By Issam Younis
The human rights community was waiting for the Palmer committee’s report to come out with a recommendation for Luis Moreno Ocampo, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, to start criminal procedures against Israeli officials responsible for legal violations that amount to war crimes.
However, the conclusions of the actual report were unexpected: it makes Israel out as innocent and holds the victims responsible for the crimes.
The Palmer report represents a critical lapse for the United Nations. In contradiction to the position of the UN generally, the report asserts that the Israeli blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip is legal and fully adopts the Israeli attitude towards the blockade as presented in the report of Israel’s own Turkel Commission. The Palmer committee differentiates between the land and maritime siege imposed on Gaza, thereby minimizing the siege, which should be examined from a broader perspective. The Israeli siege is a comprehensive one, covering land, sea, and air. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, siege is considered a collective punishment—hence there is no legal basis for the siege, even if it were imposed to protect the security of the state of Israel.
On June 14, 2010, the International Committee of the Red Cross, which is considered an authoritative point of reference in the interpretation of international humanitarian law, stated that it considered the Israeli blockade to be a form of collective punishment, meaning it is illegal and must promptly be lifted. The same position is maintained in the Goldstone report on Israel’s 2008-09 offensive in Gaza, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reports, Human Rights Council reports, and the work of human rights organizations.
Article 72 of the Palmer report disregards the established legal status of Gaza as an occupied territory, proclaiming the “uncertain legal status of Gaza under international law.” In fact, Gaza has remained occupied even after Israel’s unilateral disengagement of 2005. Its status was the same under the Oslo accords and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority. The ICRC states that as long as Israel holds effective control over Gaza’s borders and sea, the Strip remains an occupied territory. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel as an occupying power must uphold its obligations towards the Gazan population.
The report’s content produces wonder when it blames the victims for what happened to them during the Israeli attack. It likewise fails to hold Israel responsible for the crimes committed against civilian solidarity activists, who are protected under international law. Points three and four of the conclusion of the report state that “the actions of the flotilla needlessly carried the potential for escalation” and cast clear doubts about the goals and intentions of IHH, the principal organizer of the flotilla. It also states that Turkey should have done more than it did “to warn the flotilla participants of the potential risks involved and to dissuade them from their actions.”
In contrast, the UN fact-finding mission noted in its report of September 27, 2010 (at paragraph 55) that Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of staff of the Israeli army, stated in testimony before the Turkel Commission that he did not believe the Turkish organization was a terrorist group. Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu also testified that the decision to block the passage of the Turkish flotilla was not made because the flotilla posed a security threat.
Therefore, the attack against the flotilla cannot be justified as self-defense, as Israel has claimed. It is also important to recall that the Israeli attack took place opposite the Gaza coast while the ships were on their way to Gaza. But the Palestinians of Gaza, though their situation was at the heart of the incident, were not asked to give their testimony. This demonstrates that the report is fully unprofessional and politicized. It was issued just a few days before Palestinians plan to submit a request to the UN for recognition of a Palestinian state.
The Palmer report represents a deviation from the consensus UN position; it seeks to legalize the Israeli siege. Justice demands that the UN reaffirm universal principles of human rights and international humanitarian law in this situation. This can only be achieved through serious and effective investigations conducted without politicizing international law, in a way that upholds international security and peace, the achievement of justice, and redress for victims, while criminalizing the siege and collective punishment of the population of Gaza.
Justice is not subject to division. There is no half- or quarter-justice. There is also no half- or quarter-siege. Siege is a collective punishment that cannot be justified, whatever reasons may lie behind it.
Issam Younis is director of Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights in Gaza. This commentary is published by Daily News Egypt in collaboration with bitterlemons-international.org.
