An analysis published by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz warned that tightening the Israeli siege on the residents of the Gaza Strip and skimping on allowing aid to enter would place the occupying state in a legal dilemma, and would make it contingent on the possibility of continuing the fighting without it being considered “war crimes” on the amount of supplies entering the population.
It indicates the humanitarian crisis that the residents of the Gaza Strip are experiencing amidst the lack of basic necessities of life, as some residents collect herbs to prepare meals, and mothers are unable to breastfeed their children due to their weakness. These are scenes that are published by the Arab and international media, without being addressed by the Israeli media, according to the analysis.
The analysis stated that the situation can be summarized in one shocking sentence said by the chief economist of the United Nations Food Programme, Arif Hussein, which is: “The complexity, scale and speed of the crisis are unprecedented.”
A reason to celebrate
But in the eyes of a fair number of Israelis, including senior officials, journalists and influential people, this is a reason for celebration, and any easing of the blockade and any increase in the number of aid trucks to Gaza is harmful to the war effort, according to them.
In this context, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, recently appointed Sigrid Kaag to the position of the United Nations Chief Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs and Reconstruction in Gaza. Her appointment sparked a storm of protests because Kaag is “pro-Palestinian” and married to former Palestinian minister Anis Al-Qaq (who was also the Palestinian ambassador). In Switzerland), supporters of “creating famine in Gaza” believe that this is enough to prove once again that the United Nations is biased, according to the analysis.
Kaag’s appointment followed a watered-down Security Council resolution last week calling on Israel to increase humanitarian aid and allow aid to reach Gaza more quickly and effectively.
But the analysis did not care about the person supervising the efforts, representing the United Nations, as long as the quantities arriving in Gaza meet about 10% of the needs, after Israel allowed trucks to enter the Strip through the Kerem Shalom crossing, doubling their number from 100 to 190 trucks per day. .
According to the United Nations Food Programme, the absolute majority of the Gaza Strip’s population of more than two million people suffer from food insecurity, and if there is no radical change in the scope of aid by next February, about half of it will fall to the lowest level in the insecurity classification. food, which means an acute emergency.
Confusing issue
According to the analysis, these numbers related to hunger and poverty, especially if the source is Palestinian, constitute a confusing, ambiguous and often controversial issue, but if the Israeli government is not affected by the conditions prevailing in Gaza, it should be concerned about the legal consequences that may result from These circumstances, according to the analysis.
In this context, the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs this week asked the United Nations to officially declare that there is a famine in Gaza that endangers the lives of the population, and to hold Israel responsible for “genocide by starvation,” which means that Israel is committing a war crime.
The Geneva Convention prohibits starvation of a population as a means of war. It is prohibited to attack, destroy, or render unusable the means of survival of a civilian population, including food products, agricultural areas, drinking water, and irrigation facilities. In 1998, the International Criminal Court described the use of starvation as a method of war in international conflicts. It is a war crime.
In 2019, according to the analysis, two additional protocols were added that define war crimes to include the use of hunger in non-international conflicts, such as those between governments and rebel groups. These provisions have led to the emergence of many conflicting legal interpretations. A major point of contention has been how to prove that shortages of food, water and medicine are a deliberate policy, rather than an inevitable consequence of war, while one of the most plausible explanations is that the actions of the party causing the hunger are evidence of intent, even if not explicitly stated.
In the case of Israel – according to the analysis – it announced at the beginning of the war that it would prevent the entry of any products into Gaza, and its Defense Minister Yoav Galant said: “There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is forbidden. We are fighting human animals, and we will act accordingly.”
Then, Israel bombed the Rafah crossing, which was supposed to be a crossing point for goods to enter the Strip. Activists in Gaza reported in the first month of fighting that about 30 food warehouses were bombed. Israel later restored water supplies, but most of Gaza’s wells were no longer Useless due to lack of fuel.
Hundreds of grocery stores have been bombed and destroyed, while supply chains have stopped working. Despite the fact that Israel declared parts of southern Gaza (mainly Rafah) “safe zones,” in reality they are not. It is very difficult to deliver basic foodstuffs to the region, according to the analysis, which asked: “Does this provide sufficient evidence that Israel is deliberately starving Gaza as an illegal means of waging its war?”
Red lines
In 2009, Uri Blau and Yotam Feldman reported in Haaretz that there was a “red lines” document drawn up when Ehud Olmert was prime minister, and its purpose was to define what should be allowed into Gaza after the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) took control of it, but it basically It was determining what should be prevented, according to the analysis.
After a long legal struggle initiated by the non-governmental organization (Gisha) that year, the courts allowed the document to be issued to the public, and Amira Hass published the full content of the document in the Haaretz newspaper in 2012, and it is – according to the analysis – an amazing accounting document, as the daily minimum calories were calculated. The amount of thermal energy that Israel must allow into Gaza without risking famine, according to a precise measure, and then extrapolating weekly and monthly data, which then determines the number of aid trucks that must be allowed in.
According to the data obtained, the Strip’s need is limited to 170.4 trucks to reach Gaza per day, a number that can be reduced by 68.6 trucks due to local agricultural production, and taking into account the needs of children under two years of age, the final number reached 101.8 trucks per day.
After two weeks of the complete siege imposed on Gaza at the beginning of the current war, Israel began allowing the entry of 20 trucks daily (compared to about 500 before the war), and the number increased to 100 recently, then doubled after intense pressure from Washington. Apparently, calculations for 2009 show that Israel has now reached the famine prevention threshold that was set in 2007, according to the analysis.
But when the “calorie table” was placed in the “red lines” document – which the analysis considered an eternal disgrace – about 1.4 million people were living in the Gaza Strip, while their number today is estimated at about 2.2 million people, in addition to the complete disappearance of production. Local food, agricultural or other.
According to the analysis, the occupation uses 2007 estimates to calculate the amount of food allowed to enter today.
Economic war
In the past, Israel claimed that it had the right to wage an “economic war” against its enemies, and today it asserts that the blockade on Gaza aims to deprive the real enemy (Hamas) of a means of survival, and thus help in its destruction, but when it seriously restricts the entry of food Overall, it classifies the entire population as enemies, and by doing so, Israel itself undermines its own claims, according to the analysis.
The analysis stated that Israel is not the only country that takes such strict measures, recalling from the memory of the world wars the “starvation plan” developed by Hitler, which caused the death of about 4.2 million Soviet citizens during World War II, and what Pol Pot (the Cambodian dictator) did – according to Analysis – who used mass starvation as part of his plan to ruralize his country in 1945. The United States also used “Operation Starvation” – according to the code name – when Admiral Chester Nimitz ordered the planting of thousands of naval mines around its ports to prevent the entry of food.
The analysis indicated that such comparisons, which are supposed to present similar circumstances and lead to identical conclusions, are not useful in the case of Israel, and should not justify creating a famine, even if it is not intended to target the population in Gaza.
According to the analysis, Israel may not care about the moral aspects of its methods of combat, including starvation, but as a party waging a war that is expected to last for a long time, it must constantly study the degree of legitimacy that the war enjoys in the international community, especially in the American arena.
The analysis concluded by noting that at the moment when US President Joe Biden made it clear that he justifies and supports the war, as long as it does not violate the laws of war, he decided that the humanitarian aspect would be an integral part of strategic considerations, thus drawing the limits of the legitimacy that Israel can enjoy.
According to the analysis, and in the language of accounting (precise numbers) that the drafters of the “Red Lines” document loved 16 years ago, the number of calories entering the Strip will determine the number of days that Israel can continue fighting without being considered a state committing war crimes..