If we, as in our national UK government, are both supporting Israel and calling for safe zones for Gazan refugees - we could offer to take in refugees. But with the current Home Secretary, that seems unlikely. It is possible the Scottish government might offer though.
Years ago I met a man in the UK. He applied for asylum as a refugee from Gaza. In their infinite wisdom, the UK authorities had *both* determined that he wasn't to be given refugee status but also that he was a person without a state so there was nowhere for him to return to.
They made it clear that they didn't want him to stay, refused to let him work or claim any government assistance. But they found a way to bury the paperwork so they didn't have to remove him either. A totally Kafkaesque situation.
Unless something has changed, the last I read Egypt is refusing to allow refugees from Gaza to cross its border. Sisi knows that this is going to be a messy and brutal war and does not want to become embroiled in it any more than he needs to. The military regime in Egypt does not want refugee camps on its territory, potentially for decades, that could potentially be a hotbed for militant activity, as they have been in Lebanon. The Sinai Peninsula is already a center for militant groups, including ones that have pledged loyalty to ISIL, that have launched terror attacks against Coptic Christians, tourists, and Sufi Muslims in Egypt. Furthermore, the arch-nemesis of the military regime in Egypt is the Muslim Brotherhood - Sisi came to power after the army brutally overthrew an elected government with Muslim Brotherhood ties. The Muslim Brotherhood has nonviolent and violent streams, but it is the ideological parent of Hamas - so Egypt is very worried that a Palestinian refugee camp in its borders could be a base of Brotherhood support.
Everything is changing so quickly, though, that I'm not sure what Egypt will ultimately decide to do.
This is from the Guardian's website some two hours ago:
Aid flights have been arriving in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula with relief supplies for Gaza, amid diplomatic efforts to open humanitarian corridors into the besieged Palestinian enclave.
The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said during a tour of the region that the US was seeking agreement on establishing aid routes and safe zones. But by Saturday night, there was still no agreement on how to bring aid to the 2 million Palestinians under bombardment...
One wonders how long the aid agencies will be forced to wait, before they can begin work. Presumably they will be allowed into Gaza, but the fleeing Gazans will not be allowed into Egypt?
This is from the Guardian's website some two hours ago:
Aid flights have been arriving in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula with relief supplies for Gaza, amid diplomatic efforts to open humanitarian corridors into the besieged Palestinian enclave.
The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said during a tour of the region that the US was seeking agreement on establishing aid routes and safe zones. But by Saturday night, there was still no agreement on how to bring aid to the 2 million Palestinians under bombardment...
One wonders how long the aid agencies will be forced to wait, before they can begin work. Presumably they will be allowed into Gaza, but the fleeing Gazans will not be allowed into Egypt?
I think all the discussions are about establishing corridors for aid to get into Gaza and for those with some kind of special status (such as American citizens) to get out. But I haven't heard any reports about Egypt being willing to allow ordinary Gazans to cross into Egypt. I'm assuming any potential "safe zone" must be somewhere inside Gaza. As I said though, events are happening rapidly and I might be wrong.
If we, as in our national UK government, are both supporting Israel and calling for safe zones for Gazan refugees - we could offer to take in refugees. But with the current Home Secretary, that seems unlikely. It is possible the Scottish government might offer though.
There doesn't seem to be a way people can escape in order to seek refuge.
It's alarming too how quickly the debate has shifted from denouncing violations of international law to pragmatic humanitarianism and international aid relief.
A fundamental of international law – at the heart of the Geneva Conventions – is a prohibition on collective punishment: making the civilian population pay the price for the acts of their leaders and armies. That prohibition has been eroded over the years with the blockade and bombardment of Gaza by the IDF so that a prolonged siege with basic human freedoms and rights curtailed came to seem normal or even acceptable. Now the threatened ground invasion and retaliation policies have made a mockery of what is supposed to be 'prior warnings' to the civilian population by ordering Palestinians in Gaza city to 'leave' within 24 hours when this is physically impossible for many and the refugees have nowhere to go. International attention has now shifted to the arrival of aid workers in a neighbouring country and the logistics of that..
Quite right, MaryLouise, people end up discussing the minutiae and ignore the preposterous Israeli demands to leave now. I notice that Sunak offered Israel unqualified support but didn't mention Gaza. The occupation is seen as a natural phenomenon, like gravity, and as you say, politicians debate aid, and whether Egypt will take refugees. Oppression is institutionalized.
Like it or not, nobody in this situation gives a monkeys about International Humanitarian law. Given that Hamas is not a state actor and Palestine isn't a state, they're not even bound by the Geneva conventions.
In the midst of insanity of war, the only recourse left is the International Committee of the Red Cross - and their remit is very narrow. Whether Israel will take any notice of them is anyone's guess.
I also note that the US is sailing some of their big warships closer to the area. Which presumably is to frighten off any escalation by Iran. But is also quite a scary moment, as you don't have to be very bright to see how this could quite easily escalate.
Meanwhile the European Council is focusing on the important stuff
“There is a major risk of migration and movements of a large number of people to neighbouring countries which already have a significant number of refugees on their territory. If not handled carefully, there is a risk of onward migratory waves to Europe,” he said.
My wife said something about karma, that the amorality with which you conduct your affairs, (including nation states), is then visited upon you. Oh for heaven's sake, that has been known for millennia, stop being sentimental.
Like it or not, nobody in this situation gives a monkeys about International Humanitarian law. Given that Hamas is not a state actor and Palestine isn't a state, they're not even bound by the Geneva conventions.
But Israel is. Then again Israel has been in violation of the Geneva Conventions since 1967. They don't give a rat's arse about international opinion -- or morality, if by that you mean caring about the morality of their actions -- as long as they got their sugar daddy the USA to pay the bills.
Like it or not, nobody in this situation gives a monkeys about International Humanitarian law. Given that Hamas is not a state actor and Palestine isn't a state, they're not even bound by the Geneva conventions.
The precedent of Nuremberg is that (theoretically at least) crimes against humanity are not dependant on being signed up to particular treaties. The Hamas leadership and those who participated in the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or an Israeli or Palestinian domestic prison. Netanyahu and his government, along with the soldiers carrying out the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or a Palestinian or Israeli domestic prison.
The question of whether Palestine is a state is up in the air, given that it is recognised by over 2/3 of UN member states, though I agree it lacks a legitimate government at present.
Good grief, Cleverley has actually informed Israel that they should be careful with civilians. What stupid liberal codswallop. (UK foreign secretary).
Could people not do ventriloquism for their opponents and sarcasm please? Its easily misunderstood and can raise the temperature unnecessarily.
Thanks!
Louise
Epiphanies Host
Now, there's a straight line between the failure of the Palestinian Authority to establish a fully functioning state, as envisioned by Oslo, and the emergence of Hamas. There is good reason to believe that Israel directly contributed to the emergence of Hamas *because* they had no interest in a Palestinian state.
Not just 'good reason to believe' but relatively well documented proof, including the testimony of many of those involved:
This continues to the present day where support for Hamas was seen by Netanyahu as a means of keeping the Palestinian's divided, as documented most recently by Haaretz https://archive.ph/sG9wo
"Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank."
Like it or not, nobody in this situation gives a monkeys about International Humanitarian law. Given that Hamas is not a state actor and Palestine isn't a state, they're not even bound by the Geneva conventions.
The precedent of Nuremberg is that (theoretically at least) crimes against humanity are not dependant on being signed up to particular treaties. The Hamas leadership and those who participated in the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or an Israeli or Palestinian domestic prison. Netanyahu and his government, along with the soldiers carrying out the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or a Palestinian or Israeli domestic prison.
The question of whether Palestine is a state is up in the air, given that it is recognised by over 2/3 of UN member states, though I agree it lacks a legitimate government at present.
I am not a lawyer, but the precedence from the Hague courts appears to be that only the weak ever get held to account. As the USA opts out, the chances are that the Israeli leadership will too.
Practically speaking, I highly doubt that any from Hamas will ever be held to account in an international court. I doubt they'd be taken alive to an Israeli court.
I don't know about the Israeli leadership but I doubt they'd be held to legal account for anything they choose to do in a war.
And that, basically, is why International Humanitarian Law is useless.
Like it or not, nobody in this situation gives a monkeys about International Humanitarian law. Given that Hamas is not a state actor and Palestine isn't a state, they're not even bound by the Geneva conventions.
The precedent of Nuremberg is that (theoretically at least) crimes against humanity are not dependant on being signed up to particular treaties. The Hamas leadership and those who participated in the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or an Israeli or Palestinian domestic prison. Netanyahu and his government, along with the soldiers carrying out the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or a Palestinian or Israeli domestic prison.
The question of whether Palestine is a state is up in the air, given that it is recognised by over 2/3 of UN member states, though I agree it lacks a legitimate government at present.
I am not a lawyer, but the precedence from the Hague courts appears to be that only the weak ever get held to account. As the USA opts out, the chances are that the Israeli leadership will too.
Practically speaking, I highly doubt that any from Hamas will ever be held to account in an international court. I doubt they'd be taken alive to an Israeli court.
I don't know about the Israeli leadership but I doubt they'd be held to legal account for anything they choose to do in a war.
And that, basically, is why International Humanitarian Law is useless.
I largely agree about the chances of anyone being held accountable. After all, Bush and Blair still walk free despite the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis on their hands. My point was simply that the Geneva Conventions are a bit of a red herring in terms of the crimes Hamas and Israel are committing.
There are reports of numerous pro-Palestinian demonstrations in the UK yesterday, the largest being in London, though AFAIK they were not noticeably pro-Hamas.
I haven't heard if anyone has yet been arrested and put in jail, as our Home Secretary has ordered. She says that even waving a Palestinian flag might be a criminal offence...
Alas, this Psalm verse seems especially inappropriate just now:
Psalm 46:9
He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; he burneth the chariot in the fire.
Interesting blog on Zelo Street, claiming that lsrael is losing the propaganda war. I've no idea if this is correct, but Tim Fenton often hits the mark. Sorry, no link, just Google.
In answer to my own earlier question, yes, the Hamas-Israeli conflict was mentioned in the prayers at Mass this morning, in the same petition as the war in Ukraine.
A salutary reminder of yet more evil and ghastliness going on just now, albeit somewhat under the radar as far as news outlets here are concerned - perhaps understandably.
Israel gets financial support from expatriates, and has a thriving tourist industry. Palestine has little to offer anyone at present. Politics being what it is, Israel is the one that will get more support unless there's a huge swathe of popular outcry and that not confined to the Middle East.
Egypt is very well aware that people have been born, grown old and died in the Lebanese refugee camps, and won't want to find itself in the same situation of having to support these people, and also attracting international attention and potential interference. Besides, taking in the refugees helps Israel to get rid of a problem and give itself more space.
There are no easy solutions at all to this unless both sides are prepared to back down, draw a line under the past and start co-existing equally in equally shared space, with full, equal rights, which is about as likely as the world moving to a decimal week.
"Law" has been replaced with "rules based order". Nobody references law anymore, only "rules" and if you remove the "s" from that word I think the true meaning emerges.
My only prayer for all sides is that they will all experience their best outcomes and that everyone on every side will receive that which they most need.
May the Almighty God of the Abrahamic traditions have mercy on all who invoke His name.
The OP asks how "we can discuss this"? What is there to discuss?
1. That Israel was invaded by Hamas terrorists who proceeded to multilate and butcher hundreds (numbers are still to be confirmed as more bodies are being found), and took back to Gaza to face pretty well certain death? What is there to discuss about this? It happened, it was an act of unspeakable barbarity, it was an invasion, the hostages are missing, the dead are there to be seen.
2. That the Israelis have declared their wish to punish those who invaded and perpetrated the atrocities? I cannot imagine any other sovereign state having to answer questions about a desire to punish those who invade their territory and massacre their citizens. The settlements destroyed are not on disputed land but within the bounds of Israel as agreed and ratified by the UN back in 1948. The vast majority of the people killed were non-combatants. What is unique about Israel that their entirely understandable (and natural) wish to avenge their slaughtered citizens is seen as unreasonable?
3. There are many voices raised saying that the Israeli government should negotiate: negotiate with whom? On what basis? Above all, how is it possible to negotiate with people from an organisation who (a) refuse to recognise the legitimacy of a sovereign state, and (b) hold as their raison d'etre the destruction not only of the sovereign state but the slaughter of every Jew on the planet?
I'd suggest that all the governments who allowed states to be full members of the UN while refusing to recognise the state of Israel - so that's virtually everyone - take a long, hard look at the monstrous situation they have been complicit in allowing to develop. And we all should question how it is that Iran is a full member of the UN while not just supporting but actively promoting not just the destruction of Israel but the annihilation of the Jewish people.
It is to be hoped that the Egyptians may allow common humanity to over-ride common sense vis-a-vis their own national security and reopen the Rafah crossings to allow people from Gaza to take refuge in the Sinai. However, that can only be a short term solution. Long term, the job is to get the run-of-the-mill Palestinians to accept that (a) Israel is a legitimate state, and (b) the Jews have a right to live there unharmed. Given there have been 75 years of young Palestinians being taught that neither of these two are valid viewpoints, I'd say the prospects, both short and long term, are bleak.
Cairo has said the expulsion of so many Palestinians from their homes would be in breach of international law, and a national security risk for Egypt that is liable to bankrupt the country’s ailing economy. Palestinians themselves, and other Arab states, fear refugees would never be allowed back to their homes.
Has Egypt actually said why, or is it just "no, not doing that"?
From the Guardian link:
Cairo has said the expulsion of so many Palestinians from their homes would be in breach of international law, and a national security risk for Egypt that is liable to bankrupt the country’s ailing economy.
Three reasons why, I suppose, although how valid they might be is another matter...
Quite. The expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza may well be a breach of international law, but that in itself doesn't prevent Egypt from at least making the desert available...
If water is again available in Southern Gaza, and the waiting aid agencies are allowed in, there may yet be some hope for at least some of the refugees.
(Apologies to @KoF for cross-posting - we are clearly looking at the same website!).
What is unique about Israel that their entirely understandable (and natural) wish to avenge their slaughtered citizens is seen as unreasonable?
3. There are many voices raised saying that the Israeli government should negotiate: negotiate with whom? On what basis? Above all, how is it possible to negotiate with people from an organisation who (a) refuse to recognise the legitimacy of a sovereign state, and (b) hold as their raison d'etre the destruction not only of the sovereign state but the slaughter of every Jew on the planet?
.
Have you completely forgotten the troubles in Northern Ireland ? You may have noticed, in the face of long term terrorism (despite some extremely dubious tactics by the British state) - it didn’t drive one community out as refugees to a neighbouring state or carpet bomb Ireland. This involved negotiating with terrorists.
(Let me state I am well aware of hundreds of years of absolutely foul oppression and violence by England and then Britain over centuries on the island of Ireland - but I am talking about the situation in the aftermath of Irish independence, somewhat more contemporaneous with the modern conflict in the Holy land.)
@TheOrganist, since you frame this in terms of punishment and revenge, and given that the vast majority of people being "punished" by the Israeli action are not Hamas fighters, how many innocent people is it acceptable to punish and take revenge on?
And if you consider punishment and revenge legitimate military aims (I don’t; self-defence is the legitimate one) then what punishment and revenge should Palestinians be entitled to mete out when settlers attack them? For being forced out of their homes in the first place during the Naqba? Talk of punishment and revenge in a military context is dangerous; it's part of what has got the region in the mess it's in in the first place.
This is justified, as the act of a sovereign state, is it?
Israeli leaders themselves leave little doubt. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the Israeli Defence Force, acknowledged. “Right now, one goal: Nakba!”, tweeted the Likud MP Ariel Kallner last week. “A Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of ’48.” The Nakba, Arabic for “catastrophe”, refers to the expulsion and flight of 700,000 Palestinians after the 1948 Palestine war and the founding of the state of Israel. “Gaza will eventually turn into a city of tents,” a security official told an Israeli reporter. “There will be no buildings.”
This is justified, as the act of a sovereign state, is it?
Israeli leaders themselves leave little doubt. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the Israeli Defence Force, acknowledged. “Right now, one goal: Nakba!”, tweeted the Likud MP Ariel Kallner last week. “A Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of ’48.” The Nakba, Arabic for “catastrophe”, refers to the expulsion and flight of 700,000 Palestinians after the 1948 Palestine war and the founding of the state of Israel. “Gaza will eventually turn into a city of tents,” a security official told an Israeli reporter. “There will be no buildings.”
Fuck that. And fuck anyone who agrees.
Would that be the same Nakba that Israel has repeatedly objected to the marking of, with help from the US?
This is justified, as the act of a sovereign state, is it?
Israeli leaders themselves leave little doubt. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the Israeli Defence Force, acknowledged. “Right now, one goal: Nakba!”, tweeted the Likud MP Ariel Kallner last week. “A Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of ’48.” The Nakba, Arabic for “catastrophe”, refers to the expulsion and flight of 700,000 Palestinians after the 1948 Palestine war and the founding of the state of Israel. “Gaza will eventually turn into a city of tents,” a security official told an Israeli reporter. “There will be no buildings.”
Fuck that. And fuck anyone who agrees.
Would that be the same Nakba that Israel has repeatedly objected to the marking of, with help from the US?
Let's stop pretending this is Goody Israel versus Baddy Palestinians. It’s not Goodies vs Baddies at all.
Oh it is, it's violent genocidal bastards on either side of the border crossing it to kill innocent people on the other because they're easier to get to than the other set of violent genocidal bastards. And the VGBs on either side have been encouraging each other because it's easier to rile up your base if your opponents are obviously VGBs, hence Likud and chums promoting Hamas over Fatah for decades.
This is justified, as the act of a sovereign state, is it?
Israeli leaders themselves leave little doubt. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the Israeli Defence Force, acknowledged. “Right now, one goal: Nakba!”, tweeted the Likud MP Ariel Kallner last week. “A Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of ’48.” The Nakba, Arabic for “catastrophe”, refers to the expulsion and flight of 700,000 Palestinians after the 1948 Palestine war and the founding of the state of Israel. “Gaza will eventually turn into a city of tents,” a security official told an Israeli reporter. “There will be no buildings.”
Fuck that. And fuck anyone who agrees.
Would that be the same Nakba that Israel has repeatedly objected to the marking of, with help from the US?
Let's stop pretending this is Goody Israel versus Baddy Palestinians. It’s not Goodies vs Baddies at all.
Oh it is, it's violent genocidal bastards on either side of the border crossing it to kill innocent people on the other because they're easier to get to than the other set of violent genocidal bastards. And the VGBs on either side have been encouraging each other because it's easier to rile up your base if your opponents are obviously VGBs, hence Likud and chums promoting Hamas over Fatah for decades.
Baddies versus baddies, but most of the actual violence being meted out to whoever is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I wonder what God (if such exists) thinks about it all? Jesus surely would have wept at the sight of mutilated children...whoever they are...
The officiant at Choral Evensong on BBC Radio 3 this afternoon (recorded last Wednesday) prayed for *the lands in which Our Lord spent his earthly life* (or words to that effect - note the plural), which seemed to me to be pretty even-handed.
Whether prayer is efficacious in this or any other such horrendous situation, I couldn't say.
In the long term, is there any mileage in a Good Friday style solution, where you have two states but you are a citizen of both or either as of right ?
Perhaps with Jerusalem run a as shared religious city Mini-state like the Vatican.
In the long term, is there any mileage in a Good Friday style solution, where you have two states but you are a citizen of both or either as of right ?
Perhaps with Jerusalem run a as shared religious city Mini-state like the Vatican.
It's not going to happen. Israel has no interest in, nor incentive to, share Jerusalem.
Comments
Years ago I met a man in the UK. He applied for asylum as a refugee from Gaza. In their infinite wisdom, the UK authorities had *both* determined that he wasn't to be given refugee status but also that he was a person without a state so there was nowhere for him to return to.
They made it clear that they didn't want him to stay, refused to let him work or claim any government assistance. But they found a way to bury the paperwork so they didn't have to remove him either. A totally Kafkaesque situation.
The logistical problems are incredibly complex, of course.
Everything is changing so quickly, though, that I'm not sure what Egypt will ultimately decide to do.
Aid flights have been arriving in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula with relief supplies for Gaza, amid diplomatic efforts to open humanitarian corridors into the besieged Palestinian enclave.
The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said during a tour of the region that the US was seeking agreement on establishing aid routes and safe zones. But by Saturday night, there was still no agreement on how to bring aid to the 2 million Palestinians under bombardment...
One wonders how long the aid agencies will be forced to wait, before they can begin work. Presumably they will be allowed into Gaza, but the fleeing Gazans will not be allowed into Egypt?
I think all the discussions are about establishing corridors for aid to get into Gaza and for those with some kind of special status (such as American citizens) to get out. But I haven't heard any reports about Egypt being willing to allow ordinary Gazans to cross into Egypt. I'm assuming any potential "safe zone" must be somewhere inside Gaza. As I said though, events are happening rapidly and I might be wrong.
As intended.
That's a kindness I'm unsure of them extending, given that they think Palestinians are animals.
A fundamental of international law – at the heart of the Geneva Conventions – is a prohibition on collective punishment: making the civilian population pay the price for the acts of their leaders and armies. That prohibition has been eroded over the years with the blockade and bombardment of Gaza by the IDF so that a prolonged siege with basic human freedoms and rights curtailed came to seem normal or even acceptable. Now the threatened ground invasion and retaliation policies have made a mockery of what is supposed to be 'prior warnings' to the civilian population by ordering Palestinians in Gaza city to 'leave' within 24 hours when this is physically impossible for many and the refugees have nowhere to go. International attention has now shifted to the arrival of aid workers in a neighbouring country and the logistics of that..
In the midst of insanity of war, the only recourse left is the International Committee of the Red Cross - and their remit is very narrow. Whether Israel will take any notice of them is anyone's guess.
I also note that the US is sailing some of their big warships closer to the area. Which presumably is to frighten off any escalation by Iran. But is also quite a scary moment, as you don't have to be very bright to see how this could quite easily escalate.
From the Guardian
But Israel is. Then again Israel has been in violation of the Geneva Conventions since 1967. They don't give a rat's arse about international opinion -- or morality, if by that you mean caring about the morality of their actions -- as long as they got their sugar daddy the USA to pay the bills.
The precedent of Nuremberg is that (theoretically at least) crimes against humanity are not dependant on being signed up to particular treaties. The Hamas leadership and those who participated in the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or an Israeli or Palestinian domestic prison. Netanyahu and his government, along with the soldiers carrying out the genocidal acts they ordered belong in prison, whether that's in the Hague or a Palestinian or Israeli domestic prison.
The question of whether Palestine is a state is up in the air, given that it is recognised by over 2/3 of UN member states, though I agree it lacks a legitimate government at present.
Could people not do ventriloquism for their opponents and sarcasm please? Its easily misunderstood and can raise the temperature unnecessarily.
Thanks!
Louise
Epiphanies Host
Not just 'good reason to believe' but relatively well documented proof, including the testimony of many of those involved:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090926212507/http:/online.wsj.com/article/SB123275572295011847.html
This continues to the present day where support for Hamas was seen by Netanyahu as a means of keeping the Palestinian's divided, as documented most recently by Haaretz https://archive.ph/sG9wo
"Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank."
I am not a lawyer, but the precedence from the Hague courts appears to be that only the weak ever get held to account. As the USA opts out, the chances are that the Israeli leadership will too.
Practically speaking, I highly doubt that any from Hamas will ever be held to account in an international court. I doubt they'd be taken alive to an Israeli court.
I don't know about the Israeli leadership but I doubt they'd be held to legal account for anything they choose to do in a war.
And that, basically, is why International Humanitarian Law is useless.
Which maybe suggests that they don't believe that there are going to be millions of desperate people at the Rafah crossing.
I largely agree about the chances of anyone being held accountable. After all, Bush and Blair still walk free despite the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis on their hands. My point was simply that the Geneva Conventions are a bit of a red herring in terms of the crimes Hamas and Israel are committing.
FWIW, FatherInCharge put *Pray for peace in the Holy Land* on his usual weekly pew-sheet.
I haven't heard if anyone has yet been arrested and put in jail, as our Home Secretary has ordered. She says that even waving a Palestinian flag might be a criminal offence...
Alas, this Psalm verse seems especially inappropriate just now:
Psalm 46:9
He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; he burneth the chariot in the fire.
A salutary reminder of yet more evil and ghastliness going on just now, albeit somewhat under the radar as far as news outlets here are concerned - perhaps understandably.
Egypt is very well aware that people have been born, grown old and died in the Lebanese refugee camps, and won't want to find itself in the same situation of having to support these people, and also attracting international attention and potential interference. Besides, taking in the refugees helps Israel to get rid of a problem and give itself more space.
There are no easy solutions at all to this unless both sides are prepared to back down, draw a line under the past and start co-existing equally in equally shared space, with full, equal rights, which is about as likely as the world moving to a decimal week.
My only prayer for all sides is that they will all experience their best outcomes and that everyone on every side will receive that which they most need.
May the Almighty God of the Abrahamic traditions have mercy on all who invoke His name.
AFF
The Guardian's latest report seems to indicate that Egypt is backing up that refusal by sending troops to Rafah:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/15/egypt-moves-troops-to-gaza-border-amid-fears-of-expulsion-of-palestinians
1. That Israel was invaded by Hamas terrorists who proceeded to multilate and butcher hundreds (numbers are still to be confirmed as more bodies are being found), and took back to Gaza to face pretty well certain death? What is there to discuss about this? It happened, it was an act of unspeakable barbarity, it was an invasion, the hostages are missing, the dead are there to be seen.
2. That the Israelis have declared their wish to punish those who invaded and perpetrated the atrocities? I cannot imagine any other sovereign state having to answer questions about a desire to punish those who invade their territory and massacre their citizens. The settlements destroyed are not on disputed land but within the bounds of Israel as agreed and ratified by the UN back in 1948. The vast majority of the people killed were non-combatants. What is unique about Israel that their entirely understandable (and natural) wish to avenge their slaughtered citizens is seen as unreasonable?
3. There are many voices raised saying that the Israeli government should negotiate: negotiate with whom? On what basis? Above all, how is it possible to negotiate with people from an organisation who (a) refuse to recognise the legitimacy of a sovereign state, and (b) hold as their raison d'etre the destruction not only of the sovereign state but the slaughter of every Jew on the planet?
I'd suggest that all the governments who allowed states to be full members of the UN while refusing to recognise the state of Israel - so that's virtually everyone - take a long, hard look at the monstrous situation they have been complicit in allowing to develop. And we all should question how it is that Iran is a full member of the UN while not just supporting but actively promoting not just the destruction of Israel but the annihilation of the Jewish people.
It is to be hoped that the Egyptians may allow common humanity to over-ride common sense vis-a-vis their own national security and reopen the Rafah crossings to allow people from Gaza to take refuge in the Sinai. However, that can only be a short term solution. Long term, the job is to get the run-of-the-mill Palestinians to accept that (a) Israel is a legitimate state, and (b) the Jews have a right to live there unharmed. Given there have been 75 years of young Palestinians being taught that neither of these two are valid viewpoints, I'd say the prospects, both short and long term, are bleak.
From the Guardian link:
Cairo has said the expulsion of so many Palestinians from their homes would be in breach of international law, and a national security risk for Egypt that is liable to bankrupt the country’s ailing economy.
Three reasons why, I suppose, although how valid they might be is another matter...
Egypt isn't going to be bankrupt if others pay the cost of the refugee camps. They may not want it, but what other choice is there?
If water is again available in Southern Gaza, and the waiting aid agencies are allowed in, there may yet be some hope for at least some of the refugees.
(Apologies to @KoF for cross-posting - we are clearly looking at the same website!).
Have you completely forgotten the troubles in Northern Ireland ? You may have noticed, in the face of long term terrorism (despite some extremely dubious tactics by the British state) - it didn’t drive one community out as refugees to a neighbouring state or carpet bomb Ireland. This involved negotiating with terrorists.
(Let me state I am well aware of hundreds of years of absolutely foul oppression and violence by England and then Britain over centuries on the island of Ireland - but I am talking about the situation in the aftermath of Irish independence, somewhat more contemporaneous with the modern conflict in the Holy land.)
And if you consider punishment and revenge legitimate military aims (I don’t; self-defence is the legitimate one) then what punishment and revenge should Palestinians be entitled to mete out when settlers attack them? For being forced out of their homes in the first place during the Naqba? Talk of punishment and revenge in a military context is dangerous; it's part of what has got the region in the mess it's in in the first place.
Israeli leaders themselves leave little doubt. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” Daniel Hagari, a spokesperson for the Israeli Defence Force, acknowledged. “Right now, one goal: Nakba!”, tweeted the Likud MP Ariel Kallner last week. “A Nakba that will overshadow the Nakba of ’48.” The Nakba, Arabic for “catastrophe”, refers to the expulsion and flight of 700,000 Palestinians after the 1948 Palestine war and the founding of the state of Israel. “Gaza will eventually turn into a city of tents,” a security official told an Israeli reporter. “There will be no buildings.”
Fuck that. And fuck anyone who agrees.
Would that be the same Nakba that Israel has repeatedly objected to the marking of, with help from the US?
https://mondoweiss.net/2023/05/israeli-and-us-officials-push-to-have-nakba-events-stopped/
Let's stop pretending this is Goody Israel versus Baddy Palestinians. It’s not Goodies vs Baddies at all.
Oh it is, it's violent genocidal bastards on either side of the border crossing it to kill innocent people on the other because they're easier to get to than the other set of violent genocidal bastards. And the VGBs on either side have been encouraging each other because it's easier to rile up your base if your opponents are obviously VGBs, hence Likud and chums promoting Hamas over Fatah for decades.
Baddies versus baddies, but most of the actual violence being meted out to whoever is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The officiant at Choral Evensong on BBC Radio 3 this afternoon (recorded last Wednesday) prayed for *the lands in which Our Lord spent his earthly life* (or words to that effect - note the plural), which seemed to me to be pretty even-handed.
Whether prayer is efficacious in this or any other such horrendous situation, I couldn't say.
Perhaps with Jerusalem run a as shared religious city Mini-state like the Vatican.
It's not going to happen. Israel has no interest in, nor incentive to, share Jerusalem.
Quite, and you did say long term...maybe when everything is in ruins, some such solution may emerge?