Israel kwamen, vol walging weer teruggezet.
Ik zeg het u eerlijk:
Als het geen voedsel was geweest maar een ander product, had ik het
op de grond gesmeten!!
Want dat u geen gehoor gegeven hebt aan mijn eis/oproep [en waarschijnlijk ook van anderen] om uw verkoop van Israelische
producten te staken [6] is Een Ding.
Dat u het Lef hebt om juist op dit dramatische Moment
van de Geschiedenis door te gaan, met droge ogen, Israelische
producten te verkopen, is ronduit schokkend
WAAROM JUIST NU?
Moet ik het u nog uitleggen?
Dat ga ik wel doen, al is het meer dan weerzinwekkend, dat het nog nodig is, sinds het feit, dat Israel een bezettings en apartheidsstaat is, die zich in
de loop der jaren heeft schuldig gemaakt aan onderdrukking, foltering,
administratieve detentie en apartheid [7] al genoeg zou moeten zijn.
Blijkbaar niet voor u!
MISDADIGE ISRAELISCHE INVALLEN IN GAZA
Sinds de verwerpelijke en bloedige 7 october aanval van
Palestijnse verzetsbeweging Hamas [8] heeft Bezettingsstaat Israel als reactie Gaza gebombardeerd [wat trouwens nog steeds doorgaat], waarbij
waarbij
niet alleen Witte fosfor is gebruikt [kijk maar goed wat
Human Rights Watch daarover meldt, noot 9] maar ook geen enkel onderscheid is gemaakt tussen combatanten [militairen
en strijders] en non combatanten [burgers] [10], wat tot duizenden burgerslachtoffers
geleid heeft
Meer dan 7000, volgens de Israelische mensenrechtenorganisatie
Btselem! [11]
En dat was een Btselem bericht van 27 october! [12]
Ondertussen zijn er veel meer doden bijgekomen, vooral ook
in vluchtelingenkamp Jabalia! [13]
Helaas zijn wij met deze Praktijken bij Israelische militaire
invallen in Gaza bekend [14]
Willekeurige militaire aanvallen, een groot aantal burgerdoden [15]
UITHONGERING BURGERBEVOLKING
MENSEN DRINKEN BRAK WATER!!!!!
Maar wat dit alles hier nog monsterachtiger maakt is, dat het hier niet
bij blijft!
Want wat Israel ook heeft gedaan als reactie op de7 october Hamas aanval is een totale Blokkade van Gaza instellen, wat betekent, dat de
burgerbevolking geen gas, water, brandstof en medicijnen ontvangt! [16]
Moet ik uitleggen, dat dit monsterachtig is.
Moet ik uitleggen, dat dit kwaadaardig is?
Moet ik uitleggen, dat dit als ”collectieve straf” internationaalrechtelijk
verboden is? [17]
Dat uithongering van een burgerbevolking een oorlogsmisdaad is?
[18]
Weet u, dat Gazanen wegens gebrek aan water BRAK WATER drinken
[19], wat natuurijk levensgevaarlijk is?
EPILOOG
Meer hoef ik er niet aan toe te voegen.
U verkoopt nog steeds, ondanks talloze opropoen,
dat niet te doen [20] producten uit een Staat, die sinds 1967 de
Palestijnse gebieden bezet, onderdrukt, zich schuldig maakt
aan foltering, administratieve detentie, landdiefstal via illegale
nederzettingen, apartheid.
En nu wordt de burgerbevolking in Gaza uitgehongerd, van toegang tot water, electriciteit, medicijnen en voedsel afgesneden, mensen
drinken brak water [21] en u hebt het Lef, nog steeds Israelische
producten te verkopen.
Walgelijk vind ik het en ik maak het overal bekend, daarop
kunt u rekenen, digitaal en anderszins.
Stop er dus direct mee, als u niet medeplichtig wilt
zijn aan het faciliteren van Bezettings en Uithongeringsstaat Israel.
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Mail Astrid Essed dd 2 november 2023 over de aanbiedingsverkoop van avocado’s uit Israel in de Folder van 29 october t/m 4 november
Israeli authorities must be held accountable for committing the crime of apartheid against Palestinians, Amnesty International said today in a damning new report. The investigation details how Israel enforces a system of oppression and domination against the Palestinian people wherever it has control over their rights. This includes Palestinians living in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), as well as displaced refugees in other countries.
The comprehensive report, Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime against Humanity, sets out how massive seizures of Palestinian land and property, unlawful killings, forcible transfer, drastic movement restrictions, and the denial of nationality and citizenship to Palestinians are all components of a system which amounts to apartheid under international law. This system is maintained by violations which Amnesty International found to constitute apartheid as a crime against humanity, as defined in the Rome Statute and Apartheid Convention.
Amnesty International is calling on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to consider the crime of apartheid in its current investigation in the OPT and calls on all states to exercise universal jurisdiction to bring perpetrators of apartheid crimes to justice.
“There is no possible justification for a system built around the institutionalized and prolonged racist oppression of millions of people. Apartheid has no place in our world, and states which choose to make allowances for Israel will find themselves on the wrong side of history. Governments who continue to supply Israel with arms and shield it from accountability at the UN are supporting a system of apartheid, undermining the international legal order, and exacerbating the suffering of the Palestinian people. The international community must face up to the reality of Israel’s apartheid, and pursue the many avenues to justice which remain shamefully unexplored.”
Amnesty International’s findings build on a growing body of work by Palestinian, Israeli and international NGOs, who have increasingly applied the apartheid framework to the situation in Israel and/or the OPT.
Identifying apartheid
A system of apartheid is an institutionalized regime of oppression and domination by one racial group over another. It is a serious human rights violation which is prohibited in public international law. Amnesty International’s extensive research and legal analysis, carried out in consultation with external experts, demonstrates that Israel enforces such a system against Palestinians through laws, policies and practices which ensure their prolonged and cruel discriminatory treatment.
In international criminal law, specific unlawful acts which are committed within a system of oppression and domination, with the intention of maintaining it, constitute the crime against humanity of apartheid. These acts are set out in the Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute, and include unlawful killing, torture, forcible transfer, and the denial of basic rights and freedoms.
Amnesty International documented acts proscribed in the Apartheid Convention and Rome Statute in all the areas Israel controls, although they occur more frequently and violently in the OPT than in Israel. Israeli authorities enact multiple measures to deliberately deny Palestinians their basic rights and freedoms, including draconian movement restrictions in the OPT, chronic discriminatory underinvestment in Palestinian communities in Israel, and the denial of refugees’ right to return. The report also documents forcible transfer, administrative detention, torture, and unlawful killings, in both Israel and the OPT.
Amnesty International found that these acts form part of a systematic and widespread attack directed against the Palestinian population, and are committed with the intent to maintain the system of oppression and domination. They therefore constitute the crime against humanity of apartheid.
The unlawful killing of Palestinian protesters is perhaps the clearest illustration of how Israeli authorities use proscribed acts to maintain the status quo. In 2018, Palestinians in Gaza began to hold weekly protests along the border with Israel, calling for the right of return for refugees and an end to the blockade. Before protests even began, senior Israeli officials warned that Palestinians approaching the wall would be shot. By the end of 2019, Israeli forces had killed 214 civilians, including 46 children.
In light of the systematic unlawful killings of Palestinians documented in its report, Amnesty International is also calling for the UN Security Council to impose a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel. This should cover all weapons and munitions as well as law enforcement equipment, given the thousands of Palestinian civilians who have been unlawfully killed by Israeli forces. The Security Council should also impose targeted sanctions, such as asset freezes, against Israeli officials most implicated in the crime of apartheid.
Palestinians treated as a demographic threat
Since its establishment in 1948, Israel has pursued a policy of establishing and then maintaining a Jewish demographic majority, and maximizing control over land and resources to benefit Jewish Israelis. In 1967, Israel extended this policy to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Today, all territories controlled by Israel continue to be administered with the purpose of benefiting Jewish Israelis to the detriment of Palestinians, while Palestinian refugees continue to be excluded.
Amnesty International recognizes that Jews, like Palestinians, claim a right to self-determination, and does not challenge Israel’s desire to be a home for Jews. Similarly, it does not consider that Israel labelling itself a “Jewish state” in itself indicates an intention to oppress and dominate.
However, Amnesty International’s report shows that successive Israeli governments have considered Palestinians a demographic threat, and imposed measures to control and decrease their presence and access to land in Israel and the OPT. These demographic aims are well illustrated by official plans to “Judaize” areas of Israel and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, which continue to put thousands of Palestinians at risk of forcible transfer.
Oppression without borders
The 1947-49 and 1967 wars, Israel’s ongoing military rule of the OPT, and the creation of separate legal and administrative regimes within the territory, have separated Palestinian communities and segregated them from Jewish Israelis. Palestinians have been fragmented geographically and politically, and experience different levels of discrimination depending on their status and where they live.
Palestinian citizens in Israel currently enjoy greater rights and freedoms than their counterparts in the OPT, while the experience of Palestinians in Gaza is very different to that of those living in the West Bank. Nonetheless, Amnesty International’s research shows that all Palestinians are subject to the same overarching system. Israel’s treatment of Palestinians across all areas is pursuant to the same objective: to privilege Jewish Israelis in distribution of land and resources, and to minimize the Palestinian presence and access to land.
Amnesty International demonstrates that Israeli authorities treat Palestinians as an inferior racial group who are defined by their non-Jewish, Arab status. This racial discrimination is cemented in laws which affect Palestinians across Israel and the OPT.
For example, Palestinian citizens of Israel are denied a nationality, establishing a legal differentiation from Jewish Israelis. In the West Bank and Gaza, where Israel has controlled the population registry since 1967, Palestinians have no citizenship and most are considered stateless, requiring ID cards from the Israeli military to live and work in the territories.
Palestinian refugees and their descendants, who were displaced in the 1947-49 and 1967 conflicts, continue to be denied the right to return to their former places of residence. Israel’s exclusion of refugees is a flagrant violation of international law which has left millions in a perpetual limbo of forced displacement.
Palestinians in annexed East Jerusalem are granted permanent residence instead of citizenship – though this status is permanent in name only. Since 1967, more than 14,000 Palestinians have had their residency revoked at the discretion of the Ministry of the Interior, resulting in their forcible transfer outside the city.
Lesser citizens
Palestinian citizens of Israel, who comprise about 19% of the population, face many forms of institutionalized discrimination. In 2018, discrimination against Palestinians was crystallized in a constitutional law which, for the first time, enshrined Israel exclusively as the “nation state of the Jewish people”. The law also promotes the building of Jewish settlements and downgrades Arabic’s status as an official language.
The report documents how Palestinians are effectively blocked from leasing on 80% of Israel’s state land, as a result of racist land seizures and a web of discriminatory laws on land allocation, planning and zoning.
The situation in the Negev/Naqab region of southern Israel is a prime example of how Israel’s planning and building policies intentionally exclude Palestinians. Since 1948 Israeli authorities have adopted various policies to “Judaize” the Negev/Naqab, including designating large areas as nature reserves or military firing zones, and setting targets for increasing the Jewish population. This has had devastating consequences for the tens of thousands of Palestinian Bedouins who live in the region.
Thirty-five Bedouin villages, home to about 68,000 people, are currently “unrecognized” by Israel, which means they are cut off from the national electricity and water supply and targeted for repeated demolitions. As the villages have no official status, their residents also face restrictions on political participation and are excluded from the healthcare and education systems. These conditions have coerced many into leaving their homes and villages, in what amounts to forcible transfer.
Decades of deliberately unequal treatment of Palestinian citizens of Israel have left them consistently economically disadvantaged in comparison to Jewish Israelis. This is exacerbated by blatantly discriminatory allocation of state resources: a recent example is the government’s Covid-19 recovery package, of which just 1.7% was given to Palestinian local authorities.
Dispossession
The dispossession and displacement of Palestinians from their homes is a crucial pillar of Israel’s apartheid system. Since its establishment the Israeli state has enforced massive and cruel land seizures against Palestinians, and continues to implement myriad laws and policies to force Palestinians into small enclaves. Since 1948, Israel has demolished hundreds of thousands of Palestinian homes and other properties across all areas under its jurisdiction and effective control.
As in the Negev/Naqab, Palestinians in East Jerusalem and Area C of the OPT live under full Israeli control. The authorities deny building permits to Palestinians in these areas, forcing them to build illegal structures which are demolished again and again.
In the OPT, the continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements exacerbates the situation. The construction of these settlements in the OPT has been a government policy since 1967. Settlements today cover 10% of the land in the West Bank, and some 38% of Palestinian land in East Jerusalem was expropriated between 1967 and 2017.
Palestinian neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem are frequently targeted by settler organizations which, with the full backing of the Israeli government, work to displace Palestinian families and hand their homes to settlers. One such neighbourhood, Sheikh Jarrah, has been the site of frequent protests since May 2021 as families battle to keep their homes under the threat of a settler lawsuit.
Draconian movement restrictions
Since the mid-1990s Israeli authorities have imposed increasingly stringent movement restrictions on Palestinians in the OPT. A web of military checkpoints, roadblocks, fences and other structures controls the movement of Palestinians within the OPT, and restricts their travel into Israel or abroad.
A 700km fence, which Israel is still extending, has isolated Palestinian communities inside “military zones”, and they must obtain multiple special permits any time they enter or leave their homes. In Gaza, more than 2 million Palestinians live under an Israeli blockade which has created a humanitarian crisis. It is near-impossible for Gazans to travel abroad or into the rest of the OPT, and they are effectively segregated from the rest of the world.
“The permit system in the OPT is emblematic of Israel’s brazen discrimination against Palestinians. While Palestinians are locked in a blockade, stuck for hours at checkpoints, or waiting for yet another permit to come through, Israeli citizens and settlers can move around as they please.”
Amnesty International examined each of the security justifications which Israel cites as the basis for its treatment of Palestinians. The report shows that, while some of Israel’s policies may have been designed to fulfil legitimate security objectives, they have been implemented in a grossly disproportionate and discriminatory way which fails to comply with international law. Other policies have absolutely no reasonable basis in security, and are clearly shaped by the intent to oppress and dominate.
The way forward
Amnesty International provides numerous specific recommendations for how the Israeli authorities can dismantle the apartheid system and the discrimination, segregation and oppression which sustain it.
The organization is calling for an end to the brutal practice of home demolitions and forced evictions as a first step. Israel must grant equal rights to all Palestinians in Israel and the OPT, in line with principles of international human rights and humanitarian law. It must recognize the right of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to return to homes where they or their families once lived, and provide victims of human rights violations and crimes against humanity with full reparations.
The scale and seriousness of the violations documented in Amnesty International’s report call for a drastic change in the international community’s approach to the human rights crisis in Israel and the OPT.
All states may exercise universal jurisdiction over persons reasonably suspected of committing the crime of apartheid under international law, and states that are party to the Apartheid Convention have an obligation to do so.
“Israel must dismantle the apartheid system and start treating Palestinians as human beings with equal rights and dignity. Until it does, peace and security will remain a distant prospect for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”
In April, Human Rights Watch released a 213-page report, “A Threshold Crossed,” finding that Israeli authorities are committing the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution. We reached this determination based on our documentation of an overarching government policy to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis over Palestinians coupled with grave abuses committed against Palestinians living in the occupied territory, including East Jerusalem
In the months since, a growing chorus of voices, from former Israeli ambassadors to South Africa and current Knesset members to the ex-UN Secretary General and the French foreign minister, have referenced apartheid in relation to Israel’s discriminatory treatment of Palestinians, in particular in the occupied territory. Yet many in Germany, including those critical of Israeli human rights abuses, remain hesitant to apply the label to Israeli conduct.
Given history, one can certainly understand Germany’s concern for the welfare of the Jewish people, but that should not carry over to an endorsement of abusive and discriminatory Israeli government conduct, especially in the occupied territory. As recognition grows that these crimes are being committed, the failure to recognize that reality requires burying your head deeper and deeper into the sand.
The problem begins with the Israeli government having exercised primary control for more than a half-century over the land between the Mediterranean Sea and Jordan River, encompassing Israel and the occupied territory, where two main groups of people of roughly equal size live. Throughout this area, Israeli authorities methodologically privilege one of the groups, Jewish Israelis, who are governed under the same body of laws with the same rights and privileges wherever they live. At the same time, authorities allocate different baskets of inferior rights to the other, Palestinians, systematically discriminating against them wherever they live and most severely in the occupied territory.
Our sense that our research was not capturing this underlying reality led us to write this report. Reporting on “separate, not equal” schools for Palestinians inside Israel, Palestinians being forced out of their homes in occupied East Jerusalem, the serious rights abuses stemming from the Israeli settlement enterprise in the West Bank, and the crushing closure of the Gaza Strip, we felt that our work captured important dynamics, including entrenched discrimination, in particular areas, but did not capture the full scope of Israel’s discriminatory rule over Palestinians.
We set out in the report to evaluate Israel’s treatment of Palestinians across Israel and the occupied territory. As we do in the nearly 100 countries across the world we work in, we began by documenting the facts—drawing on years of our own research, case studies that compared Palestinian areas with predominantly or exclusively Jewish ones, and a review of government planning documents, statements by officials, and a range of other materials.
Across Israel and the occupied territory, Human Rights Watch found that Israeli authorities have pursued an intent to privilege Jewish Israelis at the expense of Palestinians. They have done so by undertaking policies aimed at mitigating what they openly describe as the “demographic threat” Palestinians pose and maximizing the land available for Jewish communities, while concentrating most Palestinian in dense enclaves. The policy takes different forms and is pursued in a particularly severe form in the occupied territory. It includes efforts to, as leading Israelis officials have put it, “Judaize” the Negev and Galilee regions of Israel and to maintain “a solid Jewish majority,” as described in government planning documents, in the Jerusalem municipality, which includes the eastern part of Jerusalem, which Israel unilaterally annexed and occupies. It also encompasses efforts to “settle [Jews in] the land between the [Palestinian] minority population centers and their surroundings” in the West Bank, as set out in plans that have guided the government’s settlement, and to pursue “separation” between the West Bank and Gaza. The policy across the board serves the same fundamental goal: maximum land, minimum Palestinians.
Furthermore, we found that Israeli authorities have carried out the grave abuses needed for the crimes of apartheid and persecution against Palestinians living in the occupied territory. It has done so through, among other policies, sweeping restrictions on movement in the form of the 14-year generalized closure of Gaza and the discriminatory permit system in the West Bank; the confiscation of more than a third of the land in the West Bank; and denial of residency rights to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and their relatives. Israel has imposed draconian military rule over millions of Palestinians, suspending their basic civil rights, while Jewish Israelis living in the same territory are governed under the permissive Israeli civil law; and imposed harsh conditions in parts of the West Bank that led to forcing thousands of Palestinians out of their homes.
We then evaluated these facts against the relevant areas of international law—in this case, the established law on discrimination—which includes a universal prohibition against apartheid. While the term was coined in relation to specific practices in South Africa, international treaties define apartheid as a universal legal term referring to a particularly severe form of discriminatory oppression.
International criminal law, including the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the 1998 Rome Statute to the International Criminal Court, define apartheid as a crime against humanity consisting of three primary elements: (1) an intent by one racial group to dominate another; (2) systematic oppression by the dominant group over the marginalized group; and (3) particularly grave abuses known as inhumane acts.
Racial group is understood today also to encompass treatment on the basis of descent and national or ethnic origin. International criminal law also identifies a related crime against humanity of persecution. Under the Rome Statute and customary international law, persecution consists of severe deprivation of fundamental rights of a racial, ethnic, or other group with discriminatory intent.
The ratification by the State of Palestine of these two treaties in recent years has strengthened the legal application of these two crimes in its territory. A ruling by a chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) earlier this year confirmed that it has jurisdiction over war crimes and crimes against humanity – including apartheid and persecution – committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 2014.
Applying the facts to the laws, Human Rights Watch concluded that Israeli authorities are committing the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution. We found that the elements of the crimes come together in the occupied territory as part of a single Israeli government policy. That policy is to maintain the domination by Jewish Israelis over Palestinians across Israel and the occupied territory. It is coupled in the occupied territory with systematic oppression and inhumane acts against Palestinians living there.
Sometimes the most important thing someone who cares deeply about you can do is to share hard truths and push you to confront them. The late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and leaders of Israel’s closest ally, the US, including former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State John Kerry, warned of the prospect of apartheid if things did not change.
Today, apartheid is not a hypothetical or future scenario. A 54-year-occupation is not temporary. The threshold has been crossed. Apartheid, and parallel persecution, is the reality for millions of Palestinians. Recognizing and correctly diagnosing a problem is the first step to solving it and ending apartheid is vital to the future of both Palestinians and Israelis and the cause of peace. It is by extension Germany’s special relationship with Israel and history that should prompt them to recognize the reality of apartheid and persecution and bring to bear the sorts of tools needed to end these crimes against humanity.
In administrative detention, a person is held without trial without having committed an offense, on the grounds that he or she plans to break the law in the future. As this measure is supposed to be preventive, it has no time limit. The person is detained without legal proceedings, by order of the regional military commander, based on classified evidence that is not revealed to them. This leaves the detainees helpless – facing unknown allegations with no way to disprove them, not knowing when they will be released, and without being charged, tried or convicted.
In the West Bank (not including East Jerusalem), administrative detention is carried out under the Order regarding Security Provisions. The order empowers the military commander of the West Bank, or another commander to whom the power has been delegated, to place individuals in administrative detention for up to six months at a time, if the commander has “reasonable grounds to believe that reasons of regional security or public security require that a certain person be held in detention”. If, prior to the expiration of the order, the military commander has “reasonable grounds to believe” that the same reasons “still require the retention of the detainee in detention”, he may extend the original order for an additional six-month period “from time to time”. The Order regarding Security Provisions places no limit on the overall time that a person can be held in administrative detention, so the detention can be extended over and over. In practice, this allows Israel to incarcerate Palestinians who have not been convicted of anything for years on end.
Individuals held in administrative detention must be brought before a military judge within eight days – either of the original detention order or of its extension. The judge may uphold the order, reject it, or shorten the period of detention stipulated in it. Whatever decision the military judge makes, both the detainee and the military commander may appeal it to the Military Court of Appeals, and thereafter, to the High Court of Justice (HCJ). Hearings on administrative detention orders are held in camera, and the judges are permitted to set aside ordinary evidence law. In particular, judges may “accept evidence in the absence of the detainee or their counsel and without disclosing it to them”, if they are convinced that disclosing the evidence may “harm regional security or public security”.
Administrative detention of Israeli citizens and residents is carried out under the Emergency Powers (Detentions) Law. Over the years, Israel has used this measure against several Israeli citizens, including settlers. These are isolated cases, and in most of them, the detention lasted a few months. Since Israel “disengaged” from the Gaza Strip in September 2005, it has used the Internment of Unlawful Combatants Law to place Gaza residents under administrative detention. This measure has so far been used in very few cases. The provisions of both these laws are similar in essence to those of the military order that applies in the West Bank.
The Order regarding Security Provisions includes provisions that are ostensibly meant to protect administrative detainees, in keeping with the tenets of international law on this matter, which allow the occupying power to place residents of the occupied territory under administrative detention only in rare, exceptional circumstances. This has not stopped Israel from making extensive use of this measure in the Occupied Territories. Israel routinely uses administrative detention and has, over the years, placed thousands of Palestinians behind by bars for periods ranging from several months to several years, without charging them, without telling them what they are accused of, and without disclosing the alleged evidence to them or to their lawyers. Some of the detainees were under 18 years of age.
During the first and second intifadas, Israel held many hundreds of Palestinians in administrative detention, and the figure crossed the 1,000 mark several times in 2003 (during the second intifada). Yet the widespread use of this extreme measure is not confined to those periods: Since March 2002, not a single month has gone by without Israel holding at least 100 Palestinians in administrative detention.
Moreover, in some cases, the authorities use administrative detention as a quick and easy alternative to criminal trial, rather than to prevent future danger. This occurs primarily when they do not have sufficient evidence for indictment, or when they do not want to reveal the evidence they allegedly possess. This use of administrative detention is absolutely prohibited and totally blurs the distinction between an administrative proceeding that is intended as a prospective, preventive measure, and a criminal proceeding, whose purpose is punitive and retroactive. Israel also exploits this measure to detain Palestinians for their political opinions and for engaging in non-violent political activity.
In addition, the restriction in the Order regarding Security Provisions on the duration of administrative detention is meaningless, as the detention may be extended over and over with no time limit. Such extensions are not rare. At the end of May 2017, for instance, 475 Palestinians were being held under administrative detention in Israel Prison Service facilities. Of these, 128 had been held for six to twelve months, meaning their detention had been extended at least once, and 121 had been held for more than a year, meaning their detention had been extended at least twice.
The military order does require that detainees be brought before a judge, but this does little to prevent abuse of this measure, and the judicial proceedings on administrative detention are mostly a façade of judicial review. In the vast majority of cases, the judges accept the prosecution’s position and approve the detention order.
According to figures provided by the IDF Spokesperson, from the beginning of 2015 to the end of July 2017, 3,909 administrative detention orders were issued. Of these, 2,441 (62.4%) were extensions of existing orders. Only 48 (1.2%) were cancelled by a military court. The remaining detention orders were approved, as follows:
2,953 (75.5%) were approved with no amendments or limitations.
In 390 cases (9.9%), the judges instructed that the orders be shortened, yet placed no limitation on the possibility of renewing them.
In 501 (12.8%) cases, the judges approved the orders, in some cases shortening them, but stipulated that they could only be extended if new information came to light – which, again, would not be disclosed to the detainee.
(Note: The discrepancy between the total number of orders and the number of court decisions appears in the original. Moreover, despite our request, the IDF Spokesperson did not provide B’Tselem with figures concerning the Military Court of Appeals).
Moreover, the judges always accept the prosecution’s demand that the evidence remain confidential for “reasons of national security”. By following this practice, the judges turn the exception provided for in the administrative detention order into a rule that denies detainees any possibility of mounting a defense against the allegations. The secrecy of the evidence prevents detainees and their counsel from examining the quality, veracity and relevance of the information used against them. True, the military judges and the HCJ justices have stated that, given the confidentiality, they must fill the void and act as defense for the detainees. However, this statement is not followed up in practice. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the judges do not ask to see the ISA’s information, do not examine the military prosecution regarding the information that led to the detention, and simply accept the arguments presented to them as fact.
Moreover, in their judgments on administrative detention, the justices of the HCJ have agreed that this is an “extreme” measure that must be used carefully and in rare exceptions only. They agreed it must be used only for prevention and never for punitive purposes, and only when the danger is posed specifically by the person under detention. They also agreed that administrative detention, like all other measures, is subject to the principle of proportionality and therefore must be used only when the alleged danger cannot be prevented through criminal proceedings or an administrative measure that is less injurious to human rights. Nonetheless, the justices have upheld nearly all the administrative detention orders brought before them.
The power to incarcerate people who have not been convicted or even charged with anything for lengthy periods of time, based on secret “evidence” that they cannot challenge, is an extreme power. Israel uses it continuously and extensively, routinely holding hundreds of Palestinians at any given moment. The state makes sure to lend this policy a guise of legality by requiring the courts to review every detention order. In these proceedings, the detainees are represented by counsel; they may appeal the judge’s decision, and the hearings follow procedural and evidentiary rules. However, this is merely a façade of judicial review, as the detainees have no real opportunity to mount a reasonable defense against the allegations. Nevertheless, the courts routinely uphold the detention orders. At the end of the day, the military, the Military Advocate General’s Corps and the State Attorney’s Office, military judges and the justices of the HCJ Court are all complicit in creating this state of affairs.
In interrogating Palestinian residents of the Occupied Territories, the Israel Security Agency (ISA, also known by the Hebrew acronyms Shin Bet or Shabak) routinely used methods that constituted ill-treatment and even torture until the late 1990s. In doing so, the ISA relied on the 1987 recommendations of a state commission headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Moshe Landau. The commission had held that, in order to “prevent terrorism”, ISA interrogators were permitted to use “psychological pressure” and a “moderate degree of physical pressure”. This permission was grounded, in the commission’s opinion, in the “necessity defense” laid out in Israeli Penal Law. In practice, the interrogation methods used by the ISA during that time went far beyond a reasonable interpretation of the term “moderate physical pressure”.
This state of affairs persisted for years, despite the right not to be subjected to ill-treatment or torture – whether physical or psychological – being one of the few human rights that are considered absolute. As an absolute right, it may never be balanced against other rights and values and cannot be suspended or limited, even in difficult circumstances.
In September 1999, following a series of petitions filed by human rights organizations and by Palestinians interrogated by the ISA, Israel’s High Court of Justice (HCJ) ruled that Israeli law does not empower ISA interrogators to use physical means in interrogation. The justices ruled that the specific methods discussed in the petitions – including painful binding, shaking, placing a sack on a person’s head for prolonged periods of time and sleep deprivation – were unlawful. However, they also held that ISA agents who exceed their authority and use “physical pressure” may not necessarily bear criminal responsibility for their actions, if they are later found to have used these methods in a “ticking bomb” case, based on the “necessity defense”. Following this ruling, reports of torture and ill-treatment in ISA interrogations did drop. However, ISA agents continued to use interrogation methods that constitute abuse and even torture, relying on the court’s recognition of the “ticking bomb” exception. These methods were not limited to exceptional cases and quickly became standard interrogation policy.
Several joint research reports published by B’Tselem and HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual, based on hundreds of affidavits and testimonials given by Palestinians who underwent ISA interrogations after the HCJ ruling, indicate that the ISA still routinely employs psychological and physical abuse in interrogations. While interrogators steer clear of the specific methods that the court disqualified, the rationale is the same: using isolation from the outside world and harsh incarceration conditions, in addition to the interrogation itself, to psychologically pressure and physically weaken the individual. This combined use of holding conditions and interrogation methods constitutes abuse and inhuman, degrading treatment, at times even amounting to torture. It is regularly employed against Palestinians in ISA interrogations, in blatant violation of international law and basic moral standards.
According to the accounts of Palestinians who have undergone ISA interrogation, they are held in inhuman conditions, including narrow, windowless cells that are sometimes moldy and foul-smelling and are constantly lit with artificial lighting that is painful to the eyes. Some detainees reported being held in solitary confinement, completely cut off from their surroundings. Some reported exposure to extremes of heat and cold, as well as sleep deprivation. Many described abominable hygienic conditions; among other things, they stated that the prison authorities do not allow them to shower, change clothes, brush their teeth or even use toilet paper. The food is intentionally poor in quality and quantity, and detainees lose weight while in custody. In the interrogation room, they are forced to sit bound to a chair, without moving, for hours and even days on end. Interrogators threaten the detainees, including threats to harm their relatives, as well as shouting and employing violence against them.
Most Palestinians who are physically or mental abused in interrogation have no way to complain until the interrogation is over. This is because Palestinian detainees are regularly denied the right to meet with counsel, and HCJ petitions against the denial of this right have been repeatedly dismissed. Also, they usually cannot use the opportunity of coming before a judge in a remand hearing to air their grievances: Most hearings are extremely cursory and, in some of them, detainees are not represented or are denied the opportunity to confer with the lawyer representing them. Most detainees are not aware of the fact that they may approach the judge on their own initiative. In any case, they shy away from sharing what they are undergoing with the judge for fear of reprisal back in the interrogation room. Even when detainees do come forward, the authorities take no action, as years of monitoring by human rights organizations reveal. Since 2001, not a single criminal investigation has been launched into a complaint against an ISA interrogator, despite hundreds of complaints being lodged with the relevant authorities. Although formal changes have been made to the apparatus charged with looking into these complaints – including the appointment of an Inspector of Complaints by ISA Interrogees inside the ISA, and the subsequent transfer of the position to the Ministry of Justice – they have done nothing to alter the situation: Hundreds of complaints, zero criminal investigations.
This system of interrogation, which relies on a combination of holding conditions and interrogator conduct, was shaped by state authorities. It is not the personal initiative of any particular interrogator or prison guard, and the actions described here are not anomalies to be weeded out by the justice system. The cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees is inherent to the ISA’s violent interrogation policy. This policy is dictated from above, and not set by interrogators in the field.
While the ISA runs the system, a broad network of partners collaborates to facilitate it. The Israel Prison Service (IPS) adapts prison conditions to match the interrogation plan designed to break the detainee’s spirit. Medical and mental health personnel greenlight the interrogation of Palestinians who arrive at the facility – including in cases of poor health – and even hand detainees back to the interrogators after caring for physical and mental injuries they sustained in interrogation, knowing full well that they would be subjected to measures of abuse and torture; soldiers and police officers abuse detainees while transporting them to the ISA, with their commanders turning a blind eye and the MAG Corps and State Attorney’s Office not bringing them to justice or holding them fully accountable. Military judges almost automatically sign off on motions for remand in custody and effectively sanction the continued abuse and inhuman conditions. The State Attorney’s Office and the Attorney General have thus far provided ISA interrogators with full immunity. Finally, HCJ judges regularly reject petitions seeking to overturn the denial of detainee’s rights to meet with legal counsel, clearing the way for continued abuse.
All these are party, in one form or another, to the cruel, inhuman, degrading and abusive treatment to which Palestinians are subjected in ISA interrogations. By enabling the existence of this abusive interrogation regime, they all bear responsibility for the severe violations of interrogatees’ human rights and for the mental and physical harm inflicted on these individuals.
Use in Populated Areas Poses Grave Risks to Civilians
(Beirut, October 12, 2023) – Israel’s use of white phosphorus in military operations in Gaza and Lebanon puts civilians at risk of serious and long-term injuries, Human Rights Watch said today in releasing a question and answer document on white phosphorus. Human Rights Watch verified videos taken in Lebanon and Gaza on October 10 and 11, 2023, respectively, showing multiple airbursts of artillery-fired white phosphorus over the Gaza City port and two rural locations along the Israel-Lebanon border, and interviewed two people who described an attack in Gaza.
White phosphorus, which can be used either for marking, signaling, and obscuring, or as a weapon to set fires that burn people and objects, has a significant incendiary effect that can severely burn people and set structures, fields, and other civilian objects in the vicinity on fire. The use of white phosphorus in Gaza, one of the most densely populated areas in the world, magnifies the risk to civilians and violates the international humanitarian law prohibition on putting civilians at unnecessary risk.
“Any time that white phosphorus is used in crowded civilian areas, it poses a high risk of excruciating burns and lifelong suffering,” said Lama Fakih, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “White phosphorous is unlawfully indiscriminate when airburst in populated urban areas, where it can burn down houses and cause egregious harm to civilians.”
On October 11, Human Rights Watch interviewed by phone two people from the al-Mina area in Gaza City, who described observing strikes consistent with the use of white phosphorus. One was in the street at the time, while the other was in a nearby office building. Both described ongoing airstrikes before seeing explosions in the sky followed by what they described as white lines going earthward. They estimated that the attack took place sometime between 11:30 a.m. and 1 p.m. Both said that the smell was stifling. The person who was in his office said that the smell was so strong that he went toward the window to see what was happening and then filmed the strike.
Human Rights Watch reviewed the video and verified that it was taken in Gaza City’s port and identified that the munitions used in the strike were airburst 155mm white phosphorus artillery projectiles. Other videos posted to social media and verified by Human Rights Watch show the same location. Dense white smoke and a garlic smell are characteristics of white phosphorus.
Human Rights Watch also reviewedtwo videos from October 10 from two locations near the Israel-Lebanon border. Each shows 155mm white phosphorus artillery projectiles being used, apparently as smokescreens, marking, or signaling.
White phosphorus ignites when exposed to atmospheric oxygen and continues to burn until it is deprived of oxygen or exhausted. Its chemical reaction can create intense heat (about 815°C/1,500°F), light, and smoke.
Upon contact, white phosphorus can burn people, thermally and chemically, down to the bone as it is highly soluble in fat and therefore in human flesh. White phosphorus fragments can exacerbate wounds even after treatment and can enter the bloodstream and cause multiple organ failure. Already dressed wounds can reignite when dressings are removed and the wounds are re-exposed to oxygen. Even relatively minor burns are often fatal. For survivors, extensive scarring tightens muscle tissue and creates physical disabilities. The trauma of the attack, the painful treatment that follows, and appearance-changing scars lead to psychological harm and social exclusion.
The use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas of Gaza violates the requirement under international humanitarian law to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian injury and loss of life, Human Rights Watch said. This concern is amplified given the technique evidenced in videos of airbursting white phosphorus projectiles. Airbursting of white phosphorus projectiles spreads 116 burning felt wedges impregnated within the substance over an area between 125 and 250 meters in diameter, depending on the altitude of the burst, thereby exposing more civilians and civilian structures to potential harm than a localized ground burst.
Israeli authorities have not commented on whether or not they used white phosphorus during the ongoing fighting.
Israel’s use of white phosphorus comes amid hostilities following Hamas’ deadly attacks on October 7 and subsequent rocket attacks that have killed, as of October 12, more than 1,300 Israelis, including hundreds of civilians, and taking of scores of Israelis as hostages in violation of international humanitarian law. Heavy Israeli bombardment of Gaza in this period has killed, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, more than 1,400 Palestinians in Gaza, including scores of civilians, and displaced more than 338,000 people. Many communities in southern Israel have also been displaced and more than 1,500 Palestinian militants reportedly died in Israel. Israeli authorities have cut electricity, water, fuel and food into Gaza, in violation of the international humanitarian law prohibition against collective punishment, exacerbating the dire humanitarian situation from over 16 years of Israeli closure.
Human Rights Watch has documented the Israeli military’s use of white phosphorus in previous conflicts in Gaza, including in 2009. Israel should ban all use of “airburst” white phosphorus munitions in populated areas without exception. There are readily available and non-lethal alternatives to white phosphorus smoke shells, including some produced by Israeli companies, which the Israeli army has used in the past as an obscurant for its forces. These alternatives have the same effect and dramatically reduce the harm to civilians.
In 2013, in response to a petition to Israel’s High Court of Justice regarding the use of white phosphorus in Gaza, the Israeli military stated that it would no longer use white phosphorus in populated areas except in two narrow situations that it revealed only to the justices. In the court’s ruling, Justice Edna Arbel said that the conditions would “render use of white phosphorous an extreme exception in highly particular circumstances.” Although this ruling did not represent an official change in policy, Justice Arbel called on the Israeli military to conduct a “thorough and comprehensive examination” and adopt a permanent military directive.
Attacks using air-delivered incendiary weapons in civilian areas are prohibited under Protocol III of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW). While the protocol contains weaker restrictions for ground-launched incendiary weapons, all types of incendiary weapons produce horrific injuries. Protocol III applies only to weapons that are “primarily designed” to set fires or cause burns, and thus some countries believe it excludes certain multipurpose munitions with incendiary effects, notably those containing white phosphorus.
Human Rights Watch and many states have long called for closing these loopholes in Protocol III. These attacks should add impetus to the calls from at least two dozen countries for the CCW Meeting of States Parties to set aside time to discuss the adequacy of Protocol III. The next meeting is scheduled for November at the United Nations in Geneva.
Palestine joined Protocol III on January 5, 2015, and Lebanon on April 5, 2017, while Israel has not ratified it.
“To avoid civilian harm, Israel should stop using white phosphorus in populated areas,” Fakih said. “Parties to the conflict should be doing everything they can to spare civilians from further suffering.”
END
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noten 8 en 9/Astrid Essed pakt VOMAR
The seven fundamental rules which are the basis of the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols.
1 – Persons hors de combat and those who do not take a direct part in hostilities are entitled to respect for their
lives and their moral and physical integrity. They shall in all circumstances be protected and treated humanely
without any adverse distinction.
2 – It is forbidden to kill or injure an enemy who surrenders or who is hors de combat .
3 – The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for by the party to the conflict which has them in its power.
Protection also covers medical personnel, establishments, transports and equipment. The emblem of the red
cross or the red crescent is the sign of such protection and must be respected.
4 – Captured combatants and civilians under the authority of an adverse party are entitled to respect for their lives,dignity, personal rights and convictions. They shall be protected against all acts of violence and reprisals. They shall have the right to correspond with their families and to receive relief.
5 – Everyone shall be entitled to benefit from fundamental judicial guarantees. No one shall be held responsible for an act he has not committed. No one shall be subjected to physical or mental torture, corporal punishment or cruel or degrading treatment.
6 – Parties to a conflict and members of their armed forces do not have an unlimited choice of methods and means of warfare. It is prohibited to employ weapons or methods of warfare of a nature to cause unnecessary losses or excessive suffering.
7 – Parties to a conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to
spare civilian population and property. Neither the civilian population as such nor civilian persons shall be the
object of attack. Attacks shall be directed solely against military objectives.
(Jerusalem) – Israel began major ground operations in the Gaza Strip on October 28, 2023. During the last major Israeli ground operation into Gaza in July and August 2014, Israeli forces committed numerous violations of the laws of war – including fatally firing on civilians – that amounted to war crimes. These violations were never prosecuted. Palestinian armed groups also deliberately launched numerous rocket attacks towards Israeli communities in 2014, which are war crimes. They also deployed and kept munitions in areas that unnecessarily put civilians at risk.
The following quote can be attributed to Tirana Hassan, executive director at Human Rights Watch:
“Israel’s major ground offensive in Gaza, following weeks of bombardment that have reduced large parts of neighborhoods to rubble, raises grave concerns for the safety of all civilians caught in the fighting. Thousands of children and other civilians have already been killed. Palestinian armed groups are continuing to indiscriminately launch rockets at Israeli communities. All civilians, including the many who cannot or do not want to leave their homes in northern Gaza, retain their protections under the laws of war against deliberate, indiscriminate, or disproportionate attacks.”
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 10/Astrid Essed pakt VOMAR
Since the start of the war, Israel has dropped thousands of bombs on the Gaza Strip. Gaza is an enclave enclosed on all sides. There are no safe rooms, no shelters, no safe spaces. Residents have no way to protect themselves. They wait, in terror and fear, hoping to survive. Over a million people have already left their homes in an attempt to find a safe place; some have been killed while fleeing, others where they sought shelter.
Israel, like Hamas and like every country in the world, must follow international humanitarian law. These legal provisions were not enacted by human rights or pro-Palestinian organizations. They were accepted by all nations – including Israel – out of a shared understanding that even during war, there must be rules that minimize the suffering caused to civilians and ensure that they are kept outside the cycle of hostilities to the extent possible.
Two key principles enable the achievement of this goal. First – the principle of distinction – determines what legitimate targets are: according to Article 52(2) of Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions, only military objects are legitimate targets for attack. They are defined as objects that make an effective contribution to military action and whose destruction would offer a definite military advantage to the attacking side. The second principle – the principle of proportionality – limits how attacks are to be carried out: according to Article 51(5)b of the Protocol, legitimate targets must not be attacked if the expected harm to civilians would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. Whether or not an attack is proportionate is not determined by the actual harm inflicted but by the information those responsible for it had or should have had.
Israel’s airstrikes since the start of the war are an abject violation of these principles and constitute a war crime. The massive scale of destruction in the Gaza Strip is unprecedented. Entire residential neighborhoods have been destroyed, and, according to Gaza authorities, at least 16,000 residential units have been completely destroyed, while an additional 11,000 have been rendered uninhabitable. The horrifying death toll, which rises every day, is unfathomable: according to the Gaza Health Ministry, more than 7,000 people have been killed, including almost 3,000 minors, more than 1,700 women, and dozens of families who were killed together when their houses collapsed on them. More than 17,000 people have been injured, about 2,000 are still missing under the rubble.
These figures cannot be reconciled with the provisions of international law described above: neither with the requirement for each of the thousands of targets bombed to have made “an effective contribution” to Hamas’s activities and their destruction to have offered a “definite military advantage” to Israel; nor with the requirement that even if the targets did meet these conditions, the massive loss of life and damage to property was proportionate. Such an interpretation would be not only legally mistaken but also morally unacceptable.
Israel says Hamas is to blame for these figures because it uses civilians as human shields, conceals weapons in their homes, and fires at civilian targets in Israel from within a civilian population, allegedly leaving Israel with no choice but to harm civilians in its war against Hamas. According to this view, assigning full responsibility to Hamas means that every action taken by Israel, however horrific the outcome, would be considered legitimate. Such a claim is baseless. Respect for the law, international humanitarian law included, is not subject to reciprocity: failure by one side to comply does not give the other license to do the same.
Fighting Hamas poses difficult challenges to Israel: How to distinguish between legitimate military targets and civilian ones, when Hamas does not distinguish itself from the rest of the population? How to avoid harming civilians who are not taking part in the hostilities when Hamas members continue to fire on Israeli communities from within population centers? B’Tselem does not pretend to advise the government or the military how to conduct the fighting in Gaza, nor is this the role of a human rights organization. But one thing is clear: The choice whether or not to obey the law is Israel’s. The government and the military must stay respect the law and maintain humanity as they search for the answers.
On October 7, Hamas committed horrific war crimes. Hundreds of Hamas militants and other residents of Gaza entered Israeli territory, firing at anyone who passed by. They entered communities and homes, shot and killed entire families and party-goers, set homes on fire, and committed atrocities. More than 1,300 people were killed, thousands more were injured, and many are still missing. More than 200 people – including babies, children, women, and the elderly – were kidnapped to the Gaza Strip and are being held hostage.
There is no way, nor can there be a way, to justify these crimes, and any attempt to do so must be rejected and denounced. But these crimes cannot justify the death and destruction Israel is now inflicting on Gaza’s more than two million residents. Targeting civilians, their property and civilian infrastructure is always prohibited, and Israel must end this immediately.
Israel, like any other country, is obligated to protect its citizens. However, Israel, like any other country, is also obligated to comply with the restrictions set by international humanitarian law.
END
Reacties uitgeschakeld voor Noot 11/Astrid Essed pakt VOMAR
Bij een luchtaanval op het Palestijnse vluchtelingenkamp Jabalia in de Gazastrook zijn vermoedelijk veel doden gevallen. De directeur van een nabijgelegen ziekenhuis spreekt tegen Al Jazeera van meer dan vijftig doden. Volgens hem kan het dodental nog oplopen, want het tellen van de slachtoffers is nog bezig.
Een woordvoerder van Israëlische leger bevestigt tegenover CNN dat het leger de luchtaanval heeft uitgevoerd. Volgens hem was een commandant van Hamas het doelwit van de aanval. “Hij verstopte zich tussen de burgers.” Gevraagd naar de burgers in het vluchtelingenkamp antwoordt de woordvoerder dat dit “de tragedie van oorlog” is. De woordvoerder zegt dat zowel de commandant als een “groot aantal terroristen” is gedood.
