As I understand it, Israel supplies a significant fraction of Gaza’s electricity and water. (Less than half, though).
Prof. Avi Bell, a “Senior Fellow,” at the Kohelet Policy Forum, as well as a law professor at the San Diego School of Law, writes here (PDF) that in his view of international law:
He goes on to note that Ukraine has threatened to cut of the supply of water and electricity to Crimea, and indeed has already limited the water supply, as a sanction for the Russian occupation, even though the territory is completely dependent on Ukrainian electricity and water – and that he’s not heard of any characterization of these steps as violative of international law.
OK. So what I know about international law might fill a medium-sized thimble.
Electricity being classified as not necessarily a humanitarian good is debatable point.
Not supplying water would seem to definitely cross some line. International law may not say any thing specific, but cutting off water does not seem like a moral action.
Interestingly, recently the city for Detroit, MI was was cited by the United Nations for human rights violations for shutting off water for delinquent payment to around 17,000 homes.
I’m very skeptical of the claim that electricity is not a necessary humanitarian good. And from what this fellow is saying, the Israeli Supreme Court seems reluctant to rule thus as well (though they haven’t precluded all interference with electricity flow).
BTW - the Israeli Supreme Court publishes in English. The Bassiouni decision cited in the Koholet article is here : חסימת בקשה לא מורשת
The Court ruled, essentially, that modest limits upon fuel and electricity supply to Gaza could be consistent with Israel’s obligation to avoid intereference with humanitarian needs, but the Government did not even argue that it had no obligation under international humanitarian law to supply fuel or electricity. Insofar as this wasn’t a disputed point, it doesn’t quite go to the Koholet article - but it seems very unlikely the Court would adopt this fellow’s position in future.
It probably matters less whether the law technically says one thing or another, than it does who other countries interpret Israel’s actions. If another country feels that shutting off water and electricity is an inhumane and requires punitive sanctions they are going to impose those sanctions regardless of whether Israel actions were technically legal. Unlike traditional court there isn’t some third party judicial with the power to enforce the word of the law on the parties. In this case any enforcement is going to come from involved parties each with its own agenda and interpretation.
wow…only 6 posts to Godwin…
You might want to rethink this a bit.
The Nazis supplied water to their starving, totally powerless prisoners locked into camps.
Gaza is not a prison camp; It is a semi-state-in-the-making that shares a border with Egypt–a nation with very similar language and culture. Gaza is a national entity with its own army and elected leaders. Those leaders travel the world and meet with the leaders of some of the world’s richest nations (e.q. Qatar), buy weapons in huge quantities, and have the responsibility to care for their own population. The leaders of Gaza could choose to build their own electric plants, water desalination plants and factories. Instead, they choose to spend their money on missiles and palatial houses for themselves, while the population stagnates in dire poverty. And they also take electricity from Israel and without paying for it
It wouldn’t affect the Hamas bigwigs; it would only harm the little guys.
If Gaza had factory complexes where they were building their rockets, then it might make sense. But Gaza isn’t that kind of industrial nation.
(If Gaza spent all the money and effort they now spend on rockets on a real economy, and provided a peaceful environment where investment felt welcome, they could make themselves a fast-growing financial enclave. The Saudis and others would be happy to send gobs of money. Being a kind of Liechtenstein would mean they could afford their own sources of water and power.)
So then just to be clear, you’re saying that King Hussein was worse than the Nazis because he cut off electricity and water to the refugee camps during the Black September revolt?
I ask because most people would find such an assertion utterly moronic, but based on your rather ridiculous post, if you’re being intellectually consistent that’s what you must believe.
The Fourth Protocol to the Geneva Conventions states that “Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” That article also forbids the use of terrorism, unjustified penal actions, pillage, and reprisals.
According to the ICRC, “This paragraph then lays a prohibition on collective penalties. This does not refer to punishments inflicted under penal law, i.e. sentences pronounced by a court after due process of law, but penalties of any kind inflicted on persons or entire groups of persons, in defiance of the most elementary principles of humanity, for acts that these persons have not committed.” The ICRC also points to the Hague Conventions, which stated: “No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible.”
In response, the linked article states that the judiciary in Israel has determined in 2008 that reducing fuel and water supplies is not collective punishment.
It appears to me that the view of the ICRC would be that cutting off water to civilians, on the rationale that terrorists are also using the same water, would be impermissible even if the Israeli Supreme Court believes otherwise.
There are different rules that apply if Israel is considered an “occupying power”, in control of civilians not normally under its control in a time of war.
In other words, it may be that Israel has different responsibilities to the Gaza civilians today than they did yesterday, if Israel is judged to have invaded and occupied Gaza.
Whether yesterday’s military move across the border counts as that I couldn’t say. I would say that if Israel cut off food, fuel or water yesterday as part of this military action, then they are more likely to be seen as in violation of the laws of war. Not that anyone is going to enforce anything.
Would the answer be different depending on the circumstances on the ground? There are three cases here
1: shutting off water and electricity during times of relative peace
2: shutting off water and electricity when there are significant attacks from within the territory, say hundreds of rockets fired.
3: shutting off water and electricity during an occupation.
I don’t feel that legally or morally any nation is obligated to supply commodities to neighbouring nations. (Israel, as a pertinent example, has always had difficulty in importing oil despite being located in an oil-rich region.)
If a country is completely surrounded by a neighbour, like Lesotho is, then I’d accept that there might be some obligation to at least guarantee access.
You’re demanding a cite that you said the Israelis would be worse than Nazis if they cut off water to Gaza?
Err… your own post. Post #6
Do you not remember making it?
Now, using that logic, King Hussein was worse than the Nazis when he cut off water to the Palestinian refugee camps during the Black September revolt he should be compared to the Nazis.
So, please explain why you feel that the Israelis could be compared to the Nazis if they were to cut off water to Gaza but it would be wrong to compare King Hussein to the Nazis for doing exactly that. Or is your position that it’s proper to argue King Hussein was worse than the Nazis during the Black September Revolt?
Thanks in advance for your response.
Also, consider your recent posting history, I’d be careful about calling others “rude”.
The moral action would be for the electricity companies to be privately owned and under no control of the Israeli government. Then the moral action would be for the electricity companies decide for themselves whether to do business with the Palestinians.
^^^ Fwiw, electrical supply is pretty much a nationalised industry in Isreal.
Are Isrealis really going to watch tv images of the consequences of hospitals in Gaza with no power, old people dying from heat, etc, etc. Of course not.