Hello and welcome to the program. Im fully back people, most of the victims in the guise of war, our civilians, thousands of palestinians have either been killed or injured. And the numbers keep rising. Israel is intensifying this bombing of guys after my shootings and abductions of ease, really is by how my slide is on saturday. One of the most densely Populated Areas on earth is now on the complete siege. Depriving 2300000 people have food medicine and water supplies. At the same time, how much so supplied barraged off the barrage of rockets into is really towns and cities. Protection of civilians is a fundamental principle of International Law governing conflict. So what role is it play here . Well be discussing this with, i guess in just a few minutes. But 1st, this report from benton model, the humanitarian crisis is unfolding and gaza. Israels Bombing Campaign has killed hundreds of palestinians, a forced tens of thousands from their homes. Garza is now under a complete siege. No food, water or fuel is getting into the enclave. The Un Human Rights Office regardless as collective punishment of the violation of International Law. The imposition of sieges that endanger the lives of civilians by depriving them of goods essential for their survival is prohibited under International Humanitarian law. And a restriction on the movement of people and goods to implemented siege must be justified by military necessity or it may amount to collective punishment. European union has issued a warning to israel saying its military operation and gaza is going to far. It will, it has to fight to defend, but it has to be done to coordinate with International Law here many teddy little and strong decisions. Contact dish, the International Law the tax by homos up and widely condemned the arm groups assault on israel deliberately target civilians. Many have been inducted and taken back to gaza. How boss has threatened to kill and is really captive every time is real bonds of palestinian home without warning. I recognize the legitimate grievances of the palestinian people. But nothing can justify these acts of cattle and the killing made me the doctrine of cdns. I write to raise my call to immediately seize these effects and release all last searches. But be as really military insist, its campaign is in line with International Law. The idea remains submitted to the law of conflict and we conduct ourselves according to it, despite the fact that we are furious. Im very frustrated and appalled by the atrocities that somebody else has done against us. We still keep on walls and we still make sure that the finance according to the laws that we are committed to. And israel has support from allies in washington. The binding administration throws distinction between attacks by him off which it calls terrorism and israels bombing of gaza, which it describes as self defense. So in this moment, we must be Crystal Clear. We stand with israel, tears pressure purposely target civilians killed. We have followed the laws of war law more. It matters is a difference. Its ordinary people on both sides, were paying the heaviest price in this war International Law as opposed to shield noncombatants. But well see, meet with you. Consequences for those who break it. How much protection does a little really offer . Sense amount in for inside story. A nice spring in august. Now for todays inside story in london, jeffrey nice barrister and former prosecutor at the International Criminal court in chicago is omar shakira, the israel and palestine director at human weiss watch. He wrote a report 2 years ago and hes really war crimes against palestinians and was deported from israel as a result of his investigation. And in ontario, canada is michael lincoln, Professor Emeritus in the faculty of law at Western University and a former un special robert who only occupied palestinian territory from where he was banned by israel down. And welcome to you. Oh, thank you very much for joining us on inside story. Michael link. If i can start with you vs likes the past few days on guys. A has been indiscriminate and widespread in response to hamas is surprise attack on israel. Help us understand for us what the rules of engagement and the fundamental principles that both parties in this conflicts are expected to follow under International Law. And specifically, what israel is, obligations are as the occupying power. Sure what the primary responsibility of the occupying power in any occupation is the protection of the other protected people under occupation. That is to ensure their well being that their 1st interests are always the top of the mind in what the occupying, occupying power is doing. In. Busy of conflict, the standard roles of International Humanitarian law, wind replying, which means that there must be of the occupying power. And the military force must always make a distinction. A very clear distinction between civilian and military objects. Its forbidden to be able to target um, civilian populations, either directly or through their property or through their means of a subsistence. And the other aspect of this is obviously the siege thats going on. Now. We know the cause has been under a block a since 2000 and, and 6. 00, i have a special rabbit tor. The and one of my reports to the United Nations stated that this amount of to collective punishment, which is absolutely forbidden. Under article 33. 00 of the 4th geneva convention, the total sage that has been placed on gas and now since the weekend where theyre cutting off of, of water sanitation, food, and any kind of supplies getting in the guise of it is forbidden, under International Humanitarian law. Is forbidden to starve ation or the, or the deprivation of any kind of the necessities of life that would support the civilian population. So there are a number of areas of deep concern with respect to International Law. So mike, on link, a number of violations being committed here by these relays. What about violent resistance against the occupation . Is that legal . Is this . The answer is yes, but the answer is also that it must be done within by a very clear boundaries. So people under occupation, people under colonialism, has had for a number of decades the right to resist their subjugation. But that must be done again within the rules of International Law. And in particular, it means that even though you may be using the right to resist any military force and the occupation that you cannot target, for example civilians, you cannot fire rockets into a civilian areas. You cannot cannot civilians or kill them. So all of these a donate that, that any sign to a conflict, be at the occupying power, increasing its oppression, or a Resistance Force trying to big back the occupying power. All of them have to be, uh, the rules of International Law in terms of who you target and what mills reactions you wind up and committing. So jeffrey, nice, i want to bring you on this particular point and terrify something with you. Thats a, i think a lot of people are asking about, and that is a fact that how moss is a non state actor in this conflict. And both israel and us politicians have characterized the mazda tag on israel as terrorism targeting, as weve heard civilians under International Law, is illegal, illegal under the rules of war. But those rules are set by countries that govern themselves. What about non state actors like come off . Whats the law regarding that . What, as well as the lowest bit unsettled, because as an own, stay that then you agree 0 may not be fully entitled or intitled to argue self defense in the way that it has. And the whole issue has to be approached in the way thats being so helpfully described, i much more than sorry to keep calling. Mister lynch has what has to happen in respect of an occupying pie. So the position is exactly as explained that they can resist the occupying power, that those within cause it come resist the occupying power within the law using force, but without breaking the role. And then they may not have to consider the possible defense of self defense as being raised by israel. But that doesnt change the duty on them to act roughly. Im afraid were in the position of afraid its not for me to express any aside from way over the over the position is clear that the opening actions of this particular part of this, im happy, long term conflict. The opening actions on of low please. You cannot go, for example, and kill people. Theres a party in the way that they were killed and all the civilians. So its a complicated issue. But the rule to keep in mind is that both sides subject to the limitations that may apply because of the different stages. One from the of the basic point has to be that the root of multi jeffrey nice was, was saturday and how mouse is actions. The opening action really was it or is it the occupation thats lasted over 70 years . Well, its the opening action of this part of a long contest or long series of contests. And and how that would play out in the course of roys nothing tale easy to full full costs. And indeed, the whole question of self defense of a country visit would be, or against a not in stay tact, which is the would be the position for israel here. Theres never been paid out yet in the course of little okay, that i think it brings me if i may just interpose this point to something of great importance. And why is this math and not . And never for quote a rule. There are quotes that showed and could have dealt with the earlier events in tutoring, for example protective adage, in 2014 in the of the nothing the golf is. I think that cold attacks by, by israel. And of course, i never consented because israel is not a participating member of the International Criminal. Cool tri state. Not only sensible. Yeah. Let me bring a martial here into the conversation if i may. So jeffrey, uh nice if i can omar your thoughts about weve what weve heard so far from both jeffrey nice and mike link and also based on the information that Human Rights Watch has observed on the ground these past few days. What would you say are the potential war crimes that are being committed by eva side in this conflict right now . Or here . Precisely because the parties ever too long, flagrantly violated International Humanitarian law. And already in the 1st few days of this conflict, were seeing much of the same. We should be Crystal Clear from us as brutal assault on southern israel, including deliberately targeting civilians shooting them in and mass taking as far as just women and children. Those are war crimes, flagrant violations of International Law. They have no justification. Weve seen the use re or the army pound. The densely populated cause a stir over repeated days and evenings. This includes dropping explosive weapons with wide area thats into guys that we have all. Ready the same large numbers of civilians killed, including children and weve seen high rise buildings reduced to rubble. Weve seen the cutting of the electricity of fuel water of the entry of goods a few minutes hearing aid. This is a clear war. Crime is professor of like noted which is not only collective punishment, you know, an entire 2200000 people. Ready punish for the actions of individuals, but its also potentially starvation as a tool war. And well see where things go in the coming days. Right, is rarely authority for the long track record of committing serious war crowds and gods, including deliberately targeting civilian buildings, wiping out families, destroying high rise buildings without any apparent military target there. So were seeing a real descent into darkness. A can i ask you about one specific aspect of all this because the laws of war, omar required the warring parties to give effective a warning advance of attacks that may affect civilian populations. And weve seen this happen in the past in guys where these really military has given warning to civilians. Is it happening in this current conflict . It, are they expected to wanting a warning signs given to the policy and population of casa a look, i think, were too early in our research to make definitive conclusions. Weve heard, you know, in our Research Examples of our warnings had been provided and there had been allegations that. Ready been cases or warnings are not provided with the let me be clear on. Ready even more warnings are provided that does not make an air strike necessarily legal. For example, weve documented in previous runs of escalations. After warnings have been given, destroying high rise buildings, hundreds of homes and businesses solely because there, there may have been a office for a policy auto group there, Something Like that would clearly be a violation of International Law, disproportionate or indiscriminate. So the warnings do not themselves give you Carte Blanche to, to kill the fact that a warning is not been given. Certainly um, if it involves significance to big ceiling cavities could be evidence of a work, right . But its really important to note we have a lot of this information out there, not a lot of things happening in real time. The sort of things required details, factual investigations. These really government is blocking access as long blocked access to gaza to un mechanisms to human rights organizations, which makes this work very difficult. So i think we need to be careful of making concrete claims. There are some that we can make based on the brace and this which with theyve been carried out or stated, but others will take time. Its interesting that you point out to the, this information and im curious to find out in just a little why, how the Media Coverage in public perspective, perception may impact efforts to uphold International Law michael link. Let me come back to you and ask you a question. About the issue of proportionality here. Israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the world. Of course, how does International Law define proportionality and distinction in on conflicts and how do these principles apply to the situation in, gosh, as sure, well, the distinction is clear, you are not to target a civilian populations are here to try to minimize, to the absolute degree possible any harm to civilians or to their or to their property in, in terms of the other question of a portion ality it, it is permitted, International Law i guess, to be able to choose the military target, which might have consequences for civilians either in their lives or their property, if the, the advantage militarily is overwhelming in favor of it, of attacking that, of all that said. So its important. The militarys never use these rules loosely. And israel has been cited on a number of occasions on reviews of as a tax, particularly in gas or in living on that. It has a very flexible or elastic definition with respect to the strict rules on International Humanitarian law. And how you were to go about choosing particular targets. We can see in virtually every one of the major conflicts or thoughts on gals are that have occurred since 2008, 2009. But there are many credible instances where these rules have disregarded the. You know the one example i can ill cite to now is 2014. When a roughly 2300 cala stadiums were killed in in gas, over the course of the 50 day war, 2 thirds of those were were civilians. And there were many instances where question marks or actually firm conclusions were drawn, that the way in which is really targeted. The destruction of buildings or the targeting of middletons add to higher price with respect to civilian lives, typically in wounding and disability and property to be justified under the laws of war. All right, so jeffrey, nice let me come to you. Now as weve heard, both sides have broken the rules of war here, and weve heard from some leaders calling on israel to exercise restraint in response to the attacks that had suffered. But the Biden Administration in the us, it seems as old, but given the green light to israel to retaliate against him, us vowing is public unconditional support for. And its now is war as michael link said, that we have been here before in 2014, where the rules of war were again, ignored. What consequences then what ive been use all day for accountability. If this keeps continuing topic to the very limited avenues of accountability as long as a israel remains, can you so far as the International Criminal court is concerned and as long as america would found any referral to that cooled by the security council. And this is a matter of real concern because the rules of laws being so helpfully explained by the 2 other speakers require a great deal of his row. Theyve been cry for example, not just the proportionality that weve heard all the proper record keeping. So that in the case of gauze, or if you decide you want to talk you to particular toilet annual household building, because of who you say, well, its got to be in in it. Youve also got to have regard to the impossibility of avoiding Collateral Damage in the form of human, a civilian suffering and death because of the nature of the building. The limited ability all complete in ability of civilians to escape from the area where the particular targeted building is going to be boned. Not this detail in the legitimate, if it ever is legitimate defense to this kind of bombing is never going to be available for the public to see as long as israel is kept away from any form of criminal court. And that is the position at the moment, and i