[59]
Whole families wiped out
At around 8:20pm on 7 October, Israeli forces struck a three-storey residential building in the al-Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City, where three generations of the al-Dos family were staying. Fifteen family members were killed in the attack, seven of them children. The victims include Awni and Ibtissam al-Dos, and their grandchildren and namesakes Awni, 12, and Ibtissam, 17; and Adel and Ilham al-Dos and all five of their children. Baby Adam, just 18 months old, was the youngest victim.”
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
DAMNING EVIDENCE OF WAR CRIMES AS ISRAELI ATTACKS
WIPE OUT ENTIRE FAMILIES IN GAZA
20 OCTOBER 2023
ZIE VOOR GEHELE TEKST, NOOT 51
[60]
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?
ASTRID ESSED
2 NOVEMBER 2023
ZIE OOK
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
ISRAEL’S APARTHEID AGAINST PALESTINIANS”A CRUEL
SYSTEM OF DOMINATION AND A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY
1 FEBRUARI 2022
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.”
ZIE OOK
RAPPORT AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL:
ISRAEL’S APARTHEID AGAINST PALESTINIANS”A CRUEL
SYSTEM OF DOMINATION AND A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY
ZIE OOK
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
ISRAELI APARTHEID: ”A THRESHOLD CROSSED”
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.
EINDE BERICHT HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
RAPPORT HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
A TRESHOLD CROSSED
27 APRIL 2021
https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution
ZIE OOK
[61]
MILITAIRE SAMENWERKING MET ISRAEL ONACCEPTABEL/ASTRID ESSED’S
INGEZONDEN STUK
ASTRID ESSED
19 APRIL 2023
ZIE OOK
TWEEDE KAMER
VEDRAG MET ISRAEL OVER DE STATUS VAN ELKAARS STRIJDKRACHTEN
Verdrag met Israël over de status van elkaars strijdkrachten
6 april 2023, wetsvoorstel – Met Israël zijn afspraken gemaakt over de juridische status van defensiepersoneel dat aanwezig is op elkaars grondgebied. De Kamer debatteert met minister Ollongren (Defensie) en minister Hoekstra (Buitenlandse Zaken) over het verdrag waarin dit is vastgelegd.
Het verdrag met Israël is een bilaterale overeenkomst zoals we die ook met andere landen hebben, leggen Ollongren en Hoekstra uit. Het zegt niets over de inhoud van samenwerking. Er is vastgelegd dat de bevoegde autoriteiten jaarlijks afspraken maken. Het zou bijvoorbeeld kunnen gaan om wederzijds gebruik van trainings- en oefenfaciliteiten, gezamenlijke innovatiestudies en kennisuitwisseling.
Relatie met Israël
Nederland draagt bij aan vrede, vrijheid en veiligheid in de wereld, zegt Kuzu (DENK), behalve als het om Israël gaat. Hij betoogt dat keer op keer de ogen worden gesloten voor de wandaden die de apartheidsstaat Israël begaat tegen de Palestijnen. Hoe kunnen we samenwerken met een leger dat verantwoordelijk is voor een illegale bezetting en flagrante schendingen van het internationaal en humanitair recht?
Er is geen duidelijk doel van het verdrag, vindt Futselaar (SP). Israël is volgens hem bovendien geen normaal land en heeft geen normaal leger. Hij wijst op de bezetting van Palestijnse gebieden en het annexatiebeleid. Nederland zou schendingen van het internationaal recht niet moeten legitimeren. Het sluiten van het verdrag is daarom in zijn optiek ontijdig en onwenselijk.
Fritsma (PVV) steunt juist het sluiten van het verdrag. Zijn partij draagt Israël een warm hart toe. Het is in zijn ogen dan ook goed dat de (militaire) banden worden aangehaald.
Samenwerking met Israël mag nooit de bezetting van Palestijnse gebieden faciliteren of versterken, benadrukt Ollongren. Nederland zet zich volgens Hoekstra binnen Europa in voor het gezamenlijk uitspreken van zorgen over annexatie door Israël van bezette gebieden.
De Kamer stemt op 11 april over het wetsvoorstel en de tijdens het debat ingediende moties.
THE RIGHTS FORUM
ONTLUISTEREND KAMERDEBAT LEIDT TOT
GOEDKEURING DEFENSIEVERDRAG MET ISRAEL
13 APRIL 2023
Op donderdag 6 april vond een Kamerdebat plaats over een met Israël te sluiten defensieverdrag. Vrijwel geen partij kwam opdagen en antwoorden van het kabinet blonken uit door vrijblijvende vaagheid. Toch werd het verdrag deze week aangenomen.
Donderdag 6 april debatteerde de Tweede Kamer over goedkeuring van een verdrag tussen Israël en Nederland dat de juridische ‘status van hun strijdkrachten’ op elkaars grondgebied regelt. Volgens het kabinet is dat een noodzakelijke stap voor nauwere samenwerking met het Israëlische defensie-apparaat. Ondanks de structurele mensenrechtenschendingen van het Israëlische leger en het annexatie- en nederzettingenbeleid van de Israëlische regering stemde een Kamermeerderheid voor goedkeuring van het verdrag.
Treurig was dat bij het debat vrijwel geen Kamerleden aanwezig waren. Alleen DENK, de initiator van het debat, de SP en PVV waren vertegenwoordigd. Regeringspartijen VVD en D66 hadden zich weliswaar aangemeld, maar trokken zich om onduidelijke redenen terug.
Nederlandse hypocrisie
Tijdens het debat hekelde Tunahan Kuzu van DENK de Nederlandse hypocrisie ten aanzien van de Israëlische bezetting en onderdrukking van de Palestijnen. Ook wees hij erop dat Israël kampioen-schender is van VN-resoluties. SP-Kamerlid Frank Futselaar vroeg zich vooral af wat de aanleiding voor het verdrag was, en waarom het inhoudelijk verschilt van vergelijkbare verdragen die Nederland eerder heeft gesloten.
Namens het kabinet slaagde minister van Defensie Kajsa Ollongren (D66) er niet in om deze en andere vragen te beantwoorden. De samenwerking zou volgens het kabinet bijdragen aan de versterking en innovatie van de Nederlandse krijgsmacht; Israël beschikt over waardevolle kennis en technologie, aldus Ollongren. Volgens Futselaar van de SP is dat niet het punt; hij vroeg zich terecht af waarom je een militair verdrag zou sluiten met een land dat zich aanhoudend schuldig maakt aan schendingen van het internationaal recht. Het antwoord daarop werd begraven in vaagheden.
Uitzonderen van Israël
Ook werd de vraag gesteld waarom met Israël maar liefst negen jaar over het verdrag is onderhandeld, terwijl er volgens het kabinet geen concrete plannen voor defensiesamenwerking bestaan. Doen we dat ook met willekeurige andere landen?, wilde de Kamer weten. Volgens Ollogren is negen jaar ‘geen ongebruikelijk lange duur’. Zij noemde een paar landen, waaronder Burkina Faso en Jordanië, als andere voorbeelden. De vraag is of dat klopt. Maar de crux is dat er in het geval van Israël wel degelijk concrete plannen bestaan, in de vorm van de aanschaf van een raketsysteem van leverancier Elbit, zoals wij eerder deze week schreven.
Daarnaast is het zorgwekkend dat bij dit verdrag, vergeleken met andere verdragen die Nederland heeft getekend, andere regels gelden met betrekking tot het dragen van wapens. Zo is met Israël afgesproken dat de wetten en regels van de zendstaat gelden, en niet die van de ontvangende staat. Ook voor deze uitzonderingspositie kon minister Ollongren geen reden geven.
Rechten van de Palestijnen
Een terechte vraag die meermaals door Kuzu en Futselaar werd gesteld is hoe de rechten van de Palestijnen in dit verdrag en overige onderlinge afspraken worden gewaarborgd, en hoe wordt voorkomen dat de Nederlands-Israëlische samenwerking (in)direct bijdraagt aan rechtenschendingen. In haar reactie volstond Ollongren met de opmerking dat het verdrag ‘niet indruist tegen artikel 90 van de Grondwet of de Nederlandse grondhouding ten aanzien van het internationaal recht en mensenrechten’.
Dat tekortschietende antwoord is opmerkelijk. Ollongren stelde namelijk in hetzelfde debat dat het kabinet geen screening zal uitvoeren om te voorkomen dat Israëlische militairen die zich schuldig hebben gemaakt aan volkenrechtelijke misdaden of terreurdaden bij de samenwerking betrokken raken. Dat betekent dat het kabinet met het sluiten van dit verdrag in de toekomst mogelijk een samenwerking aangaat met militairen die misdaden hebben begaan. Of, zoals Kuzu dit heikele punt tijdens het debat illustreerde:
Deze militaire samenwerking tussen Israël en Nederland betekent dat de sniper die Shireen Abu Akleh heeft gedood gewoon kan deelnemen aan militaire activiteiten op Nederlands grondgebied. Zonder deze screening is het reëel dat er oorlogscriminelen zullen trainen op Nederlands grondgebied.
Het voorbeeld illustreert de bredere praktijk waarin het kabinet voorbeelden van Israëls schendingen van het internationaal recht keer op keer van tafel veegt met de bewering dat ‘Nederland Israël consequent aanspreekt op de voortgang en uitkomsten van verschillende onderzoeken’. Wat dat betreft is het onderzoek naar de moord op Shireen Abu Akleh tekenend: ondanks Nederlands gemopper is de dader door Israël niet aangeklaagd, laat staan veroordeeld.
Israëlische bezetting
Ollongren benadrukte dat het verdrag op geen enkele manier kan worden gezien als goedkeuring van de Israëlische bezetting en dat alleen zal worden samengewerkt binnen Israëls internationaal erkende grenzen van voor 1967. Daarnaast is het verdrag volgens de minister ‘opgesteld met het oog op respect voor het internationaal recht en mensenrechten en wordt elke vorm van samenwerking daarom zorgvuldig en afzonderlijk afgewogen’. Ook onderstreepte zij dat de samenwerking met Israël de bezetting van de Palestijnse gebieden niet mag faciliteren of versterken: ‘Er wordt geen Nederlandse kennis overgedragen die concreet bijdraagt aan de instandhouding van de bezetting.’
Hoe Ollongren die afspraak gaat waarborgen bleef volstrekt onduidelijk. Het Israëlische leger vormt immers de spil van de bezetting en is verantwoordelijk voor het geweld, de onderdrukking en de apartheid waarmee de Palestijnse bevolking al decennia dag in, dag uit wordt geconfronteerd. Het leger faciliteert de bezetting en beschermt de kolonisten die pogroms aanrichten in bezet gebied. Daar kun je als Nederland niet omheen werken.
Verdrag aangenomen
Ondanks het onbevredigende debat werd het verdrag op dinsdag 11 april met een ruime meerderheid aangenomen. Alleen DENK, BIJ1, SP, PvdD en FvD stemden tegen. Opvallend is dat ook GroenLinks, de PvdA en D66 voor het verdrag stemden. Een motie van Kuzu om een jaarlijkse planning voor defensiesamenwerking met Israël voor te leggen aan de Kamer kreeg meer steun, waaronder van regeringspartij D66, maar werd desondanks verworpen. Volgende week debatteert de Kamer over de aanschaf van het Israëlische wapensysteem. In een volgend artikel gaan we daar dieper op in.
In de marge van het het debat meldde minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Wopke Hoekstra (CDA) dat op aandringen van Nederland in Europees verband een demarche (diplomatiek protest) wordt voorbereid tegen Israëls ‘annexatiebeleid’. In een eerdere nietszeggende reactie op schriftelijke Kamervragen van Sjoerd Sjoerdsma (D66) hierover ging de minister antwoorden nog uit de weg. Luxemburg sprak tijdens een recente vergadering van de VN-Mensenrechtenraad wel al van de jure en de facto annexatie van Palestijns gebied.
EINDE
[62]
OVER DE POLITIEKE EN MORELE MEDEPLICHTIGHEID
VAN DE NEDERLANDSE REGERING AAN DE ISRAELISCHE MISDADEN
ASTRID ESSED
12 SEPTEMBER 2023
[63]
WIKIPEDIA
2023-ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR
[64]
NOS
ISRAEL KREEG F-35 ONDERDELEN VANUIT NEDERLAND
ONDANKS RISICO SCHENDING OORLOGSRECHT
8 NOVEMBER 2023
‘Israël kreeg F-35-onderdelen vanuit Nederland ondanks risico schending oorlogsrecht’
Nederland heeft sinds het uitbreken van de oorlog tussen Israël en Hamas de levering van onderdelen voor Israëlische F-35-gevechtsvliegtuigen niet tegengehouden, ondanks waarschuwingen. Het gaat om ambtelijke waarschuwingen dat hiermee mogelijk het humanitair oorlogsrecht wordt geschonden, meldt NRC na een onderzoek hiernaar.
Israël heeft na de terreuraanslagen van Hamas op 7 oktober een bestelling geplaatst bij het F-35 European Regional Warehouse op Vliegbasis Woensdrecht, het distributiecentrum van de Verenigde Staten in Europa voor onderdelen voor de F-35. Die lading is volgens de krant al opgehaald.
Politieke afwegingen
De douane informeerde volgens NRC nog bij Buitenlandse Zaken of de zending aan Israël geblokkeerd moest worden vanwege de oorlog. Ondanks waarschuwingen van juristen dat er risico’s waren op schendingen van het oorlogsrecht, adviseerden ambtenaren de levering door te laten gaan.
Politieke afwegingen gaven hierbij volgens de krant de doorslag. De weigering van de levering zou schade kunnen toebrengen aan zowel de relatie met Israël als die met de VS, de belangrijkste militaire bondgenoot van Israël.
Niet direct betrokken
Het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken bevestigt dat de uitvoer aan internationale partners in het F-35-programma, waaronder Israël, tot nu toe niet is ingeperkt.
Die uitvoer vindt volgens het ministerie plaats vanuit de langlopende samenwerking tussen Nederland en internationale partners, door middel van een bulkvergunning. Daardoor is niet voor iedere aanvraag een aparte vergunning nodig. Vanwege die algemene vergunning is het ministerie niet direct betrokken bij de doorvoer, laat het ministerie in een reactie weten.
Wel weigerde Nederland 29 keer een vergunning voor de uitvoer van militaire goederen naar Israël, tussen 2004 en 2020, meldt NRC. Daarbij ging het vermoedelijk om individuele leveringen en niet om de bulkvergunning voor de F-35-onderdelen.
Recht op zelfverdediging
Buitenlandse Zaken meldt verder dat het kabinet de precieze rol onderzoekt van het ministerie bij uitzonderingen op algemene vergunningen. Daarbij wordt gekeken of het “wenselijk en mogelijk” is om “specifieke leveringen aan extra controles te onderwerpen”.
“In die besluitvorming neemt het kabinet alle beschikbare informatie mee, waaronder het Israëlische recht op zelfverdediging en de risico’s op schendingen van het humanitair oorlogsrecht”, aldus het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken.
Israël gebruikt de F-35’s voor het uitvoeren van luchtaanvallen op de Gazastrook. Vorige week zei het Hoge Commissariaat voor de Mensenrechten van de Verenigde Naties na zo’n aanval op het Palestijnse vluchtelingenkamp Jabalia in de Gazastrook dat dit mogelijk buitenproportionele aanvallen zijn, die kunnen neerkomen op oorlogsmisdaden. Bij die luchtaanvallen vielen veel burgerslachtoffers.
Inmiddels zijn er ook Kamervragen over de leveringen van reserveonderdelen voor de F-35 aan Israël gesteld.
EINDE