As the people of Gaza face relentless bombardment, death, and destruction on an unprecedented severity and scale, a global coalition of more than 250 human rights and humanitarian organisations, academics, legal professionals, and students organised a “Global Day of Action” on May 2 with a particular focus on countries that are major arms exporters to Israel ~ the US, Canada, UK, Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Australia ~ and to call on governments around the world to stop the transfer of all arms and ammunitions that are being used to fuel violations of international law in Gaza. The central aim of the campaign was to sensitise the global community to the devastating impact of arms transfers on the sufferings of civilians in the Gaza Strip and hold the perpetrators of international humanitarian law (IHL) violations and atrocious crimes accountable.

Israel’s military offensive in Gaza in response to Hamas’s October 7 attacks on southern Israel, in which more than 34,500 Palestinians have been killed and 77,700 injured, the majority of whom are women and children, and more than 70 per cent of the Palestinian territory has been reduced to rubble, has exposed the hypocrisy and double standards of the West led by the US, which always champions the cause of human rights and international law. The West has almost turned a blind eye to the enduring sufferings of the Palestinians. Despite damning evidence of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of IHL committed by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller recently declared that it has not found Israel to be in violation of IHL, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance.

Advertisement

In fact, under the National Security Memorandum on Safeguards and Accountability with Respect to Transferred Defence Articles and Defence Services 20 (NSM-20) countries that receive US military assistance are required to give Washington “credible and reliable written assurances” that the arms will not be used in violation of IHL and human rights law. NSM-20 also requires the Departments of State and Defence to report to Congress within 90 days on the extent to which such partners are abiding by their assurances.

It must be noted that since October 7, the US has approved over 100 Foreign Military Sales to Israel, even using an emergency power to bypass Congressional review. Regrettably, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Jim Risch have written a letter to President Biden and Secretary Blinken urging the repeal of the NSM-20. They have argued that it erodes America’s ability to provide security assistance to its key partners and allies who count on the country’s security assistance, especially Israel, and threatens its ability to create and maintain partners in an era of strategic competition.

Earlier in March, during the meeting of the UN Human Rights Council, the US was not only seen diplomatically shielding Israel but also justifying its actions. Miller’s statement defies the regular credible media reports and recommendations from its own State Department experts about IHL and human rights violations by the IDF in Gaza. A recent report by an Independent Task Force on the application of NSM-20 regarding Israel also confirms such violations by the IDF in Gaza on a large scale.

The report features sixteen clear, credible, and compelling incidents of such violations, along with multiple restrictions on humanitarian assistance for the period identified by NSM-20 (1 January 2023- April 2024). In one of the worst incidents of IHL violations reported by the task force, the IDF struck Jabalia refugee camp on 9 October 2023, and destroyed several multi-story buildings, killing at least 39 people, for which the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights found no specific military objective and no reports of advance warnings. Similarly, Human Rights Watch has also documented strikes on or near several major hospitals, including the TurkishPalestinian Friendship Hospital, the Indonesian Hospital, and the International Eye Care Center. Under IHL, hospitals and ambulances are protected civilian objects and cannot be targeted unless they are used by a party to the conflict to commit an “act harmful to the enemy.”

The arbitrary denial and restrictions of humanitarian aid and essential supplies by Israel also violate IHL and the Roman Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which Israel seeks to justify on security grounds. As per the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocol of 1977, intentionally starving civilians, depriving them of vital survival objects, and obstructing relief supplies are strictly prohibited. It must be noted that the ICC is already considering issuing arrest warrants for senior Israeli political and military officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defence Minister Yoav Galant, and Army Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, on charges related to the on-going war in the Gaza, especially the indiscriminate killing of civilians and blocking the delivery of aid to Gaza, which has led to starvation and the onset of famine. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has already held in January that Israel’s campaign in Gaza ‘plausibly’ amounts to genocide.

The most disappointing thing is the inability of the United Nations Security Council to act in the face of continued violations of international law applicable during armed conflicts because of the veto power used by the US in favour of Israel. The US is continuously thwarting any meaningful attempt, either for ceasefires, protecting civilians in Gaza, or holding Israel accountable for violating international law, despite broad international support for such actions. In March 2024, following several failed attempts over six months and tremendous international pressure, the US finally allowed a ceasefire resolution to pass by the Security Council, but without any immediate effect on the ground, as Israel immediately declared that it would not abide by the decision and would continue to fight unless Hamas is completely destroyed and the last of the hostages returns home. Despite the binding nature of the Security Council resolutions, US ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield insisted that the resolution was non-binding.

The question remains as to how, when, and by whom the decision of the Security Council would be enforced in the absence of US support. An immediate ceasefire and unconditional release of all hostages, along with permanent actions towards a two-state solution, could only help to bring about long-term peace, which has been eluding for a long time. However, there seems to be no end in sight, at least in the near future, to the sufferings of Palestinians, as Israel has already launched its operation in Rafah, which is the last presumed safe haven for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and where conditions are already dire. This could turn Rafah into a zone of bloodshed and destruction that people won’t be able to escape. Where would the Palestinians go from Rafah; they have by now been displaced multiple times by the on-going fighting? There are not many viable options for safety and shelter for them. It is hard to discern the aftermath of Israel’s Rafah operation.

(Writer is professor and teacher at international law at Aligarh, Muslim University and heads its strategic and security studies programme)