Building Bridges Project
An important dimension of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice's work is to promote unbiased understanding and disseminate accurate information to different sectors of Israeli society. The Jerusalem Institute of Justice welcomes the opportunity to speak to tour groups from a variety of backgrounds, organizations, faiths, student groups, etc. By speaking to and providing information to thousands of people each year, we hope to stimulate constructive conversation about the political realities Israel faces internally and internationally.
Want to host a JIJ lecture? Contact us today at [email protected]
A Reaction to the UN’s Lack of Reaction
Last week, the 75th session of the United Nations was officially opened, but it was a little different this time around. This year, endless convoys of leaders from all over the world did not fill the streets of New York. Instead, they delivered their remarks through recorded statements.
A few hours later and approximately 250 miles away, on the White House lawn, an important message of peace was being conveyed to the world. The State of Israel signed an historic peace agreement with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. This was only the beginning of something great; several other Muslim and Arab countries have already announced their intentions to join the initiative and normalize their relations with Israel.
In my naivety I thought the UN, the largest international human rights platform in the world, whose stated goal is the promotion of human rights and the achievement of world peace, would take advantage of the opportunity to praise this important step toward peace in the Middle East during their opening session. For some reason, they didn’t find the time for it. Forget praising this momentous occasion, what about simply recognizing it? I guess they didn’t have time for that either. However, there was plenty of time for the United Nation’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet to attack and solely blame Israel for the situation in Gaza.
Once again, the UN’s true colors are exposed. And again, the UN proves that it doesn’t value nor demonstrate the tenets it sets forth and expects its member states to uphold. The peace agreement with the UAE and Bahrain was made despite the UN, rather than thanks to it.
We can only hope that through changing the Israeli-Palestinian relations paradigm and opening up channels of dialogue with Muslim and Arab nations, Israel will be able to overcome the automatic majority and the decades-long, antagonistic voting bloc in the UN.
Adv. Uri Morad
International Law & Public Diplomacy
Jerusalem Institute of Justice
The Cat is Out of the Bag
The Gaza Voice, a recorded podcast released on May 21st 2020 contains Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) co-founder Omar Barghouti saying, “If the refugees return to their homes [in Israel] as the BDS movement calls for, if we bring an end to Israel’s apartheid regime and if we end the occupation on lands occupied in 1967, including Jerusalem, what will be left of the Zionist regime? That’s the question. Meaning, what will the two states be based on?”[1]
The organization claims to advocate for Israeli political reform and the improvement of Palestinian human rights, not the elimination of the State of Israel. But Barghouti hints here at exactly that. He reveals what could be the underlying intentions of BDS’s three official goals. [2]
We interpret Barghouti’s statement as the following: if BDS successfully achieves the goals it built its platform on, Israel will no longer exist. To answer Barghouti’s rhetorical question, not much will be left of the “Zionist regime”. Answering the three objectives essentially erases what Israel has built over the past 72 years, which includes its normalized relations with the neighboring Arab countries. This contradicts Barghouti’s reference to “two states”, as in having a two state solution. Barghouti understands this, as he reveals in this segment of the twenty-minute podcast.
It should be noted this rhetoric isn’t a shocking revelation. Barghouti has previously stated that Jews cannot have their own state in Palestine. [3] However, what is important about this recent quote is that it reminds the listener of the movement to disrespect the right to self-determination and ultimately delegitimize the state of Israel. The argument that BDS is less impactful toward Israel than it claims to be is irrelevant here; [4] the focus is on the fact that Barghouti continues to preach an unrealistic and undesirable approach when facing a country that has already solidified, built itself up, and is now thriving.
Why unrealistic and undesirable? The organization, with Barghouti as one of its international representatives, goes further than confronting politics and human rights. It questions the existence of a legitimate state and hints at its eventual downfall. It’s dangerous territory to cross into, and it’s something that individual supporters and affiliated groups (NGOs and others) of BDS should understand.
Barghouti continues by saying, “There won’t be any Zionist State like the one we are talking about (present day Israel)… and the Palestinian minority will become a Palestinian majority in the state that today is called Israel.”
Well, what would it mean if Israel did not exist? What would we lose? To name a few basic things: the lack of a Jewish home which was deemed necessary by the United Nations after an extensive history of persecution and incontestable anti-Semitism that is prevalent until this day. It would mean losing the “Start-Up Nation”; the loss of a greenhouse constantly bearing the fruit of an incredible number of innovations and developments that benefit the whole world. It would mean the loss of a home not only for Jews, but for Christians, Druze, and other Arab populations as well.
Thank you Barghouti for revealing that BDS’s end goal is to eliminate Israel.
[1] https://soundcloud.com/user-742784347/bds
[2] https://bdsmovement.net/call
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/27/world/middleeast/bds-israel-boycott-antisemitic.html
[4] https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/01/26/how-much-does-bds-threaten-israels-economy/
Prostitution and Rehabilitation
Can we welcome the closure of the strip clubs while the women are thrown to the street?
Closing strip clubs is an important step, but as is common here, only half the job has been done!
Article by Tzipi Sa’ar translated from Hebrew 19.02.2020 12:13, Haaretz newspaper.
The closure of strip clubs in Tel Aviv is great news. We are finally recognizing that buying a woman’s body for sexual purposes is an act that disgraces women and is a phenomenon that should be eradicated from this world. At the same time, it is impossible to ignore that, as is common here, only half the work has been done. The clubs were closed, but the women working there were offered no professional retraining or alternative livelihood as options. As a result, some of the women, although supporting the closure of the clubs in which they worked, also protested these very closures.
We cannot and must not ignore their voices. This does not mean that stripping should continue, but that eliminating this practice must be accompanied by adequate steps in favor of the women who happened to get trapped into such reality.
First of all it should be clear: as long as there is legitimacy for a situation where a woman’s body, or parts of it, are currency or a commodity for a merchant, it is impossible to fundamentally change the existing culture that, in this context, may move within a range between objectification - to rape- or even to murder by a spouse. A commodity is considered property that is owned and this “ownership” by men - of women - fundamentally underlies the ills noted here. According to this twisted logic, a woman who wants to leave her spouse violates his “property rights”. This conflict sometimes, in extreme cases, ends in the murder of the wife.
As for stripping, to a large extent, it is nothing but prostitution in disguise. In a discussion in the Knesset’s Committee of the Promotion of Woman Status, a survivor of prostitution testified stating, “Stripping is like a teaser for advertising prostitution. Because whoever likes the dancer is allowed to take her to a private room and, for a fee, gets a sexual service there. You feel as if you are in a store with price tag on you. Those who are better dancers, of course, have a higher price tag.”
According to a document submitted to the committee, “For many young women, strip clubs serve as the gateway to the world of prostitution. While lap-dancing on a customer’s knees in the back rooms or at other locations within the strip club, the young women are required to satisfy their clients’ sexual needs and demands. They also must allow the customer to touch their body parts. To cope, they detach themselves from who they are, from their consciousness, and in particular from their feelings about what happens with their bodies. Strip clubs serve as a cover for brothels, where sexual acts - complete or partial - between clients and women are performed under the auspices, encouragement and support of club owners who in this manner make fortunes.”
The Jerusalem Institute of Justice (JIJ) research has shown similar findings as well. A JIJ position paper cites Judge Michal Agmon Gonen, who imposed a ban on the operation of strip clubs in the Ramat Gan Stock Exchange area, as stating that strip clubs are an integral part of the sex industry. The study further says that, while hiding behind different phrases, for all intents and purposes, strip clubs operate as brothels and the only difference between the two seems to be the social approval of the strip clubs in contrast to the disgrace that brothels carry.
The judge wrote, “Strip clubs are used to systemically hurt women and the difference from brothels is definitely artificial.” This contrived difference needs to be eliminated. One can also hope that more and more men will understand what stripping really is and reject, for example, an invitation to a “bachelor party” with a stripper. In this spirit, and with an administrative warrant, the police closed three strip clubs in Tel Aviv last month. They were following the instructions of former state attorney Shai Nitzan which include a definition of lap-dancing as a form of prostitution and therefore clubs allowing lap dancing are operating a brothel which is a criminal offense.
But what about the argument of some women who engage in stripping, and even prostitution, who say they engage in these activities voluntarily? Well, here we have compelling data regarding the personal harm to prostitutes that is impossible to ignore: the early age of entry into prostitution (14), the high rate of women in prostitution who were victims of childhood sexual abuse (about 90%), the horrendous short life expectancy of women in prostitution (40 years), and more.
Still, some would say, “Who authorized you to decide for other women what is good for them? And what about those women who do it voluntarily?” Well, we accept that among women in stripping and maybe even prostitution there are those who choose it freely, however, these examples represent a very small minority. When the harm of “freedom of occupation” is compared with the bitter and harsh fate of the vast majority of women trapped in stripping and prostitution - it is clear what decision is needed to be made.
As a comparison, there are other forms of restricted behavior. There are some individuals who would choose to sell a kidney on the black market to support their family or to cover a major debt. Society draws a red line here and says this activity is not moral and is therefore not allowed. The fact that society does not generally draw a similar red line in the context of a sex sale is simply an indication of a moral failure and an issue that requires redress.
After all the above, under no circumstances should women in prostitution or stripping be abandoned to their fate. These welcomed changes in law and enforcement must be accompanied by comprehensive and practical programs designed to help these women find alternative ways to make a living. This must not be lip service only. One cannot cheer for strip clubs being closed while watching the women being thrown to the street. The truth is that the government approved a plan for prostitution rehabilitation over a year ago, but according to a petition submitted in the end of 2019, this program is not yet implemented. We, as the people who support the eradication of this practice, should be the first to demand the immediate and comprehensive implementation of these rehabilitation strategies.
Human Rights Council - Political Bias
The UN Human Rights Council “database” of business enterprises
On 24 March 2016, at its 31st session, the Human Rights Council (HRC) adopted resolution 31/36 entitled “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan”.[1] Paragraph 17 (OP 17) of this resolution requests the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) produce a database of all business enterprises engaged in certain Israeli settlement activity in the occupied Palestinian territory, or the "Blacklist".
While local and international business activity in disputed or occupied territories is widespread, and involves some of the world’s largest companies, Resolution 31/36 represents the only known UN effort to produce a “database” of such activity in respect of one situation. The fact that such business activity is so ubiquitous and rarely criticized demonstrates that it is not viewed as raising legal or human rights issues, while the desire to establish a database only with respect to business activity in Israeli settlement communities points to the political bias of the body that initiated this process.
OP17 was adopted despite the strong opposition of the US, EU and Israel. It is the product of a specific discriminatory HRC agenda item, the organization's only country-specific agenda item, which reflects ongoing and well documented institutional bias against Israel in the HRC. The Council is widely criticized as a deeply politicized body, whose agenda is often dictated by the world’s worst human rights violators, and whose legitimacy and credibility in the human rights arena has been fundamentally undermined as a result.
Israel, together with the United States and numerous other leading States, have expressed, consistent opposition to the database and its publication, and have conveyed this position in their public and private communications. Israel has no intention of cooperating with this illegitimate exercise for the following reasons:
- Lack of authority to produce database: The production of a “database” exceeds the mandate of the OHCHR, which has neither the competence nor the capacity to engage in this action. The responsibility for ensuring compliance of business enterprises with relevant laws, or for promoting any relevant non-binding guidelines with respect to business practices, rests exclusively with the States in which the relevant enterprises are domiciled or operating.
- Lack of authority to communicate to companies: The HRC and OHCHR are bodies mandated to deal with State conduct in the human rights field and they have no legal or other authority over business enterprises.
- Lawfulness of business activity: Business activity in areas of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) under Israeli jurisdiction in accordance with existing Israeli-Palestinian agreements, is entirely lawful. Indeed, the notion that business enterprises are even subject to international law, international humanitarian law, and international human rights law is highly questionable and has been rejected by Courts in leading national jurisdictions.
- Blacklist: The creation of a database, and certainly its publication in any form, amounts to an effort to produce a blacklist of companies that are not engaged in any wrongdoing, and with the potential of causing commercial, reputational and legal harm. By engaging in this action, the OHCHR is allowing itself to become an instrument of those engaged in an illegitimate, discriminatory and political motivated agenda.
Furthermore, the methodology of the OHCHR is entirely devoid of transparency, and the information upon which it has based its communication has been drawn from partial, unverifiable and unknown sources, including politically-motivated actors, who responded voluntarily to the OHCHR’s calls. The OHCHR also lacks the requisite competence or capacity to verify independently the information it has received. While Resolution 31/36 requires a database of “all” business enterprises, the process adopted makes the database flawed from its inception and inevitably renders the list the partial, selective and discriminatory in nature
It is important to note that the database initiative is not legal or quasi-legal in nature, and does not, in and of itself, carry with it legal consequences. The process lacks due process and procedural safeguards to ensure that the list will not contain unauthoritative or inappropriately verified information. Furthermore, cooperation by companies with the database initiative may entail potential legal consequences, liability, financial risk and reputational harm. As is known, relevant domestic legislation and anticipated legislative proposals in various jurisdictions prohibit companies from discriminating in their business practices, including laws that specifically pertain to discriminatory practices with respect to Israel or territory subject to Israeli jurisdiction. This pertains, for example, to companies that are domiciled in the US, are subsidiaries of US-domiciled companies, or that do business in the US. In this context, dozens of U.S. State laws currently bar granting contracts to, or pension-fund investment in, companies that boycott Israel or territories under its jurisdiction. Moreover, such cooperation might raise issues under existing relevant US federal legislation.
The UN Human Rights Council “database” of business enterprises
On 24 March 2016, at its 31st session, the Human Rights Council (HRC) adopted resolution 31/36 entitled “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan”.[1] Paragraph 17 (OP 17) of this resolution requests the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) produce a database of all business enterprises engaged in certain Israeli settlement activity in the occupied Palestinian territory, or the "Blacklist".
While local and international business activity in disputed or occupied territories is widespread, and involves some of the world’s largest companies, Resolution 31/36 represents the only known UN effort to produce a “database” of such activity in respect of one situation. The fact that such business activity is so ubiquitous and rarely criticized demonstrates that it is not viewed as raising legal or human rights issues, while the desire to establish a database only with respect to business activity in Israeli settlement communities points to the political bias of the body that initiated this process.
OP17 was adopted despite the strong opposition of the US, EU and Israel. It is the product of a specific discriminatory HRC agenda item, the organization's only country-specific agenda item, which reflects ongoing and well documented institutional bias against Israel in the HRC. The Council is widely criticized as a deeply politicized body, whose agenda is often dictated by the world’s worst human rights violators, and whose legitimacy and credibility in the human rights arena has been fundamentally undermined as a result.
Israel, together with the United States and numerous other leading States, have expressed, consistent opposition to the database and its publication, and have conveyed this position in their public and private communications. Israel has no intention of cooperating with this illegitimate exercise for the following reasons:
- Lack of authority to produce database: The production of a “database” exceeds the mandate of the OHCHR, which has neither the competence nor the capacity to engage in this action. The responsibility for ensuring compliance of business enterprises with relevant laws, or for promoting any relevant non-binding guidelines with respect to business practices, rests exclusively with the States in which the relevant enterprises are domiciled or operating.
- Lack of authority to communicate to companies: The HRC and OHCHR are bodies mandated to deal with State conduct in the human rights field and they have no legal or other authority over business enterprises.
- Lawfulness of business activity: Business activity in areas of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) under Israeli jurisdiction in accordance with existing Israeli-Palestinian agreements, is entirely lawful. Indeed, the notion that business enterprises are even subject to international law, international humanitarian law, and international human rights law is highly questionable and has been rejected by Courts in leading national jurisdictions.
- Blacklist: The creation of a database, and certainly its publication in any form, amounts to an effort to produce a blacklist of companies that are not engaged in any wrongdoing, and with the potential of causing commercial, reputational and legal harm. By engaging in this action, the OHCHR is allowing itself to become an instrument of those engaged in an illegitimate, discriminatory and political motivated agenda.
Furthermore, the methodology of the OHCHR is entirely devoid of transparency, and the information upon which it has based its communication has been drawn from partial, unverifiable and unknown sources, including politically-motivated actors, who responded voluntarily to the OHCHR’s calls. The OHCHR also lacks the requisite competence or capacity to verify independently the information it has received. While Resolution 31/36 requires a database of “all” business enterprises, the process adopted makes the database flawed from its inception and inevitably renders the list the partial, selective and discriminatory in nature
It is important to note that the database initiative is not legal or quasi-legal in nature, and does not, in and of itself, carry with it legal consequences. The process lacks due process and procedural safeguards to ensure that the list will not contain unauthoritative or inappropriately verified information. Furthermore, cooperation by companies with the database initiative may entail potential legal consequences, liability, financial risk and reputational harm. As is known, relevant domestic legislation and anticipated legislative proposals in various jurisdictions prohibit companies from discriminating in their business practices, including laws that specifically pertain to discriminatory practices with respect to Israel or territory subject to Israeli jurisdiction. This pertains, for example, to companies that are domiciled in the US, are subsidiaries of US-domiciled companies, or that do business in the US. In this context, dozens of U.S. State laws currently bar granting contracts to, or pension-fund investment in, companies that boycott Israel or territories under its jurisdiction. Moreover, such cooperation might raise issues under existing relevant US federal legislation.
The potential legal consequences, liability, financial risk and reputational harm is not merely a theoretical possibility, as the Airbnb case which unfolded from late 2018 to April 2019 exemplified. In this case Airbnb announced its intention to delist an estimated 200 listings of Israeli properties in Judea and Samaria. The company announced in April 2019 that his policy will not be implemented as part of settlement reached with all lawsuits that were brought by hosts and potential hosts and guests who objected to the policy on grounds of discrimination. This policy was not only attacked in the courts as it landed Airbnb on the top ten antisemitic events of 2018 by the Wiesenthal Center, led to US State investment boards to add the company to their blacklists as well as a host of leading political figures, including State Governors and American Vice President Mike Pence. All this not only led the company to abandon its policy, it also led to the company stating that "Airbnb has always opposed the BDS movement"[2]. This case exemplifies the risk the potential risk stated above.
The potential legal consequences, liability, financial risk and reputational harm is not merely a theoretical possibility, as the Airbnb case which unfolded from late 2018 to April 2019 exemplified. In this case Airbnb announced its intention to delist an estimated 200 listings of Israeli properties in Judea and Samaria. The company announced in April 2019 that his policy will not be implemented as part of settlement reached with all lawsuits that were brought by hosts and potential hosts and guests who objected to the policy on grounds of discrimination. This policy was not only attacked in the courts as it landed Airbnb on the top ten antisemitic events of 2018 by the Wiesenthal Center, led to US State investment boards to add the company to their blacklists as well as a host of leading political figures, including State Governors and American Vice President Mike Pence. All this not only led the company to abandon its policy, it also led to the company stating that "Airbnb has always opposed the BDS movement"[2]. This case exemplifies the risk the potential risk stated above.
[1]https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session31/Pages/DatabaseHRC3136.aspx
[2] https://news.airbnb.com/update-listings-disputed-regions/
Does Humanity End at the Border?
In a world where oppression and punishment are a means of securing power, respect for human life becomes scarce and is replaced by inhumanity and suffering. But do we really know what is happening on the other side of Israel's border?
Imagine that you and your family live somewhere in the West Bank. One day, you discover that a child is about to be used as a suicide bomber to blow up a bus. A desire to do everything possible to prevent a child from becoming a suicide bomber and averting the death of many innocent people is a natural response for you and me. However, under the Palestinian Authority (PA), this response would be grounds for receiving a life sentence and thus commences a nightmare. Because you have tried to stop a fatal attack, you will be arrested and all the people around you will pay a price.
First, it starts with your child. Let’s say your child was born prematurely and she needs to remain in an incubator that provides an environment that allows her to properly mature.
However, because the PA operates like a machine of terror; cruel and creative forms of inhumane acts are implemented against individuals as a form of punishment. And for this reason, because you saved innocent people, the PA decided not to give your child the necessary treatment and they expel your child from the hospital. Consequently, an innocent child is severely handicapped not only physically but also psychologically for all her life. Still, the punishment goes on.
You might be imprisoned and subjected to many different types of torture, such as being tied to a post and beaten until losing consciousness, burnt with cigarettes, having boiling and cold water thrown on you, having your nails and teeth ripped out, being electrocuted and deprived of sleep and food. The methods of torture are endless. This is not a nightmare or fiction, but rather the reality of many Palestinian citizens who oppose the politics of the PA or take a stand against acts of terror. This is one of the many real cases that occurred under the PA regime which JIJ has documented and reported.
Palestinian security forces systematically inflict ill-treatment and torture on their citizens as a form of government policy, cruelly disrespecting human rights. The PA speaks worldwide, appealing for the rights of the Palestinians and their territories, but it is the PA who violates the rights of its own citizens by secretly shedding blood and putting in place an oppressive machine to destroy all who disagree with their acts.
The Oslo Agreement was signed in September 1993 by the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The Palestinian Authority (PA) was then created in 1994 to govern the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (areas A and B). However, the Palestinians have not complied with the provisions of the treaty. Violent clashes broke out between the two Palestinian factions: Hamas and Fatah following the January 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) elections. Thus, in 2007, Hamas lost its ruling position in the West Bank, being replaced by Fatah and independent members. Hamas, in turn, expelled Fatah from Gaza and retained control of that area. This division resulted in two separate administrations: the Palestinian Authority, led by Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas controlling the West Bank; and control of the Gaza Strip by Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas's leader. These groups have since then exercised effective control over everything that happens in those regions.
Palestinian witnesses reported and described the abuses that the PA had perpetrated against them, including abduction, imprisonment, torture, and rape. The PA reportedly murdered and illegally detained many of their citizens intentionally and premeditatedly to intimidate its civilians.
This is condemned by international criminal law. A crime against humanity is characterized as any of the atrocious acts indicated in art.7 of the Rome Statute, committed in the framework of a widespread or systematic attack against the civilian population, with knowledge of that attack. Thus, illegal acts include sexual assault, torture, murder, kidnapping, and imprisonment.
The international legal standard of general human rights must be met by all governments and regimes in order to ensure peace, prosperity and the welfare of individuals. It falls upon society as a whole to prevent crimes against humanity from occurring. Therefore, the best definition of international crimes is that which contemplates the idea of acts performed by states or individuals, and that violate principles and rules that protect values to which humanity attaches great importance. According to the Rome Statute, crimes against humanity can occur in times of war or peace. In this article, it is clear what the elements of the crime are. First, a physical element is required, such as murder, imprisonment, torture and other inhumane acts. The second element is contextual, meaning a crime is committed as part of a widespread ("large-scale nature of the attack, which should be massive, frequent, carried out collectively with considerable seriousness and directed against a multiplicity of victims") or systematic attack directed at any civilian population ("the organized nature of the acts of violence and the improbability of their random occurrence"). This means that there have to be numerous threats in a geographical area and that the violence has to follow a methodical approach. Finally, the crime must be committed with the knowledge of an attack, that is, the mental element. Beyond all these elements, crimes against humanity occur only when they are committed for the sake of a state or political organization.
In these terms, it is considered that the PA violated the human rights of its citizens by murdering, imprisoning, torturing, and kidnapping them. These acts were carried out in a judicious, organized and frequent manner to a multitude of victims, under a large-scale attack.
Palestinian citizens experienced severe physical and mental pain and suffering, which was premeditated and calculatedly caused by their leaders to oppress them and to preserve positions of leadership in both territories. This violates international human rights law. The PA controls both the police and the military as well as the courts themselves, so nothing is done to help Palestinian citizens within the West Bank. This is a cycle of violence, repression, and misery for the victims, their families, the entire Palestinian people, and potentially even their regional neighbors. Palestinian leaders must realize that because they have signed and agreed to treaties such as the Rome Statute, they are legally obligated to prevent cruel acts against their own people.
On this matter, the Jerusalem Institute of Justice has already submitted several communications to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) regarding crimes against humanity committed by Palestinian leaders, such as murder, imprisonment and torture, respectively, against Palestinian civilians.
Crimes against humanity are serious violations of international law. It is time to take responsibility, we must not only point the finger at the culprits of these atrocities but also at the supporters and spectators who become accomplices. The real victims of this war are the Palestinian citizens who are cynically exploited as political pawns.
Chronicle of a Predetermined Decision
The decision of the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in The Hague to launch a “comprehensive criminal investigation” of “alleged war crimes” committed in what has been named the "situation in Palestine" is dramatic but not surprising. The writing was on the wall, written in large Gothic font. The decision was made somewhere in 2015, when the Chief Prosecutor, Ms. Fatou Bensouda, accepted Palestine's request to join as a member state of the court.
The motives for Bensouda’s decision were probably political and as a result, answers from the political field are now needed. Let us not be mistaken, Israel has a long list of weighty legal arguments in her defense, but unfortunately, these will not rescue her from the current situation. Any attempt to fend off political interests with legal arguments, however strong, is doomed to fail.
At this time, it is essential for Israel to have political backing from the US and to encourage the positive winds blowing from England, as this is an hour for politics and diplomacy.
This kind of pressure was recently exerted with great success by the United States, where a series of resolute statements and decisions from the former National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were able to thwart the ICC’s intention to investigate war crimes that US forces allegedly committed on Afghanistan's soil. Incidentally, the ICC's decision to reject the motion to investigate the alleged war crimes came immediately after the denial of entry into the United States of the Chief Prosecutor and an explicit threat to use the American Service-Members' Protection Act, better known as the "The Hague Invasion Law," which gives the president a free hand to take all necessary measures in order to release American soldiers, if the ICC decides to order their imprisonment. In addition, the law prohibits any cooperation or transfer of evidentiary materials to the ICC.
The broad American defense umbrella was kindly offered to Israel as well. The sand in Israel’s hourglass started draining on Friday and will last for several months. Within this time, the Chief Prosecutor, Ms. Fatou Bensouda, will receive the opinion of the pre-trial court regarding its legal position on the issue of the court's jurisdiction to investigate the “situation in Palestine”. The court's legal position does not oblige by law, but it can outline the limits and scope of the investigation, since these arise from a determination regarding the territory in which the court may exercise its authority.
The Jerusalem Institute of Justice, a legal research institute operating in the international legal arena, has recognized and anticipated the decision of the ICC and has worked hard to ensure that the ICC investigates the real criminals who are directly responsible for committing war crimes in our region, the Hamas terrorist organization. Our efforts have borne fruit. The ICC accepted the legal and evidentiary infrastructure we presented to it and stated that it intends to investigate, inter alia, the criminal use of the Palestinian civilian population as human shields, as well as victims of murder and torture.
It is important to clarify that the ICC in its decision to investigate Israel, clearly deviates from its given mandate. This mandate does not involve the criminal investigation of leaders from countries with a self-reliant, independent, and reliable judicial mechanism. Past experience shows that Israel and specifically the IDF are able to conduct self-examination and critique of their actions. Wherever Israel recognizes a potential deviation from the morality and values that characterize the IDF in its activity (in the myriad of complex challenges that it faces), it is still able to ask and answer tough questions when needed.
Adv Uri Morad,
Director of the of International Law & Public Diplomacy Department
Indoctrination – Lasting Effects on Children and Conflicts
Indoctrination as a concept can be divisive and problematic. To an extent it can be positive, as this allows for the creation of communities that share the same values, giving stability to the people of those groups. However, it can also be dangerous
To differentiate between the positive and negative sides of indoctrination, Tom Nachtigal’s definition[1] will be used. As such, in this context, indoctrination will be defined as “teaching with the intention of instilling certain beliefs and propositions among pupils, by disregarding evidence, reasoning, and logic in the teaching process”. More specifically, this article will focus on systematic indoctrination into hatred and violence and its lasting consequences.
As referred above, vulnerable groups such as children (which according to the Rome Statute are persons below 15 years old) are more sensitive to these influences, as their associated naivety makes them more likely to process information without questioning it.
The resulting consequence of indoctrination can be catastrophic. Children of all ages can suffer unimaginable amounts of pain simply by trusting the teachings of a wrong adult. And from all the possible horrors they could face, it is in becoming a soldier that this article will focus on. Throughout conflict areas in the world, from Colombia to the Philippines, children have been sought and used as tools for war.[2]
Such was the case with the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), the ultra-nationalist heterodox group that terrorized Uganda from the 1980’s. Currently dispersed between the borders of the DRC, Central African Republic and South Sudan, this group is known for abducting the majority of their top leaders while they were kids.
After weaponizing these children, they were then used to cause mayhem, killing and abducting tens of thousands of other children along the way. By continuing this practice, conflict ensued, displacing almost 500,000 people in the Ugandan plains during the group’s active years[3]. Even though they are largely inactive in currently, the story of the rebel militia is still being mirrored throughout our world. And the effect of such practices is felt to this day.
As reported by the Washington Post[4], abducted children that manage to defect from the LRA face an arduous uphill battle for reintegration. After serving under uneducated authoritarian superiors, who mercilessly kill any caught defector by way of a firing squad, the surviving children face the mental adjustment to day-to-day life. This is compounded by the added paranoia-like pressure of seeing comrades get promoted through informing on each other, and “commanders” being punished for doing acts of kindness. This results in severe mental health issues that surface many months after their release. PTSD is common and in extreme cases, suicide is an escape from the horrors faced during their time as conscripted soldiers.
This fear-based indoctrination of children by the LRA finds its direct counterpart in Hamas’s indoctrination. The terrorist organization has a reported use of 17,000 children, directly or indirectly, throughout the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather than abducting, Hamas ensures that from an early age the children of the Gaza Strip are slowly pushed to dehumanize and stigmatize the Israeli citizen.
In kindergarten, through their considerable influence in the region, Hamas uses the public Al-Aqsa channel to broadcast anti-Semitic shows that promote a jihadist mindset and violence against the Israeli forces.[5]
This is then furthered by the dubious curriculum employed in the Gaza Strip (and in many cases, the remaining Palestinian territories).[6] There are reported uses of clear ennoblement of martyrdom, in particular against the Israeli enemy, and incitement to violence.[7]
Despite all this, Hamas further organizes summer camps each year whereby teenagers reportedly use and practice gunplay and military-like exercises. [8]In addition, preachers (religious authorities of the region) stimulate the aforementioned feelings towards martyrdom and against Israel.[9]
It is through this systematic, determined effort that the infamous terrorist group ensures the continuation of their own war efforts. Children can be used to bolster their army and kill if needed[10]. If successful in a military endeavour, these kids are then encouraged and hailed as heroes, further cementing in their minds that their behaviour was/is correct[11]. Even when building dangerous tunnels to cross the border of Gaza with Israel, children are used as builders.[12]
Whilst these practices were several times noted during Haniyeh’s tenure as de facto and de jure leader of the group, there is no sign that ensures they have all summarily stopped and been reversed under Sinwar’s rule. As explained above, the scars left on rescued child soldiers can remain for a long time after they leave their military service. More so, they are ruthlessly effective in promoting warmongering and belligerence. Thus, they make sure that the next generation will perpetuate conflict and that a polarizing mentality is the norm in an already precarious society.
As a matter of fact, the tendency is that the militarization of children will be increased. From 2013 onwards, Hamas has purportedly included military training in the Gazan high school curricula[13]. Moreover, the increasingly hostile summer camps – such as the “Pioneers of Liberation”[14] camps – ensure that this military education is year-round, as is the spread of violence towards their “Zionist Enemy”. In fact, Abu Muhammad, responsible for the recruitment unit of the camps was recorded stating that the goal of the camps was to provide educational and military activities to train the coming generations to fight the [Israeli] “occupation”[15]. He then continued, stating the generation in front of him was “determined to put an end to the Israeli entity”.[16]
A very important question is then to be asked – what can we do? Any individual effort is unlikely to succeed in the face of such atrocities. As such, it is highly recommended that we take a look at successful preventive programs[17] and reintegration programs[18]. Only through this can the Children of today, not become the Soldiers of tomorrow.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Nachtigal, T. (2019). Responsible Education: Responsibility under International Law for Indoctrination to Hatred and Violence in Education Systems. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. [online] Available at: //jtl.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2019/09/Nachtigal_CJTL-57-600.pdf (Accessed 23 Sep. 2019].
[2] Information retrieved from //childsoldiersworldindex.org/hostilities (Accessed 21 Sep. 2019)
[3] Retrieved from //childrenandarmedconflict.un.org/the-lords-resistance-army-and-children/ (Accessed 21 Sep. 2019)
[4] Retrieved from //www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/kidnapped-as-children-they-escaped-from-konys-lra-to-be-reunited-with-their-families-in-uganda/2018/08/10/625e5b12-8f67-11e8-ae59-01880eac5f1d_story.html (Accessed 21 Sep. 2019)
[5] Israeli Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center, Educating for Hatred and Violence Against Israel in a Performance Held in a Kindergarten Sponsored by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, (December 31, 2017); available at //www.terrorism-info.org.il/en/educating-for-hatred-and-violence-against-israel-in-aperformance-held-in-a-kindergarten-sponsored-by-the-palestinian-islamic-jihad-pij/ (Accessed 22 Sep. 2019)
[6] Groiss, A. and Shaked, R. (2017). Schoolbooks of the Palestinian Authority (PA): The Attitude to the Jews, to Israel and to Peace. [online] Center for Near East Policy Research Available at: //israelbehindthenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Schoolbooks-PalestinianAuthority2017.pdf [Accessed 23 Sep. 19].
[7] P. 62 ff. (n6)
[8] ITV News, Inside the Hamas Summer Training Camp for Gaza Teens, (added on July 27, 2016); video available at: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD2FezhJgqA ; 4 Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, Incitement to Terrorism and Hatred, (June 8, 2017); //www.terrorism-info.org.il/en/21218/
[9] Hamas’s new way of poisoning the minds of Palestinian Children, Gatestone Institute, 1 April 2016. //www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7804/palestinian-children-torture (Accessed 23 Sep. 19)
[10] Riley Clafton, At Summer Camp, Hamas Raises the Next Generation of Killers, The Tower (August 2016); available at: //www.thetower.org/article/at-summer-camp-hamas-raises-the-next-generation-of-killers/ (Accessed 23 Sep. 19)
[11] IDF Website, The Status of Children in Gaza; //www.idf.il/en/minisites/facts-and-figures/hamas/thestatus-of-children-in-gaza/ (Accessed 23. Sep 19).
[12] Lea Spyer, How Child Labor in the Terror Tunnels is Killing Palestinian Children, (July 27, 2014); available at: //www.breakingisraelnews.com/18992/child-labor-terror-tunnels-killing-palestinian-children/; Myer Freimann, Hamas Killed 160 Palestinian Children to Build Tunnels, (July 25, 2014); available at: //www.tabletmag.com/scroll/180400/hamas-killed-160-palestinian-children-to-build-terror-tunnels
[13] Retrieved from //www.terrorism-info.org.il/en/20511/
[14] Summer Camps in the Gaza Strip: A tool for indoctrinating the younger generation with radical ideologies and training them to become future operatives in the terrorist organizations, especially Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. (14 July 2019). The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Centre. Available at: //www.terrorism-info.org.il/app/uploads/2019/07/E_156_19.pdf [Accessed 26 Sep. 2019].
[15] Page 8 (n15)
[16] Ibid.
[17] As the “Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative” (//www.childsoldiers.org)
[18] As “The Save Children Fund” (//www.savethechildren.net)
LEGAL ACTION IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA
The Jerusalem Institute of Justice has been actively engaged in legal proceedings before the International Criminal Court (ICC), particularly focusing on the actions of Hamas and other terrorist organizations. In response to the October 7, 2023, attacks, JIJ has intensified its efforts to hold these groups accountable, arguing that these acts meet the criteria for genocide under international law. The legal documents submitted by JIJ underscore the historical context of the Genocide Convention of 1948 and emphasize the legal definition of genocide as codified in the Rome Statute of the ICC.
In past years, JIJ has filed extensive legal complaints and memos to both national and international bodies, highlighting human rights violations in the region. Their goal is to bring perpetrators, who have enjoyed impunity, to justice. Notably, JIJ has filed lawsuits against Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh for war crimes committed against the Palestinian people in Gaza and against Chairman Mahmoud Abbas for crimes against Palestinian civilians in the West Bank.
In addition to these efforts, JIJ has submitted fifty-two Palestinian testimonies to the ICC in The Hague, revealing severe abuses committed by the Palestinian Authority against their own citizens. These testimonies detail brutal acts, including murder, kidnapping, imprisonment, torture, and rape of Palestinian and Israeli citizens residing in the West Bank. A landmark 1,800-page verdict by Judge Moshe Drori of the Jerusalem District Court has also held the Palestinian Authority accountable for these severe abuses.
Irredeemable and Flawed
By Rachel Rosen.
"There is no doubt that we [UNRWA] have contributed to one of the most remarkable human development processes and significantly advanced several key sustainable development goals for Palestine refugees...”
The United Nations Relief Works Agency for Palestinians, or UNRWA, is a UN agency that purports to provide humanitarian aid to Palestinian refugees. A simple click on their website will bring forth an array of quotes and pictures of children happily reaping the benefits of UNRWA services, such as engaging in art projects and sports competitions at UNRWA schools. According to UNRWA Commissioner-General Pierre Krahenbuhl, "There is no doubt that we [UNRWA] have contributed to one of the most remarkable human development processes and significantly advanced several key sustainable development goals for Palestine refugees...” If UNRWA is in fact providing essential humanitarian aid to refugees however, then what are the issues with this agency that have caused the US to stop funding it?
Unlike the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR), the UN program which gives aid to refugees from all over the world, UNRWA is dedicated to helping Palestinians alone. Even more striking is the fact that UNRWA created a new definition of refugees that applies only to Palestinians, including not only those who were displaced after the 1948 and 1967 wars, but also their descendants. While UNRWA is commonly depicted as a humanitarian agency that provides educational, health, and welfare services to displaced Palestinians across the Middle East, it is in fact stewing a false hope among Palestinians that they will return to an Arab State of Palestine, and thus erase the State of Israel.
What does UNRWA accomplish? What are the issues it causes?
UNRWA’s definition of refugee has exponentially increased the Palestinian refugee population. While it originally aided 750,000 people, today UNRWA serves 5 million people. Consequently, many Palestinians, have acquired citizenship in other states, in Jordan in particular. Only the return of refugees and their descendants to their homes could remove their refugee status. Several Arab states, such as Lebanon and Syria, do not want to fully integrate Palestinians in an effort to not deny them their right to return to modern-day Israel. According to Einat Wilf, UNRWA expert and former Member of Kennest, this has focused Palestinian national identity on the right of return and on eliminating the modern State of Israel.
The educational system funded by UNRWA is especially problematic. UNRWA schools indoctrinate students in the West Bank and Gaza with violent, hateful ideologies. Students are taught that Israel has no right to exist, that Palestine and Israel cannot coexist, and that the Land of Israel should only contain an Arab Palestinian state. The Center for Near East Policy Research found that textbooks in UNRWA schools were filled with anti-Semitic and anti-Israel statements. These instructional materials promote the deligitmization and demonization of Israel and Jews and advocate for a violent struggle for liberation of 1948 Palestinian borders.
The UNRWA definition of Palestinian refugee status and its support for a biased education system does not contribute to peace efforts between Palestinians and Israelis, but rather, perpetuates the conflict. Refugee status is passed on from generation to generation. This ensures that many Palestinian children attend UNRWA schools where they are indoctrinated with hateful, anti-Israel, anti-peace beliefs. Hamas leaders put these beliefs into practice in UNRWA facilities by training children to become terrorists and by using these spaces for terrorist operations- such as digging tunnels under schools or storing weapons in hospitals.
Why has the US stopped funding it?
The defunding of UNRWA is one out of several steps the Trump Administration is taking to strengthen Israel. The US was the largest single donor to UNRWA, giving more than $350 million in 2017. After, however, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas refused to enter US-led peace talks with Israel, the US froze $125 million in aid. The decision was made at a meeting between Jared Kusher and Mike Pompeo, however, many other leaders- including President Trump and National Security Advisor John Bolton- were supportive. Trump stated, “...With Palestinians no longer willing to talk peace, why should we make any of these massive future payments to them?” Abbas’s refusal to engage in peace talks stems from the fact that Palestinians do not see the US as a fair, peace-making body. In moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, he claims that the Trump administration alienated Palestinians from the peace process.
Both US and Israeli leaders view UNRWA as a means of deepening Palestinian problems. Their alienation from the peace process is not the fault of the US, but rather can largely be attributed to their own neglect to work towards coexistence. US leaders tend to point to the issue of how UNRWA defines refugee, while their Israeli counterparts discuss the existential threat that UNRWA poses to Israel. According to National Security Advisor John Bolton,
“UNRWA is a failed mechanism. It violates standard international law on the status of refugees. UNRWA’s program is the only one in history based on the assumption that refugee status is hereditary... it is long overdue that we have taken steps to reduce funding.”
US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, affirmed Bolton’s point, claiming that in order for UNRWA to receive US dollars, the number of refugees will need to be changed to an accurate count. Heather Nauert, State Department spokeswoman, called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to support the US decision to withdraw funding from UNRWA, describing the program as an “irredeemably flawed operation” that is based on an “unsustainable” business model. The Prime Minister’s office affirmed Netanyahu’s support for the US’s “critical attitude towards UNRWA” and claimed that “practical steps need to be taken in order to change the fact that UNRWA is being used to entrench the Palestinian refugee problem instead of solving it.” The hawkish view of Israeli leaders is reflected in statements made by former and current Israeli ambassador to the UN, Ron Proser and Danny Danon, in which they describe how UNRWA-funded facilities are used for terrorist activities. Proser describes UNRWA schools as a “hotbed of incitement” against Israel, Jews, and the West, while Danon points to UNRWA’s adoption of a unilateral political position and the anti-peace rhetoric in course materials taught at UNRWA schools.
What are the solutions to UNRWA?
The largest problem with abolishing UNRWA is addressing who would provide humanitarian aid to poor Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Several solutions have been suggested that seek to reform who controls UNRWA and who oversees where funds get allocated. One solution would be to transfer UNRWA’s responsibilities to the UNHCR. If UNRWA operated under the UNHCR, it would to adopt the UNHCR rules and regulations, ensuring that Palestinian refugees were treated the same as all other refugees around the world. This would revoke the unique refugee status of Palestinians. Another solution would be to put UNRWA under the sole control of the Palestinian Authority, thus terminating its affiliation with the UN and UN funding. A third solution on the table is increasing UNRWA’s transparency in order to ensure that its budget and equipment are used for the correct purposes and to ensure that educational programs are supervised. In a statement to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Haley stated, “UNRWA can stay there, and we will be a donor if it reforms what is does... If it goes and makes sure that they’re not doing those teachings in textbooks, if they actually change the number of refugees to an accurate account. We will look back partnering with them.” She noted that the administration is seeking to bring resolutions to the UN that will hold Hamas accountable for human rights abuses in Gaza, such as the use of children as human shields.