Navigating Self-Defense and International Law in Gaza
This webinar explored the complex legal and humanitarian aspects surrounding recent events in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Specifically, this program will feature a discussion of Israel’s military operation in the Gaza Strip, proportionality in armed conflict, and the right to self defense in international law. Following Hamas’s atrocities in Israel on October 7th, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) began warning residents of Gaza to evacuate southward in anticipation of a large-scale military operation. Now, more than a month into the conflict, the military operation is well underway, offering further dilemmas for consideration such as the scale of the IDF’s response, the international reaction to the conflict, and future control of the Gaza Strip.
A panel of National Security and Law of Armed Conflict experts joined us for an educational discussion of these crucial legal considerations and more.
Featuring:
Prof. Jennifer Maddocks, Assistant Professor of Law, US Military Academy, West Point
Prof. Paul Stephan, John C. Jeffries, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
Moderator: Prof. Jeremy Rabkin, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Пікірлер: 2
Another view on the limitation of Israel's ostensible right to self-defense was not mentioned by Prof. Paul Stephan. He characterizes the view most limiting of Israel's right in this regard as an ideologically driven anti-colonial one, which seems a caricature of the legal issue being raised here at the Federalist Society. The authoritative legal position most limiting of Israel's right seems to be that provided by the International Court of Justice. I thought that the Federalist Society members might want to know that. In its 2004 advisory opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) established the non-applicability of “self-defence” under Article 51 in the situation between Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Israel remains an occupying power in Gaza despite its unilateral removal of settlements. After the 2006 election of Hamas, Israel imposed a blockade against Gaza which is specifically listed as an act of aggression under UN general assembly resolution 3314. An occupying force has a duty to protect the people it occupies; it cannot claim self-defence against the occupied. Actions taken by Palestinians to resist the blockade are not “acts of aggression” so they do not allow Israel to claim it is acting in self-defence.