Bloodshed upon bloodshed. It has been six weeks since the brutal attacks by Hamas left over 1,200 people dead in Israel. The fate of more than 200 hostages remains unknown. Since then, around two-thirds of the population of Gaza Strip have been rendered homeless by the Israeli response to the Oct 7 terrorist attack. More than 11,000 people have died in the intense bombardment and ground offensive.
I am a good friend and admirer of Mr Bilahari Kausikan, who wrote an op-ed on the hard truths about the Gaza war’s cruel and complex dilemmas. I agree with many points in his article.
However, I do not agree with his statement that in view of the existential imperatives of Israel’s response in Gaza, “humanitarian law and the laws of war take on a somewhat abstract quality as counsels of perfection”. The same goes for the argument that Israel “will respect humanitarian law and the laws of war to the extent that it is practical”.
This is how I look at the situation:
There is no doubt that the attacks by Hamas on Israel are acts of terrorism and should be condemned. I am disappointed that some of my Arab and Muslim friends have refused to do so. I would respectfully point out to them that international law and international humanitarian law apply to Hamas as well as to Israel. No one is above the law, and Hamas must be held accountable for the atrocities it committed on Oct 7.
Hamas is also to be condemned for its seizing of hostages, children included, on Oct 7. The taking of hostages is prohibited by international law and international humanitarian law. Hamas should release the hostages promptly and unconditionally.
As for Israel, it has a right to defend itself against Hamas. However, Israel’s right of self-defence must be proportionate and must not violate international law and international humanitarian law, which seeks to limit the effects of armed conflict.
Israel’s obligation to comply with both is not “abstract” or “counsels of perfection”. It is also incorrect to say that Israel will respect international law and international humanitarian law “to the extent that it is practical”. The obligation by Israel to comply with both sets of laws is absolute, and not only when it is practical to do so.
Acts forbidden by international humanitarian law
There are certain acts that are forbidden by international humanitarian law. These include collective punishment; attack on civilians; the destruction of civilian infrastructure such as schools, hospitals and ambulances as well as residential buildings; and the denial of human necessities to the civilian population, such as water, food, medicine and fuel.
Israel’s war against Hamas is a just war. However, it would seem that the war against Hamas has been transformed into a war against Palestinians in Gaza.
Israel argues that Hamas uses civilians as human shields and that when civilian facilities are used to hide their fighters and arsenals, they become legitimate targets. But the massive scale of the devastation in Gaza as a result of Israeli military operations is disproportionate to its goal of destroying Hamas and cannot be justified.
Consider the appalling statistics that have turned Gaza into a “graveyard for children”, in the words of United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres: Of the 11,000 Palestinians killed, nearly half of them are children. On average, a child is killed every 10 minutes.
All but one of the hospitals in the north of Gaza have stopped functioning as Israel forces push deeper into Gaza and supplies of fuel, water, food and medicine to the besieged enclave become dangerously scarce.
In short, it is not possible to justify the Israeli blockade or the bombing of schools, hospitals and ambulances in pursuit of its military goals.
The hard truth is that both Hamas and Israel have committed war crimes.
Peace between Israel and the Palestinians
When this war ends, we must launch new initiatives to make peace between Israel and the Palestinians. The end goals are clear: First, Israel must have the right to exist within secure and internationally recognised borders.
What are the “internationally recognised borders”? They are the borders prevailing in 1967, before the so-called Six Day War. Israel must return to the Palestinians all the territories it has occupied after that war, namely, Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. It is also necessary for the half-million Israelis to leave the settlements built illegally on Palestinian land.
The second goal is for the Palestinians to have a state of their own. Only when the Palestinians are freed from Israeli occupation and are able to govern themselves will there be peace for Israel.
In his op-ed, Mr Kausikan predicted that an independent Palestine will become “just another corrupt and badly governed Third World state”. It is a presumptuous remark. I would also point out that there are some corrupt and badly governed states in the First World.
The Palestinians have waited since 1947 to have a state of their own. It is time for the world and for Israel to fulfil their aspiration. We should wish the Palestinians well and not discourage them. I remember that Mr Yasser Arafat, the late leader of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, once expressed his dream for Palestine to be the Singapore of the Middle East. I hope that one day, Mr Arafat’s dream will come true.
The Jewish people have suffered discrimination and persecution for thousands of years. After the horrors of the Holocaust, in which millions of Jews were killed, I understand and empathise with their aspirations to have a homeland of their own. I support the wish of the Israelis to live in peace and security. The problem is that in establishing the new state of Israel in Palestine, many Arab Palestinians had to flee or were driven from their homes and their lands.
The governments of the Arab countries have committed several blunders at the expense of the Palestinian people. In 1947, they rejected the UN plan to divide the land of Palestine into two states, one for the Arabs and one for the Jewish people. They fought against Israel, in 1948, 1967 and 1973. The Palestinian people have suffered from those wars.
More recently, under the Abraham Accords, several Arab countries such as Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Morocco established diplomatic relations with Israel. But in normalising ties with Israel under the right-wing Netanyahu government, which has run roughshod over the two-state solution as envisaged in the 1993 Oslo Accords, they have also effectively abandoned the Palestinian cause.
The Israel-Hamas war has reminded the world that the Israel-Palestine conflict has not been resolved.
Since 1967, the Palestinians have lived under the oppressive rule of Israel. Like all of us, the Palestinians wish to be free; they wish to have a state of their own and to govern themselves.
It is no contradiction that I support both Israel and the Palestinians. I support the aspiration of Israelis to live in peace and security. And I support the aspirations of the Palestinians to have their own state and to be free of Israeli rule. My dream for them is that, one day, Israel and the new state of Palestine will be good neighbours and will live in peace with each other. This dream will come true when there are strong leaders on both sides who have the will and courage to make peace. I hope that day will come soon.
Tommy Koh is chairman of the international advisory panel of the Centre For International Law at the National University of Singapore.
Top photo from Pixabay.