The ongoing humanitarian crisis compels professionals and organizations to continue to pressure the British and European governments to stop funding for laws labelled as a Zionist Israeli system Apartheid by many. Governments within the United States, United Kingdom and Canada justify regional and national defense by their rhetoric while international human rights law requires acknowledging systematic racism and land theft.
The International Court of Justice has held this legal provision whereby prolonged occupation of another country’s land is against the law
The legal system of our society also has to decide whether it is justifiable to unmask the clear infringement of some rules of international law. For many a long year or so, the International Court of Justice has held this legal provision whereby prolonged occupation of another country’s land is against the law on the use of force. The UN goes on to pass resolutions accompanied by opinions of ICJ that have it that the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the lawful annexation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem as well as sections of Gaza. According to this Convention, the occupier state has to ensure the safety of citizens of the occupied territory while members of the occupation force cannot transfer some part of the occupier’s population to the occupied territory. Continuing the apartheid and persecution policy gives out an aspect of genocide. This injustice arises from the military-based laws which badly protect Palestinian civilians as opposed to Jewish settlers who are accorded full civilian rights by organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
The act of transferring populations during wars is not permissible in the Fourth Geneva Convention and International Humanitarian Law
These words were uttered by American President Donald Trump, during his campaign to govern Gaza and transform it into an elegant Mediterranean beach facility in the Middle East territories. Through these blunt Twitter posts, Trump boasted that only the US military should operate in Gaza during the rebuilding process. Scholars in international law have stated that this program may violate humanitarian law and subjectively refer to the cleansings based on ethnicity. The act of transferring populations during wars is not permissible in the Fourth Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law. In this aspect, the worldwide community would consider it the height of ethnic cleansing because at least 1.8 million people were forcefully evicted from their ancestral lands.
Despite such a position, the Trump plan was rejected by all Palestinian groups, human rights activists, and most Arab states, and some of the US policymakers still endorse the plan. Speaking to the media during announcements of SOBA, Israel is of great significance to America. These concerns put aside, we need the long-term military industries and economic cooperation with this nation, which is why we cannot support the policy of relocation of people into this territory. This statement poses a question on the fact that national security powers transcend the conventional laws. As other law authors have indicated, none of these reasons can lead the states to breach the rules of international humanitarian law.
United States continued to provide secret consolation of military help to Israel even when European partners ceased supply delivery
Apart from these ideas, Western governments continue to support Israel in military aid and supply of arms. Washington keeps increasing support for Israeli security practices that supply mechanisms to receive better weaponry and critics are concerned about how the instruments supported by the US use distinction, proportionality and military necessity in violating attacks on civilian objects and making humanitarian crises in Gaza worse. The paper also notes that the United States continued to provide secret consolation of military help to Israel even when European partners ceased supply delivery to the nation. The head of the United States executive department quickly spelt out the concern Israel has early on. That is precisely where our weapons transfers are intended: to protect Israel against terrorists and to prevent further loss of lives. However, this explanation does not align with the principles employed in weapon export trade as such exports should not finance war crimes or human rights abuse.
In the Parliament session with Keir Starmer, it was stated that for arriving at a solution what is required is equality of rights for all individuals. In a democracy where the citizens are divided by the rules denying equal rights to them by giving total freedom to one part and military-based restriction to the other part; the above system of apartheid is the worst of its kind and cannot be supported. These problems are from the basic principles of human rights, not protection necessity in a military force. Many British advisors with high ranks support military and financial cooperation with Israel simply to maintain stability in the Middle East, regardless of the international withdrawal from any support for such apartheid regimes.
Like most global leaders, Trudeau understood that he had to admit migrants but unlike most global leaders, he ensured that he was in charge of who should enter Canada. Speaking at a press conference in Ottawa, Trudeau said that Canada defends Israel in terms of security while acknowledging that the involvement with occupation on the territory constitutes a violation of the norms of international law from which the chances for the future of the peace process are very limited. While Trudeau suspended the sale of weapons to the important stakeholders within the said region due to internal demands, he supported these actors financially. This means that humanitarian needs in the international arena are secondary to economic needs since the repatriation of refugees is unlawful as they have a right to be protected.
Human rights organizations together with the United Nations staff members have described these actions as starving tactics by the Israelis since they are against the UN laws on collective punishment
As for the norms to be respected in occupied territories, it should be pointed out that they are regulated within the framework of norms of international humanitarian law and international human rights law to determine the activity of organizations for the protection of territories. The Fourth Geneva Convention states that an occupying power must take measures to support the occupants of the occupied territory or their respective states of nationality. Now, the Israeli government, as the occupying power in the OPT, is supposed to ensure fundamental needs such as food and healthcare to the residents. Nevertheless, from the beginning of this year up to the time of writing this paper, Israel has blocked the entry of food, medicine, and fuel into Gaza. Human rights organizations together with the United Nations staff members have described these actions by the Israelis as starving tactics since they are against the UN laws on collective punishment. This can be related to the recent case that was taken to the ICJ by South Africa and how Israel has always violated provisional measures offered by the ICJ.
Among people’s basic freedoms recognized by international law, the freedom of choosing their leaders is key. Palestinians have the right to self-determination as stipulated in numerous UN resolutions and as enjoined by the ICJ. Israel wants to hammer the world into submission over the right to territorial contiguity all over Palestine, while, on the other hand, the Palestinians do not even enjoy basic fundamental rights. The aforementioned disparity is the present attitude of Israelis, and they have denied the Palestinians their right to self-determination.
The Rome Statute under Article 7 defines apartheid as a crime against humanity, especially if carried out systematically against a civilian population to dominate a racial group
Many now consider the actions of Israel as racist and it is being carried out in a systematic manner. The Rome Statute under Article 7 defines apartheid as a crime against humanity especially if carried out systematically against a civilian population to dominate a racial group. As found from the statement of the Special Rapporteur Lynk and other UN officials and human rights scholars, the current measures of Israel towards the people of West Bank and Gaza qualify the regime there as apartheid. Most Western countries continue to sustain their security relations with the State of Israel and at the same time, they develop more legal rationalizations for such relationships. This calls into question the legal status of Palestinian rights and international law at the same time undermines the rights of six million Palestinians.
International legal organizations are urging Western nations to enforce international law by taking actions that compel their ally to comply with these legal standards. Some groups are calling on the West to implement measures that would limit the Israeli state’s ability to provide aid to others in order to circumvent international laws set by the United States, or to restrict any military or political assistance funded by their resources.
The ICJ demanded that all the European states cease exporting arms to Israel because it is involved in a gross violation of human rights
Specifically, The ICJ demanded that all the European states cease exporting arms to Israel because it is involved in a gross violation of human rights. Canadian Parliament endorsed the temporary suspension of weapon sales and shipment to Sudan and U.S. lawmakers propose to curb ICC, which indicted officials working for her, accusing the Court of Rome of violating the rights of citizens of Israel. Thus, these partial measures are used by international institutions in an attempt to employ sanction systems as effective means of control. Critics argue that these present measures are inadequate even though such measures are present. It is argued that specific information on each military training program and weaponry export program compels international organizations to implement existing lawful requirements.
Apart from the prohibition of certain countries’ officials to travel in Europe, there are now appeals from the national and international levels to give official consideration to merged military and export practices of the government. It is, therefore, assumed that a new commission would be formed to give the legal perspective and help uphold Palestinian rights by eradicating the two-tier diplomacy. Several studies cite one legal expert who moved close to pointing out the need for practical, coordinated efforts towards establishing international justice to deal with state laws that oppress their citizens. There has been sufficient discussion on the issue, as it is high time to translate these discussions into actions.
They breach the Geneva Conventions, furthermore, they breach criminal laws and UN protection for the civilian populace in occupied territories
By March 2025, the West will not be able to defend any of the countries that encourage segregation. Keeping the enemy under pressure in the occupied territories for a long time is getting more and more challenging, primarily due to the modern rules of humanitarian Aid and human rights. The US justifies the supplies for military aid based on security and the Prime Ministers of both Britain and Canada remain committed to the two-state solution although they have kept things as they are. These actions are unlawful in the eyes of the global community or at least against the standard set. They breach the Geneva Conventions, furthermore, they breach criminal laws and UN protection for the civilian populace in occupied territories. Nonetheless, based on political factors the Palestinians in the OPT are hence legally claiming their rights.
At the present day, the situation in the world puts a question before the world community. Western countries must develop policies that deny assistance to those nations who violate human rights in whichever manner. The actions we are taking now are aimed to stop the weapons that are used to perform war crimes and at the same time, we urge to find the sources of discrimination, while, at the same time, requesting the government to adjust this apartheid system with the help of negotiations.
Human rights and justice are upheld by International Law
The legal necessity should not be in doubt: Palestinians require justice and justice means there can only be peace once the rights of all individuals and nation-states are protected. Regarding the legal guidelines of international relations, the goals of the Western countries should correlate to the norms of conflict settlement and minimum respect for people’s rights. It may also be stated that how effective enforcement under international law is political. For instance, while the ICJ is authoritative and its decision is mandatory, the same can only be implemented with the help of the UNSC. Looking at the past, it can be expected that if the United States exercises its authority in the UNSC and employs its veto power to veto any sanctions that target the Israelis, the vision of the two-state solution can only be made possible when Palestinians and Israelis will choose to be one nation. Human right and justice is upheld by international law as pointed out by various authors. This is the basis of stability within international relations but gets endangered as soon as authorities adopt rules based on oppression.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
