Memorandum submitted by the Palestine
Solidarity Campaign (PSC)
INTRODUCTION
1. Since it was founded in 1982, the Palestine
Solidarity Campaign (PSC) has become the largest and most active
campaigning organisation in the UK on the issue of Palestine.
Further information about PSC can be found on our website: www.palestinecampaign.org.
2. PSC agrees with much of the analysis in the
International Development Committee's report on Development Assistance
and the Occupied Palestinian Territories ("the report").
In particular, PSC agrees that the main obstacle to Palestinian
economic development is the Israeli occupation. The report rightly
drew attention to features of the occupation which are calculated
to damage the Palestinian economy such as unjustifiable restrictions
on the movement of goods and people, the destruction of Palestinian
infrastructure and agricultural resources, the daily oppression
of Palestinians living under occupation, the grossly inequitable
allocation of water between Israelis and Palestinians, the continuing
development of illegal settlements and the building of the Wall.
PSC is in no doubt that when the Committee returns to these issues
it will find that the situation is even worse now than in 2002-03.
3. PSC also agrees with the Committee's recommendations
that the UK Government should honour its obligations to uphold
the 4th Geneva Convention, that Israel's preferential terms of
trade with the EU should be suspended and that economic sanctions
should be used to bring pressure to bear on Israel to uphold international
human rights and humanitarian law. PSC considers that on each
of these issues subsequent developments have made the case stronger
since the report was published. It hopes that the Committee will
call the Government to account for its continuing failure to protect
the rights and welfare of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation.
4. In what follows we confine ourselves to four
developments since the Committee's report was published:
— The withdrawal of settlers from Gaza.
— The response of the UK Government
and the EU to the election of Hamas.
— Israeli attacks on Gaza since June
2006.
THE RULING
OF THE
ICJ
5. The importance of the ICJ's 2004 advisory
opinion on the Wall is twofold in the context of issues raised
by the Committee's report. First, it is an authoritative statement
that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the occupied Palestinian
territories (OPT's); second, it drew attention to the responsibilities
of states (including the UK) to uphold the Convention in the OPT's:
"all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention are under
an obligation, while respecting the Charter and international
law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian
law as embodied in that Convention". Although the advisory
opinion was confined to the implications of the building of the
Wall, this broad statement of the responsibilities of other states
applies to all breaches of humanitarian law in the OPT's, many
of which were referred to in the Committee's report. PSC hopes
that the Committee will ask the UK Government what it considers
to be its legal responsibilities in the OPT's arising under the
Fourth Geneva Convention? What has it done to uphold the ICJ's
advisory opinion and the Fourth Geneva Convention in the OPT's?
We are not aware of any Government initiative or action in this
regard. (We return to this issue below in our discussion of recent
developments in Gaza.)
6. Specifically in relation to the Wall, the
Israeli Supreme Court claims that it has, in a series of judgements
on small sections of the route of the Wall, upheld the "normative
considerations" of the ICJ advisory opinion in purporting
to strike a proportionate balance between the human rights of
Israeli settlers and the Wall's adverse economic and humanitarian
impact on the Palestinian population. In reality, the Court has
not been willing to examine the lawfulness of the route of the
Wall but has accepted uncritically the Israeli state's argument
that the route is based on security considerations. Research by
B'tselem (Under the Guise of Security, Routing the Separation
Barrier to Enable the Expansion of Israeli Settlements in the
West Bank, December 2005—available at www.btselem.org) demonstrates
that the route—twice the length of the Green Line—has
nothing to do with security considerations but is designed to
allow for expansion of existing settlements so as to annex to
the Israeli state the maximum amount of land and the minimum number
of Palestinians.
THE WITHDRAWAL
OF SETTLERS
FROM GAZA
7. Our view, which we believe reflects the consensus
of international lawyers, is that the withdrawal of illegal settlers
from Gaza has not affected its status in international law: it
continues to be occupied territory subject to the Fourth Geneva
Convention. If there was any doubt about this before, we consider
that events since June 2006 show that Israel continues to control
the Gaza Strip and to exercise the rights of an occupying power.
It does so without regard to its responsibilities in international
humanitarian law. We urge the Committee to express a view on Gaza's
current status in international law and to seek clarification
of the UK Government's position on this question.
THE RESPONSE
OF THE
UK GOVERNMENT AND
THE EU TO
THE ELECTION
OF HAMAS
8. We consider that the Committee's description,
in paragraph 5 of the report, of Hamas as a "terrorist group"
was too glib. Clearly, in our view, once Hamas had made the decision
to stand in the legislative elections and had won such widespread
support from the Palestinian electorate, the description was misleading.
The Committee was surely perceptive when it said that the effect
of Israel's oppressive policies towards Palestinians living in
the OPT's is to increase "the level of despair and anger
felt by ordinary Palestinians at being denied the possibility
of any semblance of an ordinary life".[223]
It is therefore not surprising that Hamas did so well in the legislative
elections. The UK Government's suspension of development assistance
following January's elections failed to acknowledge that the vote
reflected the predicament of ordinary Palestinians, which was
so clearly set out in the Committee's report.
9. It is important that the Committee should
look again at the issues of Transparency and Monitoring, which
were considered in paragraphs 124-125 of the report where it was
recorded that no proof had been offered in support of the contention
that development aid had been used to finance terrorism. Given
the undertakings that have consistently been given by Hamas representatives
about transparency, there was surely no justification for withholding
financial support on the grounds that money could be diverted
to terrorism. To suspend development assistance was to collude
with Israeli collective punishment of the Palestinians for voting
for Hamas in such large numbers.
ISRAELI ATTACKS
ON GAZA
SINCE JUNE
2006
10. Against the background of Israel's breaches
of humanitarian and human rights law in the OPT's, PSC condemns
the UK Government's failure to criticise Israel's actions, whether
the killing of innocent civilians or the destruction of homes
and infrastructure. Perhaps the most striking recent example of
the latter was the attack on 28th June, as part of Israel's response
to the abduction of an Israeli serviceman, on the only electrical
power plant operating in the Gaza Strip.
11. The UK Government was quick to condemn the
raid in which the serviceman was abducted and two others killed.
In a statement on 25 June Margaret Beckett called it terrorism.
When asked, in a letter written by a PSC member which was forwarded
to her by Frank Dobson MP, to agree that the Israel's destruction
of the power station was an unlawful act aimed at the civilian
population and was disproportionate to the supposed military objective,
Mrs Beckett failed to say anything about it. As far as we are
aware, that remains the UK Government's position—silence.
12. A recent report by B'tselem, Act of Vengeance,
Israel's Bombing of the Gaza Power Plant and its Effects, September
2006 describes the impact on Palestinians of the breakdown of
their electricity supply. It made a very bad situation considerably
worse for a great many people. What the report also shows, as
was apparent from official statements at the time, is that the
Israeli Government is not able to identify what military purpose
was served by putting the power station out of action. Even if
a military justification could be found for cutting the power
supply in the Gaza Strip, the report shows that other, less damaging,
means were available. The report therefore concludes that the
attack was unlawful, disproportionate and constituted a war crime.
13. In its report, the Committee urged the UK
Government to be "more forceful in its advocacy" and
to ensure that the Government's position "is consistent with
all parties' obligations under international law".[224]
The bombing of the Gaza power station is perhaps the clearest
recent example of wanton destruction of civilian infrastructure
with extremely serious implications for ordinary Palestinians.
It was in clear breach of humanitarian law. PSC despairs of the
failure of the UK Government to condemn Israel's actions even
when they are as blatant as blowing up a civilian power station.
It hopes that the Committee will ask why the UK Government is
so reticent in criticising Israel in relation to this matter.
Government ministers are often heard to say that nothing would
be gained by public condemnation. But what good is achieved by
remaining silent? What does Israel do in return? The UK Government's
failure to condemn war crimes, but instead to carry on business
as usual with Israel, is tantamount to complicity.
CONCLUSION
14. The Committee will no doubt hear from other
organisations that are better able than PSC to describe the humanitarian
impact of the continuing Israeli occupation and the daily assaults
on Palestinian civilians and infrastructure.
15. PSC is unaware of any evidence that international
diplomacy has succeeded in improving the position of the Palestinians,
either politically or economically. There is a clear need for
effective action. As indicated in the committee's report, economic
sanctions and the suspension of the EU's trade agreement with
Israel might have little direct effect on the Israeli economy,
but they would undoubtedly have a huge political impact. The Israeli
Government, and seemingly most of the Israeli population, lives
under the illusion that Israel is a liberal democracy, comparable
to EU countries. While this may be true for the Jewish majority
in Israel, it has no relevance at all to Palestinians living under
occupation. If Israel is not willing or able to uphold international
human rights and humanitarian law in the OPT's, the UK Government
has a responsibility not merely to acknowledge this but to take
action against Israel. Such action, whether by the UK alone or
in concert with other EU countries, would help to shatter the
Israeli illusion and, more important, would improve the life chances
of ordinary Palestinians.
October 2006
223 Paragraph 57. Back
224
Paragraph 150. Back
| 
