Israel-Gaza Conflict: Here We Are Again

To begin, I want to make my view clear that the attacks by both Israel and Hamas must be strongly condemned. Both sides have been displaying utter disregard for the right to life and a clear lack of interest in holding those responsible (including senior political and military leaders) accountable for grave human rights violations and violations of international law. This lack of accountability may have been a key factor in the resumption of hostilities and in the loss of hope for a peaceful and durable solution to the conflict that has existed for long between Israelis and Palestinians.

The ongoing indiscriminate targeting of civilians in conflict is illegal under international law and also morally reprehensible, even when one claims their right to self-defense. According to estimates by the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), thousands (several of which were children) have been killed and injured since the fighting began on 7 July when Israel launched a military operation with the objective of halting rocket fire into its territory. Over 70% of those targeted have been civilians, and attacks have been launched onto hospitals, clinics and refugee camps, among other densely populated areas, such as residential homes. Meanwhile, Israel claims that Hamas militants have been using their own population as human shields by hiding them in these places.

On 23 July 2014, the UN Human Rights Council took a vote in Geneva to set up an independent investigative commission into what has been occurring in Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian territories. The commission would be an international one and would specifically investigate all violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. A seemingly well-intended first step was supported by 29 out of the 47 Council member states (with the exception of the US and 10 European countries) but has received criticism from Israel, which has already stated that it will not cooperate with the commission given that it views the Human Rights Council as anti-Israel. To refresh our minds, there is a precedent of lack of cooperation by Israel with a similar body. A UN Fact-finding Mission report on the Gaza Conflict dated 2009 (known as the 'Goldstone Report' due to the last name of the former judge and prosecutor who led the investigation) concluded that, in the context of Operation Cast Lead offensive of 2008-09, both sides had committed war crimes. On that occasion, once again, Israel rejected the findings of the document.

Beyond any legal analysis and moral speeches, the reality is that what is taking place right now is a massacre. Without entering into the debate surrounding the principle of proportionality, each side has a share of the blame in this situation and each side has undermined their own causes by showing a lack of restraint in their responses, making inflammatory statements that contain zero respect for victims, and just simply showing a lack of humanity. A cease-fire is needed immediately to allow for humanitarian relief efforts but a short-term halt will not, by any means, constitute a real solution that will withstand the passing of time. For that to happen, a lot will have to change, starting with discussing the fundamental issues, including the role of the Palestinian Authority in its control of Gaza and the existence of a two-state solution.

Views: 146

Tags: 2014, Conflict, Council, Diplomacy, Gaza, Human, Israel, Israeli, Palestine, Palestinian, More…Rights, UN, Un

Comment

You need to be a member of Global Ethics Network to add comments!

Join Global Ethics Network

Comment by Al LeBlanc on June 30, 2015 at 3:58pm

The US has tried "time and time again" to broker an Israel-Palestine Peace Accord.  I was fortunate to be involved in Defense Cooperation Part of the Camp David Peace Accord between Israel & Egypt (which although costly to the US has held to this day).  . I recall the historic moment when I saw Sadat fly in to meet Begin.  IMHO, Peace has to come from within -both sides - can't be imposed by outside agents - Need People/Voter Power - Vision of Peace Win-Win Future versus infinite conflict.  

Comment by Valentine Olushola Oyedipe on June 29, 2015 at 9:07am

I quite agree with you Jessica that a lot has to be done for an amicable resolution in that region. Indeed,there had been gross disrespect for human rights and international law from both sides.The idea of a two state solution had been and is being challenged by where to locate the Capital of Palestine nation which will be acceptable to both sides.I think the possession of East Jerusalem that is believed to be sacred to both party is a major contending issue.

Comment by Valentine Olushola Oyedipe on June 29, 2015 at 9:07am
I quite agree with you Jessica that a lot has to be done for an amicable resolution in that region. Indeed,there had been gross disrespect for human rights and international law from both sides.The idea of a two state solution had been and is being challenged by where to locate the Capital of Palestine nation which will be acceptable to both sides.I think the possession of East Jerusalem that is believed to be sacred to both party is a major contending issue.
Comment by Untung Waluyo on June 28, 2015 at 1:24am

Never enaugh with a thousand more people die :( waluhyo

Carnegie Council

Killer Robots, Ethics, & Governance, with Peter Asaro

Peter Asaro, co-founder of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control, has a simple solution for stopping the future proliferation of killer robots, or lethal autonomous weapons: "Ban them." What are the ethical and logistical risks of this technology? How would it change the nature of warfare? And with the U.S. and other nations currently developing killer robots, what is the state of governance?

As Biden Stalls, Is the "Restorationist" Narrative Losing Ground?

U.S. Global Engagement Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev notes that former Vice President Joe Biden is, in foreign policy terms, most associated with a "restorationist" approach. How does this differentiate from other candidates? What approach will resonate most with voters?

Democratic Candidates & Foreign Policy after Iowa, with Nikolas Gvosdev

With the (incomplete) results of the Iowa Caucus putting the spotlight on Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders, what do we know about their foreign policy platforms? How do they differentiate themselves from Joe Biden? Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev shares his thoughts and touches on voters' possible perception of Sanders as a "socialist" and how climate change could become an issue in this election.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

VIDEOS

SUPPORT US

GEO-GOVERNANCE MATTERS

© 2020   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.