Link
Posted by realistic bird under Politics Tags: Politics, palestine, US, Gaza, war crimes, Israeli crimes, human rights, justice, Palestinians, UN, crimes against humanity, Goldstone report
by Yaser Ahmad
by Anand Sagar, source
October 7, 2009
There is enough documented and corroborative evidence available to establish that the brutal, three-week, Israeli assault against Gaza last winter was clearly a gross violation of international law and thus tantamount to both—a war crime and/or a crime against humanity.
At least that is one inevitable interpretation of Richard Goldstone’s inquiry into the Gaza Conflict on behalf of the UN’s Human Rights Council. Of course, the 575-page report, based on an examination of 36 specific attacks in Gaza as well as in the West Bank and in Israel, does mention that there were “atrocities” committed by both sides.
But that having been said, it would now be incumbent upon any impartial adjudicator in this case to carefully measure and assess the ‘proportionality’ of blame involved on either side. It is only then that several estimated facts and figures as reported by both sides will begin to make some sense and point directly at who is more to blame and for what: For instance, according to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights lists 1,417 people, including 926 civilians, were killed in the conflict. Israel, on the other hand, puts the Palestinian death toll at 1,116 (including 295 civilians) and says 13 Israelis were killed in the conflict — between December 27, 2008 and January 18 this year.
The asymmetry, when it comes to fixing the onus for the war crimes, is as obvious as it is irrefutable. Israel is a lot more guilty of more serious violations of international law and does have to answer for a lot more. The question now is whether the international community can initiate any process whereby Israel is held accountable for its war crimes and crimes against humanity.
In fact, as Goldstone himself has warned, the lack of accountability in the Middle East has reached “crisis point” and, in turn, is undermining any rational hope of reviving a meaningful peace process.
Not surprisingly, there is much anger on the streets of the Fatah-controlled West Bank and also the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
The fact that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, obviously under pressure from the United States, had initially dropped his intention of forwarding a report accusing Israel of possible war crimes to the UN’s Security Council startled most Palestinians. However, given the rising chorus of criticism, Abbas is now reported to be “seriously studying” the possibility of asking the Arab and Islamic bloc to officially support the Goldstone’s report and forwarding it jointly to the UN Security Council.
This is one issue on which it would have been comparatively easier for both Fatah and Hamas supporters to find common cause. But the American argument that any Palestinian move to push the “deeply flawed” report would jeopardise the Middle East peace process is what prompted Abbas to err on the side of caution. But he has now realised that he has seriously misjudged the sentiments of his own people and that a quick rethink is required on this issue In addition, the possibility of a further delay in pressing for a vote of the 49-member Human Rights Council, on whether it should forward the Goldstone report to either the UN General Assembly or its Security Council (as recommended), is further widening the rift between Fatah and Hamas.
But even if any Israeli war crimes report is forwarded to the UN Security Council, both the Palestinian leadership and the Arabs know that the US would certainly exercise its veto powers to scuttle any follow up action on it.
The Israelis, in any case, well aware of both overt and covert backing of the US had consistently refused to cooperate with Goldstone’s fact-finding mission. Their pretext: That the mission was fundamentally biased against Israel on the basis of its mandate and that it had failed to take into account the fact that its Operation Cast Lead in Gaza was mounted primarily in “self-defence”. However, now with so many verified and verifiable facts exposing Israeli atrocities so easily available to the international community, Tel Aviv and the powerful Israeli lobby in the US may find it increasingly difficult to manipulate and coerce everyone, every which way.
But that does not mean that they will not try. But also, it does not mean that they will continue to be as successful at it as they have been until now. Briefly, the main case in point here is the nature and the extent of Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians. And this, not limited just to the breach of international law during last year’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza.
That Israel has much to answer for is beyond all reasonable doubt. How to ensure that it does now depends as much upon the affected and aggrieved party (the Palestinians) as upon the international community and institutions like the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague.
If the UN, at any stage does eventually refer the case to the ICC, well and good. If not, now is the time to test the efficacy of the evolving concept of “universal jurisdiction” in international law — whereby, any prosecuting state backs its claims on the premise that a certain kind of serious crime committed against one is considered a crime against all, which any state is authorised to punish.
Does Israel understand the concept and its implications? It very well should, considering that its own Supreme Court had claimed and invoked the concept of international jurisdiction — while pursuing and later prosecuting the infamous Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in 1961.
Surely, even Benjamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu remembers that.
Anand Sagar is Khaleej Times’ Foreign Editor, Professor Emeritus of the Indian Institute of Journalism & New Media, Bangalore, and Former Visiting Fellow, University of Oxford.
No comments:
Post a Comment