The US Needs to Ensure that the Israeli Siege of Gaza is Lifted (Amnesty International)

[EFerrari]

The US Needs to Ensure that the Israeli Siege of Gaza is Lifted

by Avner Gidron, Senior Policy Adviser at Amnesty International
Posted: June 11, 2010 09:53 AM

Israel's rejection of an international inquiry into its deadly raid on the Gaza-bound ship is deeply disappointing, if not surprising. Judging by precedent, Israel is unlikely to provide the effective, independent and impartial investigation required to ensure truth, justice and reparations for victims and their families. But the truth is the outcome of an inquiry is unnecessary to reach the conclusion that Israel must end its siege of Gaza now.

The blockade violates human rights and humanitarian law, and it is politically senseless. It is past time that the United States and Israel's other allies press for its immediate end.

For three years, the population of the Gaza Strip has been suffering the debilitating effects of Israel's blockade imposed when Israel decided to treat the area as a "hostile entity" after Hamas ousted Fatah from Gaza. With the stated aim of preventing rocket fire by militants and pressuring Hamas, the blockade instead punishes the civilians in the Gaza Strip by restricting a vast range of goods and products that have no possible military use.

The firing of indiscriminate rockets into Israeli towns by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups (which, since 2001, has killed some 16 civilians in Israel) deserves unequivocal condemnation. But Israel's closure of Gaza goes well beyond its security needs, penning one and a half million Palestinians into a tiny strip of land and condemning hundreds of thousands to poverty and dependence. The sweeping scope of the blockade and statements by Israeli officials about its purpose make clear that this siege is being imposed as a form of collective punishment of the entire population of Gaza, a flagrant violation of Israel's obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Gazans are trapped. Hundreds have been unable to attend university or take up jobs abroad, let alone in other parts of the occupied Palestinian Territories. For the population of Gaza, nearby East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank may as well be on the other side of the world. Critically ill patients in need of medical care that is unavailable in local hospitals are frequently prevented from leaving Gaza or delayed until it is too late. Since 2007 almost all exports have been barred, with the derisory exception of a few truckloads of strawberries and cut flowers. What security concerns can explain the general prohibition on exporting flowers?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amnesty-international/the-us-needs-to-ensure-th_b_608834.html

[shira]

1. Amnesty: Gaza is Still Under Israeli Occupation

It’s not conflict solving. It’s ending the occupation. Amnesty says that Gaza is under occupation. According to Amnesty, what actions must Israel take in order to stop the occupation?

One of the things which need to be done is to allow the passage of people and goods through the air, the sea and land. That’s one component. There are other components related to agreements of the international community since Amnesty International does not deal with solving conflicts. It only addresses the question of whether the situation is adequate in relation to international humanitarian law and international standards. It doesn’t deal with solving the conflict, not here or anywhere else.

If Amnesty claims that there’s an occupation there should be a definition of when there’s no occupation. Amnesty claims that Israel needs to open all the crossings for free movement from Gaza to Israel and remove the sea and land siege on Gaza, meaning let Gaza be open to the entire world with no connection to Israel, but under those circumstances the occupation no longer exists. So why is there a need to transfer supplies to Gaza? Does Amnesty by the same logic demand the American forces in Afghanistan to help the Taliban? And take care of the sick among the Taliban? That’s the question, when does the occupation end?

I admit that I don’t understand the question. I’m unclear as to what kind of answer you expect.

I am expecting to receive an answer to whether if Israel withdraws its forces from the waters of Gaza, allow the passage of goods to Gaza without inspection, remove the air control of the Gaza Strip and open it to free movement, the occupation will end and Israel will no longer be responsible for Gaza and only for marginal issues, that’s what I expect Amnesty to say.

There are other components of electricity, water. These things do not stand on their own. Removing the siege is one step towards ending the occupation. There are components involving all the aspects of life in Gaza: Social, economic and cultural. Removing the siege is one important step to end the occupation and there are other steps.

What are the necessary steps on which you can elaborate?

One, allow the Palestinians in Gaza free access to drinking water. Israel hasn’t done this in all the years of the occupation until now, and it has a responsibility to ensure that Gaza’s residents have access to water. The same thing goes for health services. For dozens of years the rights of those residents have been prevented and the formations of civil infrastructures were prevented and this became worse during the attacks of last year, and a large part of those infrastructures were destroyed and not rebuilt to this day. This is an obligation of which Israel cannot free itself.

<snip>

The question is whether Israel is committed, being an occupying force as Amnesty defines, to be concerned for the welfare of Gaza’s residents and therefore act against the Hamas government and the Palestinian terrorist organizations that control Gaza, in order to protect the Palestinian population?

Israel has a duty to protect its citizens.

Amnesty’s messages said that Israel should take care to protect the people of Gaza. Is the issue of the security of the people of Gaza not an authority which Israel has?

Israel’s duty is to protect its citizens and ensure that the people of Gaza enjoy all the social and economic rights recognized in international law and in the Geneva convention.

So if Hamas is violating the rights of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to live, as defined in international law, does Israel not have the authority to act against the Hamas government to care for the safety of the people of Gaza?

The problem is first and foremost the rights of the people of Gaza which Israel violates by the illegal siege.

==========

more from 6 page interview...
http://www.shalomlife.com/eng/12815/Amnesty:_Gaza_is_Still_Under_Israeli_Occupation/Page1/

[Wizard777]

2. The people of Gaza have rights under the Third Geneva Convention.

Should Israel have a neutral state undertake the functions performed under the present Convention by a Protecting Power as provided for in Article 10?