Emptying Israel’s war on international humanitarian law Israeli conflict news

On March 24, Israel hit a car in northern Gaza and killed Al -Jazeera correspondent Hosam Shabat.

The 23-year-old is one of the countless civilians-men, women and children-Israel has been killed since the launch of what legal scientists describe as a “genocide” war on Gaza.

Israel often justifies its killings by claiming that the targets sympathetic to Hamas or other armed factions. This was the justification provided to kill young women.

Israel also destroyed the entire neighborhoods and buildings, killing dozens – often hundreds – at the same time, outwardly to target one work in Hamas.

For years, Israel tried to justify these practices by employing lawyers to create semi -harsh concepts in the hope of creating new and dangerous precedents, according to scholars and legal experts.

However, legal researchers told Al -Jazeera that it is not called the so -called “targeted killings” nor the non -proportional attacks against civilians with any basis in international law.

“Are there any manifestations of the law or legal justification for the war tactics that Israel uses in Gaza? The simple answer is no. No,” said Heidi Matthews, a professor of assistant law at York University in Toronto, Canada.

Determine the precedents

On September 28, 2000, the Palestinians began all over the occupied West Bank, and Gaza began to demonstrate against the constant occupation of Israel in what became known as the second intifada.

Soon, Israel’s suppression of the Palestinian uprising was pushed to mobilize and respond.

Over the next five years, Israel has launched what was called “targeted killings” and seized unarmed Palestinians.

Israel has claimed that these goals could pose a threat to Israelis in the future because of their alleged membership in an armed faction.

“Israel … protects civilians based on their views or views,” said Nour Kalzi, a researcher in a legal agenda, a non -profit institution in Lebanon that defends legal reform and human rights in the Middle East.

Analysts said that Israel’s concept of the targeted killing was a plan adapted to the United States during the “war on terror.”

“In the early first decade of the twentieth century), Israel and the United States changed their legal doctrines and implemented this as part of their military doctrine,” Matthews at York University told Al -Jazeera.

“When it comes to distinguishing between civilians and fighters … the United States and Israel began to look (that is, a person as a goal) based on their membership in a group,” she added.

According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, the person is only a legitimate goal if he is participating directly in an armed fight while they are killed.

This means that the suspected membership in the armed group is not enough to assassinate someone.

Lieber’s legacy?

Throughout the Israel war on Gaza, It has routinely decreased 2000 pounds (900 kg) of the bomb In densely populated residential areas, as well as schools and hospitals systematically targeted and displacement shelters.

Israeli officials justify these attacks by claiming that Israel is fighting a “fair war” against the barbarians. As a result, the apparent goal of destroying Hamas is superior to reducing civil losses.

This is partially rooted in the philosophy of Francis Lieber, a nineteenth -century American military theorist, who was assigned to clarify the “rules of behavior” of trade union soldiers fighting the Confederation in the American Civil War.

He said that some wars are necessary for the moral progress of civilized countries and requires a quick victory, which can only be achieved using tactics that are likely to cause huge civilian victims.

Alonso Gurmendi Dunkeelberg, Legal Researcher at London Economy College, Alonso Dunkeberg, Legal Researcher, Legal researcher, Legal researcher, Legal researcher, Legal researcher, Legal researcher, London Gurmendi Dunkeberg Legal Researcher, London Economy College, for Alonso Gurmendi Dukelberg Legal Researcher at London Economy College, for Alonso Gurmendi Dunkeelberg, Legal researcher at London Economy College in London, Lieber, in the first place, everything that is militaryly necessary to implement the war is legal.

Gorendie Dunkelberg added that this terrifying logic is flagrantly inconsistent with international standards and laws.

He said: “He believed that the largest possible number of people can be killed, until it finished the mission quickly.

Since the beginning of the Israel war on Gaza, its spokesperson presented similar arguments.

Mark Regev, adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said that the goal is to “get the war) faster” when PBS was asked why Israel was dropped 6000 bombs in the first six days of attacks on the besieged pocket.

Then, during the early days of the war, the Israeli army spokesman Daniel Hajari admitted that the focus in Gaza was “damage, not accurate.”

The destruction of the system

In November 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) approved two arrests in favor of Netanyahu and his minister at the time, Yov Galet-accused of using hunger as a weapon of war and intentionally attacking civilians in Gaza.

A previous ruling issued by the International Court of Justice found that the Palestinians in Gaza faced a real threat to genocide due to the practices of the Israeli war.

The provisions of the International Criminal Court and ICJ add their weight to the argument that Israel failed to try to justify the practices of war, which is likely to rise to multiple war crimes, crimes against humanity and even genocide.

As a result, Israel and its Western allies are now In an attempt to sabotage Nadim Khoury, former director of Human Rights Watch and founder of the Arab Reform Initiative, said that the institutions created to support international law and perpetrators of atrocities.

“Israel has clearly achieved the extent that they could escape using legal arguments. Now, they are acting with complete escape to undermine the institutions trying to implement international laws,” he said to the island of the island.

Several scholars and legal experts have expressed their dissatisfaction that Netanyahu may be able to visit countries in Europe, which are parties in the Rome Law, a legal framework on which the International Criminal Court is based.

Countries such as Hungary, Belgium and France said that they would not arrest Netanyahu if he visits their countries or passes through their land or airspace.

Matthews at York University believes that countries that claim to support international law should work quickly to save the remainder of the system, admitting that it was never an ideal model.

“Other countries – beyond America and Israel – need to take action to save or save the regime as a whole, or will fade quickly,” she told Al -Jazeera Island.

“We are at a turning point and does not look good.”