Gaza flotilla blind to Hamas

[bigross86]

What about Mathilde Redmant, deputy director for the International Committee of the Red Cross, who declared in April that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza? That would mean that even according to the source you brought, the blockade is now legal

[Parihaka]

The Security Council isn't a judiciary, it is, at most, and only at times, a quasi-judicial body. With respect, it is simply false to say something is legal until it has been declared illegal by the UNSC. If you believe that the blockade is legal, cite a higher independent legal opinion. If it is just your opinion, that's fine.

If the Security Council itself isn't judiciary and therefore cannot declare what is or not legal under 'international law', what then does that do to your claims that an opinion of a subset of the UN can declare Israels actions illegal?

[zraver]

A primary code is a set of lws that does not stand below any othet set of laws. The LOAC which is well over100 years oldanswer only to newer LOAC treaties. When a violation of the LOAC is alledged and found to be reasonable war crimes tribunals are set up... Hauge, Nuremburg, Tokyo etc.

Please read article 51 of the UN charter, it is very clear that nothin trumps a states right of self defense. Isreal can invoke said right since Hamas declared war on her.

[Dubitante]

What about Mathilde Redmant, deputy director for the International Committee of the Red Cross, who declared in April that there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza? That would mean that even according to the source you brought, the blockade is now legal

The term "humanitarian crisis" is a sound bite. To render a blockade illegal, the humanitarian impact need only be disproportionate to the concrete military advantage gained.

We know from the Red Cross' most recent update that:

- a majority of Gazans are food insecure and rely on aid.
- Gaza’s fishermen are limited to fishing within 3 miles of the shore, in a stretch of water heavily contaminated with raw sewage. (Incidentally this raw sewage also contaminates Gazas “nice beach” as described by Ms. de Riedmatten)
- We know that 35% of agricultural land is off limits to farmers, unless they wish to find death at the hands of the IDF, and this doesn’t take into account agricultural land rendered inoperable as a result of the Gaza Massacre.
- We know that 90% of drinking water extracted from the aquifer is brackish and fail’s to meet the WHO’s standard for drinking water.

Telling a fisherman that there isn't a humanitarian crisis isn't going to fill his boat with fish is it?

With regards to the quotes published by the IDF, it was particularly interesting. As it happens, I spoke the the ICRC in Jerusalem about it. They were pretty cagey and I never got to the nuts and bolts of why the quotes were at odds with the ICRC's position. Also interestingly, Ms. de Riedmatten published a "clarification" here.

We also know from the Palestine papers that...

“As part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to (U.S. embassy economic officers) on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge,” whilst keeping the Gazan economy “functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis”.

[Dubitante]

If the Security Council itself isn't judiciary and therefore cannot declare what is or not legal under 'international law', what then does that do to your claims that an opinion of a subset of the UN can declare Israels actions illegal?

The UN Security Council is just one organ of the UN. It is quasi-judicial in nature. At least at times. I'm trying to think of a good resource to direct you on this. Maybe here?

The UNSC can interpret law, it can enforce law, and it can create law. The Mission regarding the flotilla was commissioned by another organ of the UN, and comprised of eminent legal experts, people perfectly qualified to interpret the law.

As I said before, if you have a higher, independent legal analysis, I'll happily read it.

[bigross86]

But if there is no humanitarian crisis, even according to the IDF's plans, what's the problem.

Moreover, looking at San Remo, Israel fulfills it's obligation by sending in hundreds of tons of foodstuffs and medicine. Doesn't make a difference if people need to rely on aid, they are still getting their food

[Dubitante]

A primary code is a set of lws that does not stand below any othet set of laws. The LOAC which is well over100 years oldanswer only to newer LOAC treaties. When a violation of the LOAC is alledged and found to be reasonable war crimes tribunals are set up... Hauge, Nuremburg, Tokyo etc.

Can you cite something to back that up?

Please read article 51 of the UN charter, it is very clear that nothin trumps a states right of self defense. Isreal can invoke said right since Hamas declared war on her.

I will direct you to the following sources:

- The Chatham House Principles of International Law on the Use of Force in Self-Defence, 55 Int’l & Comp. Law Quart. 963 (2006).
- Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, 2004 I.C.J. 136, at 194, para. 139.

They reiterate the same analysis and conclusion, namely:

unless an attack is directed from outside territory under the control of the defending State, the question of self-defence in the sense of Article 51 does not normally arise.

As belligerent occupier of Palestine, it is under Israel's effective control. This applies to The West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. As such, Israel cannot invoke Article 51 as any attack from the Palestinian side has come from an area under its control.

[Parihaka]

The UN Security Council is just one organ of the UN. It is quasi-judicial in nature. .

You specifically stated Israels actions were illegal under international law. The only body capable of determining that is the UNSC and they have not done so. You or any other individual or body may personally regard Israels as illegal but that can only be opinion unless or until the UNSC rules.

[Dubitante]

Moreover, looking at San Remo, Israel fulfills it's obligation by sending in hundreds of tons of foodstuffs and medicine. Doesn't make a difference if people need to rely on aid, they are still getting their food

Israel lets in a tiny fraction of what is required. It's indefensible.

[bigross86]

And yet, there is apparently enough for people to survive, even if they are dependent on aid, according to your own words

[Dubitante]

You specifically stated Israels actions were illegal under international law. The only body capable of determining that is the UNSC and they have not done so.

Again, simply untrue. Unless you can back that up with a citation.

The UN has many different organs. The ICJ for example, is the primary judicial organ of the UN, and would be perfectly capable of determining the legality of the blockade. And again, you may have performed your own legal analysis and concluded that the legal experts tasked by the UN were wrong, and that's fine. You may have read a higher legal opinion, and if so, please share it.

[Dubitante]

And yet, there is apparently enough for people to survive, even if they are dependent on aid, according to your own words

People aren't required to be starving, that isn't the legal test. The legal test is whether or not the humanitarian consequences outweigh the concrete military advantage. The expert panel looked at the facts, looked at the law and gave their interpretation of it.

[Parihaka]

Again, simply untrue. Unless you can back that up with a citation.

Sure
Charter of the United Nations: Chapter V: The Security Council
UN Security Council: Members
UN Security Council: Background

Specifically

Article 24
In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United Nations, its Members confer on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and agree that in carrying out its duties under this responsibility the Security Council acts on their behalf.

Next.

The ICJ for example, is the primary judicial organ of the UN, and would be perfectly capable of determining the legality of the blockade.

Show me where the ICJ has ruled against Israels actions.

[Dubitante]

Sure...Specifically...Next.

I asked you to back up your assertion the the UNSC and only the UNSC was competent to declare the blockade illegal. I'm not sure what you were trying to prove with your citation, but it was not what I asked.

Show me where the ICJ has ruled against Israels actions.

On the blockade? I never claimed it had, I was merely pointing out that the ICJ would be competent to declare it illegal if asked. Just as the UNHRC was competent to put together a fact finding mission to establish the facts and legal implications of the assault on the flotilla.

[bigross86]

The UNHRC is a farce.

HRC keeps clause dedicated to Israel - Israel News, Ynetnews