israel’s impunity
Cries for Justice
Gaza’s Ongoing Devastation and the Impunity of Israel’s Actions
Since October 7, 2023, we have been witnessing a live-streamed genocide unfold in Gaza, Palestine, broadcasted across social media platforms. Every day, billions of people around the world wake up to harrowing images of mass destruction—children suffering from severe burns that cover their entire bodies, individuals enduring double and quadruple amputations, widespread starvation, and torture. The forced displacement of entire communities is palpable, along with the targeting and killing of journalists, first responders, aid workers, UN personnel, and medical professionals.
The world has become a reluctant spectator to this ongoing tragedy, characterized by alarming levels of devastation and human suffering. For over a year, we have also witnessed the disturbing inaction of the international community, which has failed to intervene effectively and stop Israel's brutal attacks on civilians in Gaza. These assaults indiscriminately strike innocent men, women, children, and even infants, revealing a crisis that demands urgent global attention and accountability.
Despite the alarming scale of the violence and the profound humanitarian crisis, Israel has largely evaded accountability for its actions. While some nations have indeed taken meaningful steps to address the situation, the predominant response from the international community has been inadequate, allowing Israel to commit one atrocity after another with alarming frequency. As a result, it is becoming increasingly difficult to identify a principle of International Humanitarian Law that Israel has not breached. This raises a crucial question: Why is Israel permitted to operate with such impunity?
Israel's National Laws
The legal framework in Israel plays a significant role in facilitating an environment where violence against Palestinians is normalized, overlooked, and even endorsed. While western media often highlights the actions of ultra-religious conservatives as a driving force behind land grabs and acts of terror, it is imperative to examine the systemic implications of Israel's national laws that actively perpetuate these injustices.
Central to this discussion is the various laws that favor Jewish citizens while discriminating against Palestinians. One such law is the "Law of Return", enacted in 1950, which grants all Jews worldwide the right to immigrate to Israel and gain citizenship. In stark contrast, Palestinians who were displaced during the establishment of Israel in 1948, and their descendants, are often denied the right to return to their homes. This fundamental disparity enshrined in law contributes to the ongoing disenfranchisement of Palestinian people.
Furthermore, the "Absentees’ Property Law" of 1950 allowed the State of Israel to seize property belonging to Palestinians who fled or were expelled during the Arab-Israeli conflict, effectively denying them any legal recourse to reclaim their homes and lands. This legislation reinforces the systematic appropriation of Palestinian territory and undermines their ancestral rights.
The ongoing issue of checkpoints and movement restrictions is governed by a series of military orders, which are applied predominantly in the West Bank. For instance, the "Order Regarding Security Provisions" empowers the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to impose arbitrary movement restrictions on Palestinians, often without just cause. This not only limits their freedom of movement but also isolates communities, creates economic hardships, and increases tensions within the region.
The military laws imposed on Palestinians in the occupied territories since the birth of the occupation impose a dual legal system where Israeli settlers are subject to civilian law, while Palestinians are governed by a series of military regulations that severely restrict their rights. These laws allow for arbitrary detention, enabling Israeli authorities to arrest Palestinians without trial or evidence, often citing vague security concerns. Detained individuals frequently face a lack of legal representation, prolonged detention periods, and inhumane treatment, contributing to a climate of fear and oppression within the Palestinian community. The impact of these laws extends beyond immediate repercussions, perpetuating systemic injustice and undermining efforts toward peace and reconciliation.
Since October 7, 2023, there has been a notable increase in reports of judicial killings in the context of the ongoing conflict in Israel and the Palestinian territories. Judicial killings, often characterized by extrajudicial executions or targeted killings without due process, have raised significant human rights concerns and garnered international attention. Numerous reports indicate that following the escalation of violence that began on October 7, Israeli security forces have implemented a more aggressive military strategy in both Gaza and the West Bank. This shift has reportedly led to a higher number of individuals being killed during confrontations with security personnel, often under the justification of counter-terrorism operations. Human Rights Watch has documented numerous instances where individuals believed to be associated with militant groups have been targeted.
In Gaza, the ongoing military operations have also led to a dramatic increase in civilian casualties, with reports indicating that Israeli airstrikes have claimed numerous lives, including those of purported militants. The death toll among civilians has surged, leading human rights organizations to call for accountability and a reevaluation of military tactics being employed.
Terrorist Discourse and the Legal System
The Terrorist Label
In the aftermath of the 2001 September 11th attacks a significant shift occurred in the way terrorism is discussed and understood. Countries around the world began to prioritize security policies, increasing civilian surveillance in the name of public safety. The connection between terrorism and the concept of evil became so pronounced that it transformed into a powerful ideological label used to delegitimize entire groups of people.
Contrary to the treatment of criminals, enemy soldiers, or prisoners of war, individuals labeled as terrorists are often seen as undeserving of fundamental legal rights. They are frequently denied due process and the presumption of innocence, which are cornerstones of a fair legal system. The application of the terrorist label creates a troubling environment where basic human rights can be suspended, allowing governments to justify actions that far exceed legal boundaries.
For instance, this dynamic is evident in Israel's use of the term "terrorist" when discussing Gaza and the Palestinian resistance. By framing the situation in this manner, Israel not only rationalizes military actions but also undermines the legal protections that would typically apply to those caught in the conflict. This rhetoric serves to further entrench the divide between perceived enemies and the state, enabling violations of rights that would typically be unacceptable in civil society.
Thus, the narrative surrounding terrorism impacts not only the individuals labeled as such but also the broader legal principles that govern human rights and justice in conflict situations.
The Human Shields Label
Israel frequently employs the concept of " human shields" to explain civilian casualties, particularly when it is challenging to label those killed or injured civilians as part of a terrorist group. This terminology is not only dehumanizing but also serves to desensitize the global community to the deaths of innocent individuals. By framing the narrative in this way, it shifts the responsibility of casualties onto Palestinians themselves, suggesting that they are somehow to blame for the violence inflicted upon them. This victim-blaming mentality allows Israeli citizens to distance themselves emotionally from Palestinian suffering, effectively insulating them from feelings of guilt or compassion.
The rhetoric surrounding human shields not only influences public perception but also shapes political and judicial policies regarding Palestinians in Israel. For instance, after Hamas was elected to govern Gaza in 2008, the entire region was labeled as "hostile territory". This categorization has profound implications, as it justifies a range of military actions and legal measures against the entire population, further entrenching the cycle of violence and suffering for Palestinian people. In this context, the discourse surrounding human shields becomes a powerful tool for maintaining the status quo, perpetuating a narrative that undermines the humanity and rights of those living under an illegal military occupation.
Labeling an entire population as terrorists and human shields not only dehumanizes individuals but also creates a framework for collective punishment. This terminology implies that all members of that population—regardless of age, gender, or personal beliefs—are complicit in the alleged actions of a few. Consequently, such broad categorization justifies punitive measures that target civilian populations, leading to systematic violations of human rights.
When civilians are portrayed as terrorists, military and political actors may rationalize violent responses that ignore the principles of distinction and proportionality in armed conflict. This approach can escalate into policies and military strategies that indiscriminately affect innocent lives, resulting in mass casualties, destruction of property, and disruptions of essential services. This creates an environment where the suffering of civilians is seen as acceptable collateral damage, thereby normalizing collective punishment.
Collective punishment violates international humanitarian law and can be seen as a form of genocide when it is carried out with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. By systematically targeting an entire population based on the actions or alleged affiliations of a few, the state or occupying power not only violates the rights of those individuals but also actively pursues a course of action that can lead to the eradication of that group in pursuit of political or military objectives.
Furthermore, labeling an entire population in such a manner engenders a cycle of violence and retaliation. Victims of collective punishment may respond with resentment or armed resistance, feeding into the very narrative that justifies their mistreatment. This cycle stifles peace efforts and perpetuates conflict, leading to further justification of brutal tactics against civilians.
In summary, labeling a population as terrorists and human shields creates a dangerous precedent that undermines human rights, fosters collective punishment, and can ultimately contribute to acts of genocide. It highlights the urgent need for accountability and calls for a re-examination of how language and narrative shape our understanding of conflict and its consequences on innocent lives.
The Judiciary and the Law
In 2003, Israel revised its military doctrine to prioritize the safety of its own personnel over the protection of enemy civilians. This change increased the potential for collateral damage and expanded the circumstances under which Israeli soldiers could target civilians deemed to pose a threat to their safety.
Under this doctrine, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants has blurred. Any Palestinian accused of using weapons, resisting occupation, or building paramilitary infrastructure is considered a combatant, forfeiting civilian protections indefinitely. To regain these protections, Palestinians must prove they are non-combatants—a standard difficult to meet, as the Israeli justice system often discounts Palestinian evidence and testimony.
This policy has fostered a culture of impunity within the Israeli military, where soldiers are rarely disciplined for civilian casualties. During the Great March of Return, for example, Razan Al-Najjar, a medic, approached the Gaza security fence with her hands raised and wearing a white jacket to aid a wounded man. She was shot in the chest and killed by an Israeli soldier. Israel defended her killing by claiming she was acting as a Hamas human shield. This reflects Israel’s broader stance, which some describe as a doctrine of disproportionality against Palestinians.
Support of Western Allies
The Israeli judiciary has also embraced this doctrine of disproportionality. In 2008, the Israeli courts upheld the government's classification of Gaza as an “enemy population” emphasizing security needs over civilian welfare. This ruling reduced Israel's obligations as an occupying power, requiring it to only meet the basic humanitarian needs of Gazans. The courts have interpreted this as providing only the minimum resources necessary for survival. For instance, the import of fresh Israeli meat into Gaza has been denied on security grounds. Similarly, petitions from Gazans seeking to study in the West Bank or enter Israel for medical treatment are frequently denied, with the court prioritizing potential security concerns over personal freedoms.
The reality is that the Western world—primarily the United States, Canada, and Western Europe—has its own history of ethnic cleansing and brutal colonialism, often overlooked when it speaks on human rights or international law. Although the Genocide Convention was signed by these countries and Israel after the Holocaust, it has never addressed the genocides committed by the United States and Canada against Indigenous peoples or by Germany against the Herero people in Namibia. When the Genocide Convention was signed, France still occupied Algeria. Historically, Zionism aimed to establish a European civilized outpost in what was viewed as the undeveloped world. Selective application of international law, then, can make it a tool for the powerful to either punish or shield nations as they choose.
The United States is Israel’s strongest ally and has blocked many attempts to hold Israel accountable to international law. It has used its Security Council veto over 40 times to prevent resolutions condemning or criticizing Israel’s actions, especially concerning military operations, occupation, and settlement building. Despite international law, the U.S. moved its Israeli embassy to Jerusalem. The near certainty of a U.S. veto at the Security Council has emboldened Israel to the extent that it has passed national laws restricting UN organizations and barring UN investigators and the ICC prosecutor from entering Gaza to conduct war crimes investigations.
Moreover, U.S. support, including financial aid and military resources, is critical to Israel’s ongoing actions in Gaza. Without U.S. backing, Israel’s military operations would be far less feasible. The Biden administration has faced criticism for bypassing Congress in its ongoing support for Israel, providing arms and funding amid reports of human rights violations in Gaza. This action has raised concerns among lawmakers and human rights advocates who argue that such military assistance contributes to the continuation of violence against Palestinian civilians. By circumventing the legislative process, the administration's decisions effectively prioritize immediate strategic interests over accountability and human rights concerns, further complicating the quest for peace in the region.
Military Aid for Israel
This list outlines the significant military assistance that the U.S. government has provided to Israel during the designated timeframe, reflecting ongoing strategic and defense cooperation between the two nations. Click here for more information
List of Weapons and Financial Aid Sent by the U.S. to Israel (7 October 2024 until October 2024)
Unites States of America
Financial assistance $17.9 billion (plus approximately $4.86 billion in U.S. military operations in the region)
Munitions, from artillery shells to 2,000-pound bunker-busters and precision-guided bombs
Training and intelligence support
F-35 fighter jets (quantity not publicly specified)
Air-to-ground munitions including GBU-31 JDAMs (Joint Direct Attack Munitions)
Precision-guided munitions and laser-guided bombs
Iron Dome missile defense system components, including interceptor missiles
Patriot missile battery parts and upgrades
Enhanced surveillance and reconnaissance drones
Military transport aircraft such as C-130s or similar types
Large quantities of small arms, including rifles and ammunition
Communication equipment and defensive systems (e.g., cybersecurity tools)
Ongoing logistical support for operations, maintenance, and training related to U.S.-provided military equipment
2. Germany
Arms exports to Israel worth 326.5 million euros including military equipment and war weapons
Two IAI Heron TP type UAVs of the German Army ,10,000 tank shells
Authorized $100 million in military exports
Components of air defense systems and communication equipment. included 3,000 portable anti-tank weapons and 500,000 rounds of ammunition for automatic or semi-automatic firearms (pre Oct 7th 2023)
3. United Kingdom UK has suspend 30 arms export licences (not an arms embargo)
Two Royal Navy supports ships, 100 Royal Marines, surveillance aircraft and UK industry contributions to F-35 combat aircraft
Arms sales (various types of weaponry and components)
4. France
100,000 rounds of machine gun ammunition
R&D collaborations on defense technologies
5. Canada
Trudeau government approved at least $21 million in new licenses for military exports. Products sold include bombs, torpedoes, rockets, other explosive devices and charges, and related equipment and accessories
In August 2024, the United States agreed to a $20 billion arms sale to Israel, which included $60 million worth of Canadian-manufactured munitions
Training and joint exercises
6. Italy
Exported €2.1 million ($2.30 million) in weaponry and ammunition to Israel
7. Netherlands
$305 million export deal for artillery rocket systems from Israel's Elbit Systems
Export of F-35 parts (Haulted by a Dutch Court)
The Netherlands picked Israeli firm Rafael Advanced Defense Systems to supply an upgrade for the country’s more than 200 medium-range anti-tank missile launchers that will boost combat range, for an investment of as much as €250 million ($277 million)
8. Australia (all 66 defense-related export permits for Israel that were approved prior to the Gaza conflict are now under review)
Military equipment (various defense systems and technology)
The Military Industrial Complex
President Eisenhower first coined the term Military Industrial Complex to describe the potential influence of defense contractors and weapons manufacturers on government policy. These privately owned companies lobby the U.S. government for increased military spending and foreign policies that favor military intervention.
Wars not only increase the demand for weapons but also drive innovations in military technology. Many shareholders and executives of defense contractors and weapons manufacturers are also politicians, which gives them the power to influence foreign policy. There is a clear connection between both direct and indirect U.S. military interventions and the rising shares of military industries, resulting in certain individuals profiting from these conflicts.
Ultimately, it is financially beneficial for the U.S. to continue its support for Israel. This support not only protects the defense supply chain but also allows Israel to "battle test" new weapons on the Palestinian people, which leads to these weapons being sold at a premium.
List of U.S. Weapons Manufacturers and Their Profits in 2023
This list highlights some of the leading manufacturers in the U.S. defense sector, along with their reported profits for 2023, showcasing the significant financial impact of the weapons industry:
Lockheed Martin
Profits: $17 billion
Raytheon Technologies
Profits: $8.5 billion
Northrop Grumman
Profits: $7.5 billion
Boeing Defense, Space & Security
Profits: $4.2 billion
General Dynamics
Profits: $3.1 billion
L3Harris Technologies
Profits: $1.9 billion
Huntington Ingalls Industries
Profits: $1.6 billion
Textron
Profits: $1.4 billion
SAIC
Profits: $850 million
Leonardo DRS
Profits: $712 million
The Role of Media
Media censorship surrounding the ongoing conflict in Gaza plays a significant role in enabling impunity for Israel and its actions. By limiting the information that reaches the global audience, the extent and severity of the atrocities committed against Palestinians can be obscured or minimized. This lack of transparency serves several functions in maintaining the status quo.
First, when news coverage is restricted, public awareness of human rights violations diminishes. The international community often relies on media outlets to inform them of conflicts and abuses. If reports of violence, displacement, and civilian casualties are suppressed, it becomes easier for governments and organizations to ignore or downplay these issues. The absence of robust reporting leads to weakened calls for accountability and justice.
Second, censorship can create a misleading narrative that frames the conflict in a manner that absolves Israel of responsibility. By controlling the narrative, those in power can focus on justifications for military actions, portraying them as necessary for security while overlooking the humanitarian implications. This misrepresentation allows Israel to continue its operations without facing significant scrutiny or consequences.
Additionally, media censorship enables a culture of impunity. When violations go unreported, there are fewer repercussions for those who commit them. This lack of accountability emboldens actors within the Israeli military and government to pursue aggressive strategies, believing that their actions will remain unchecked. In turn, this perpetuates a cycle of violence, where the consequences of actions are removed from the public eye, allowing further atrocities to occur without fear of backlash.
Lastly, the role of social media platforms in either perpetuating or combating censorship cannot be overlooked. While these platforms can serve as vital channels for sharing unfiltered accounts of the situation on the ground, they also face pressures to conform to governmental narratives. Instances of content removal or de-platforming can stifle voices that challenge censorship, leading to further erosion of public discourse around the conflict.
In conclusion, media censorship is not merely a mechanism for controlling information; it is a powerful tool that contributes to the impunity of those committing atrocities in Gaza. By minimizing awareness and facilitating a one-sided narrative, it hinders the pursuit of justice and accountability for the victims of human rights violations. The international community must advocate for open dialogue and transparency to address the ongoing crisis effectively and hold accountable those responsible for war crimes.
The Rise of the People
Despite challenges, countries in the Global South are taking meaningful action to stand with Palestinians and end Israeli impunity by applying International Law uniformly. Nations within the Global South have enacted sanctions against Israel and have not hesitated to express their criticism. Palestine represents not only a struggle for Palestinian freedom but also a confrontation with Western hegemony, exposing the hypocrisy inherent in liberal beliefs. People are recognizing their own power—whether it is through organizing for political change, protesting policies, or exercising economic influence—and are utilizing these capacities to undermine the systems that perpetuate Israel’s impunity.