DILEMMAS OF HUMANITARIAN

ACTION IN GAZA

Kalim Ullah
Student ID 3370393

Centre for peace and reconciliation studies

Coventry University

Course Title Key Issues in Peace & Reconciliation studies

Module Leader Marwan Darwaish

Table of Contents

1) Objective of the Study

2) Background of the conflict

3) Humanitarian intervention and the right to Protect

4) Operation Cast Lead and Blow of humanitarian Crises

5) Freedom Flotilla Accident 31st May 2010

6) Legal standards and Israel responsibilities

7) Dilemmas of Humanitarian action and intervention in Gaza

8) Conclusion

9) Recommendations

10) Bibliography
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The main purpose of this essay is to conduct a thorough Analysis of the crises in GAZA. The
Analysis will cover different aspects of the conflict in detail the humanitarian condition in
GAZA after the assault and due to the 5 years blockade, the justification of humanitarian
intervention on the right to protect and the potential difficulties and challenges for humanitarian
intervention in the crises. Due the result of continuous Assault of Israeli defense forces and to
assess whether the crises in Gaza has crossed the threshold condition for humanitarian
intervention. I will also focus on the gaps and the double standards of international community
regarding the response to react to ensure protection of refuges and delivery of humanitarian
assistance to affected population would like to discuss the potential challenges faced by different
humanitarian organization and countries for intervention
CHP 1

Background of the conflict

The Blockade of Gaza prior to "Operation Cast Lead “Israel, which has a control over Gaza's
airspace and its land and sea borders, severely limited the stream of people, food, fuel,
medicine, money and other necessary goods into and out of Gaza for 19 months prior to the
Israeli attacks that began on December 27, 2008. Egypt contributed to some of the
responsibility for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, having mostly reserved its border with
Rafah closed during the Israeli blockade. These restrictions, crippling in themselves, greatly
reduced the capacity of Gaza's inhabitants and its infrastructure to manage with the
humanitarian blow of armed conflict. These limitations also amounted to a form of collective
penalty by Israel against the civilian population in violation of international humanitarian law
(HRW n.d)

Source (BBC NEWS)

Hamas outclass Fatah in parliamentary elections conducted in January 2006 in Gaza and the
West Bank.(BBC News February 19, 2006) June 2007, Hamas took charge of all governmental
and military institutions in Gaza. ,after taking charge Hamas' armed wing, the al Qassam
Brigades, and other Palestinian armed groups in Gaza have commenced thousands of rockets and
mortar shells at Israeli population centers, in violation of the prohibition against premeditated
and indiscriminate attacks on civilians under international humanitarian law. During the first 3
weeks of 2008 alone, Palestinian militants targeted around 220 mortar shells and 110 rockets into
Israel.(Domino.un 23rd Jan 2008) Magen David Adam (Israeli Red Cross) said that between
December 27, 2008, and January 12, 2009, more than 500 rockets fired from Gaza have hit
Israel, killing three civilians and wounding 78 people, four seriously injured

According to Israel the main reason behind the blockade and fuel and electricity cuts are these
indiscriminate attacks on Israel by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Nevertheless
breach of the laws of war by one party to an armed conflict do not legitimized violations by the
other (minimum humanitarian needs). For instance, on June 28, 2006, after an armed group from
Gaza detained the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit and held him unlawfully as a hostage,( hrw.july 4th
2007) the Israeli Air Force targeted eight missiles at Gaza's only power plant. Israel
consequently belated or blocked the supply of material needed to repair the plant, leaving it able
of producing only 80 megawatts per day out of its full capacity of 100 megawatts.

Israel's limitations on food, fuel and other essential goods, as well as on agricultural and
industrial exports from Gaza, have had a devastating impact on Gaza's economy.(New York
times Sep 18th 2007) World Bank stated In its quarterly report in October 2008, that due to the
blockade of Gaza, "only about 2% of industrial establishments are in operation," industrial
employment had reduced from 35,000 in 2005 to a only 840, and 40,000 jobs in agriculture had
been vanished.(World Bank group October 2008)

Without an operating economy, by 2008, 80 percent of Gaza's 1.5 million people relied on food
aid from humanitarian organization and close to 70% lived in "extreme poverty," defined as a
family of six or more person living on income of below than US$467 per month.(World Bank
September 2008)
Due to the Israeli blockade increased Gaza's dependency on humanitarian aid, Israel increasingly
constrained that aid. Israel allowed an average of only 475 daily truckloads of humanitarian aid
to Gaza during May 2007, 123 in October 2008, and only six in November 2008.(UN OCHA opt
December 15th 2008) these restrictions were eased somewhat during a six-month ceasefire
between Hamas and Israel in 2008, but deepen to an "extraordinary" level after November 4,
2008. (OCHA December 15th 2008) On that day Palestinian rocket attacks increased followed by
an Israeli storming into Gaza that killed four Hamas fighters. Very few international
humanitarian personnel have been given permission into Gaza since that time.

The foundation for some of Israel's actions emerged to be in a Cabinet decision on September 19,
2007, which stated Gaza a "hostile territory" and decided to constraint "the passage of people to
and from Gaza" and to cut down further supplies of fuel and electricity. The restrictions on fuel
and electricity, over and over again challenged in the Supreme Court by Israeli and Palestinian
human rights activists, termed as a collective punishment against the civilian population.

Israeli officials have utterly recognized that the blockade of Gaza amounts to collective
punishment. "There is no validation for demanding we permit residents of Gaza to live normal
lives while mortars and rockets are launched from their streets and courtyards at communities in
the south of Israel," Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on January 23, 2008.(Haaretz. January 23,
2008) Israeli Defense Ministry spokesman Shlomo Dror said on January 18, 2008: "If
Palestinians don't stop the violence, I have a feeling the life of people in Gaza is not going to be
easy."(The Washington Post, January 19, 2008)

Humanitarian intervention and the right to protect

The responsibility to protect has emerged as a response to the increased ethnic conflict the world
has experienced since the end of the Cold War. While internal sectarian conflict has raged,
the international community’s response has been haphazard at best.
There have been interventions in a number of cases, most notably in Bosnia and
Kosovo, yet, the most egregious case of human rights violations (Rwanda) drew no
effective response from any international agency.
This failure has led some academics and practitioners to theorize a new strategy for dealing with
gross domestic human rights violations in a way that would require international actors to
intervene. This process led to the formation of the International Commission on Intervention and
State Sovereignty (ICISS), which coined the term the responsibility to protect in its report of
2001.
Organized in and by the state of Canada, the report sought to get international actors to
take seriously a commitment to intervene to protect suffering world citizens. The
Commission stated the goal of having a “practical and
concrete political impact, rather than simply provide additional stimulation to scholars and
other commentators” (ICISS, P. 69).
More specifically, in 2004, according to former Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s High
Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change, the responsibility to protect would
cause a major shift in international policy. It claimed:

Military intervention should only be instituted where there is an immediate threat or an

ongoing campaign of violence that will or has led to some threshold number of civilian deaths.
Such campaigns may include ethnic cleansing, systematic rape and expulsion, genocide, and
‘crimes against humanity.’ In these cases, other states and international organizations would
have a just cause and a responsibility to intervene on behalf of civilians suffering
from these violations of their fundamental rights.

One might ask how this new conception would actually be different from current practice.
The change here lies in the official justifications and obligations given for intervening bodies.
Before, rights violations must have conferred a threat to international peace and stability.
Refugee flows and unstable or aggressive governments resulting from this type of
activity constituted justification for intervention based on security. Yet, under a responsibility to
protect, the reasoning is independent of this. The mere act of violence against civilians may
trigger a responsibility to react.
In the years since the ICISS released its report, momentum for adoption of a norm for
a responsibility to protect has simultaneously been further codified in documents in
the international system, while its exercise has been avoided in practice. One of
the principal boosts toward a domestic and international responsibility to
protect was the unanimous adoption of its main principles by
the UN General Assembly following the 2005 World
Summit (United Nations 2005, Par. 138-139).
One of the dilemmas showing by international intervention would be if the UN or ‘peacekeepers’
have the right to invade the sovereignty of a sovereign nations even in the case of human right
abuses. It’s a common feeling now that sovereignty has been no longer a divine right especially
in the Scenario of human rights violations by those who should have their people’s welfare at
heart. In these cases do we have the right to intervene? We would have to be agreeing that the
right to intervene comes from the principle that people inside nations have the right to protect
when their rights are violated especially by their own regime. None of the country has the right
to put itself forward as sole responsible for international peacekeeper or police man , so
multilateral intervention, the UN, has become the actuality.
The following seven course of action are offered by the UN record to stimulate discuss about the
circumstances under which humanitarian intervention should be endorsed, and the actions that
should be taken.
1. The international community has the right and the responsibility to respond in massive
humanitarian crises, even if such intervention involves an intrusion on state sovereignty.
2. Security Council permission should be required in all cases of humanitarian intervention. In
emergency situations where such validation is not available, unilateral or multilateral action
by Governments may be required. But Governments which commence such actions incur a
special burden to justify their intervention, and to finish and discontinue if instructed to do
so by the Security Council.
3. The United Nations will be primarily responsible for choosing a situation as a massive
humanitarian crisis. All States should accept a responsibility to facilitate UN fact-finding to
achieve this goal
4. Way out to military force should be the last option in humanitarian intervention. When
military force is believed to be compulsory, regulations of proportionality and discrimination
must be strictly stuck to
5. Decisions made on where, when and how to intervene should be neutral, guided only by
concern for the mitigation of human suffering.
6. It is the special responsibility of the Governments which undertake a humanitarian
intervention incur for reconstruction and rehabilitation once the immediate goal of the
uncertain humanitarian crisis has been completed.
7. The international community is responsible for providing the United Nations with the
resources required for fact-finding, protection of relief workers and, in dare circumstances,
coercive military action. These forces must be on hand to the Secretary-General for instant
deployment. Procedures must also be established for transferring responsibility from these
UN "fire brigades" to authorized national or multinational forces.

OPERATION CAST LEAD" AND EXPLOSION OF THE

HUMANITARIAN CRISIS
Gaza's 1.5 million people had suffered a serious humanitarian crisis fetched on by the twenty two
days of major military Assault that have doubled the impact of 19 months of a highly restraining
Israeli blockade, armored by Egypt.

The Israeli government has constantly denied that a humanitarian crisis exists. Information from
international humanitarian organizations, UN agencies and Gaza's inhabitants themselves simply
counter that claim. Hundreds of civilians have lost their lives in the fighting, most of them
children. Many wounded and sick have been trapped in their houses, unable to have access to
medical care. Dead bodies have been left among debris and in destroyed houses because Israeli
forces have at times denied access to medical crews. Thousands are displaced or are trapped in
their houses. They have no place to escape, caught in a combat zone where no place is really
safe.

Freedom flotilla incident May31st 2010

On 31 May 2010, the Israeli Defense Forces assault six ships comprising the Gaza Freedom
Flotilla. (Ohcr.31st may 2010) The task comprised an initiative of global civil society. The ships
going on under the patronage of the Free Gaza Movement and the Turkish Foundation for
Human Rights and Freedom and Humanitarian Relief (IHH) were carrying 10,000 tons of
humanitarian materials for the people of Gaza. There were 718 persons On board from 37
countries. (Freegaza.org) The ships were seized violently in international waters at mid night, by
Israeli Defense Forces special force units commandos, who landed through helicopters on the
leading Turkish ship. Fighting resulted, leading to the death of nine peace activists; dozens of
others were seriously injured and hundreds were detained. (Pmo.gov.il 30 th may 2010)Israel
assault in international waters of a humanitarian undertaking is totally against International
maritime law, especially in such a brutal manner, but more authoritative assessments will have to
await the results of several investigations currently under way. The facts are challenged as to
how the violence started and are being investigated by various panels, including one appointed
by the President of the Human Rights Council (Human rights council resolution 2 nd June 2010)
and another by the Secretary-General. (Un News centre. 7th august 2010) Israel is participating in
the latter and has appointed an Israeli to participate. The organizer of this humanitarian relief
effort to bring help to the blockaded people of Gaza have continually stressed, their purpose was
symbolically to provide needed items of food, medical supplies, construction materials and
educational supplies. Their main substantive objective was to end the blockade through an appeal
to world public opinion. In this regard, although the ships were not allowed to reach their
destinations and the citizen activists on board the vessels paid a heavy price, the venture was
spectacularly successful from a political perspective. For the first time since its establishment
three years ago, the blockade came under sustained global scrutiny for having inflicted severe
and unlawful humanitarian harm on the civilian population of Gaza. The leadership of Israel in
response agreed to limit the blockade. (mfa.gov.il 17th June 2010) It is too early to tell whether
this adjustment of the blockade will alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. To date, there are
no indications that Israel will allow humane conditions to emerge in Gaza, which would require
allowing unimpeded entry and exit both for Gazans wishing to study or travel outside Gaza and
for journalists, family members and friends to visit Gaza without acquiring permits and enduring
long waits and cumbersome security procedures. There are reports that a second flotilla of
humanitarian aid is planned. (Presstv 4th august 2010) It would consist of ships on a humanitarian
mission organized and funded by citizens in various countries, and seek to make delivery directly
in Gaza. Israel has warned that it will prevent any vessels from breaking its blockade, and the
United Nations Secretariat has also issued an official statement discouraging civil society efforts
to circumvent Israeli regulations pertaining to the occupation of Gaza. At the same time, there
are many indications of a worldwide surge of support for Palestinian solidarity efforts, including
a rapidly expanding boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign. (Usacbi.wordpress 5th june
2010) Comparisons have been made with increasing frequency to the anti-apartheid campaign of
the 1980s and early 1990s, which seemed to influence decisively the balance of thinking within
South Africa as to how to resolve the conflict over constitutionalism and racism in the country.

LEGAL STANDARDS AND ISRAEL'S RESPONSIBILITIES

The ongoing armed conflict between Israel and Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups is
directed by international accord and the rules of customary international humanitarian law (the
laws of war). This b law addresses many issues related to the terms of humanitarian assistance
and humanitarian access. Human Rights Watch don’t have concern whether Hamas or Israel is
justified in remedy to armed force or in the extent of forces positioned - we believe this approach
is the best option for us to support the goal of encouraging all parties in armed conflicts to
respect international humanitarian law. As such, we do not deal with certain issues, such as the
suitability of humanitarian ceasefires or gapes, which bear on decisions to choice to force or
withhold from using it,

Especially applicable to the humanitarian condition in Gaza is the law on occupation found in the
Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, to which Israel is party.(Geneva convention 12th aug 1949)
The Fourth Geneva Convention on occupation is applicable in Gaza because though Israel
withdrew its military forces and settlers from the Gaza Strip in 2005, it still has a control over
Gaza's airspace, sea space and land borders, as well as its electricity, water, sewage and
telecommunications networks and population registry. And Israeli military forces can enter to
Gaza any time they want

Also valid are the customary rules of humanitarian law, based on customary state practice, which
bind all parties to an armed conflict, whether states or non-state armed groups. These draw from
the First Additional Protocol of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions(Protocol 1 GC 1977) and the
Hague Regulations of 1907,( Protocol I, art. 54(2) ) which are extensively acknowledged as
reflective of customary law.

As an occupying power Israel has the responsibility to make sure the protection and well-being
of the civilian population in areas under their occupation. Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, which directs occupation, places a responsibility on an occupying power to make
sure that the food and medical supplies of the population, as well as to allow and assist the
provision of humanitarian relief. This requirement also applies to specific Israeli forces
anywhere in Gaza they exercise effective control. Israel's ongoing blockade of the Gaza Strip, an
act that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and basic needs, constitutes a form of collective
punishment and violation of article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

It is against the customary international humanitarian law to attack, destroy, remove or

rendering useless objects require for the survival of the civilian population. (Protocol I, art.
54(2)) At the same time, it is the responsibility of the conflicting parties to permit and facilitate
the rapid and unobstructed passage of impartially distributed humanitarian aid to the population.
It is against the law to use starvation of the civilian population as a tactics of warfare (Protocol I,
art. 54(1). ) conflicting parties must provide access to the free passage of food relief to civilians
at risk. (Geneva IV, art. 23) They must be agree to allow relief operations to take place but may
not reject such consent on arbitrary grounds. A deliberate denial to permit access to these
materials in response to military action can be considered as collective punishment or an
illegitimate retaliation against the civilian population.
According to international humanitarian law conflicting parties must also make sure the freedom
of movement of humanitarian relief personnel vital to the exercise of their duties. This
movement can be restricted only provisionally for reasons of crucial military need. (Protocol I,
art. 71(3). Relief workers and medical personnel may never be intentionally attacked. (Protocol I,
arts. 15 and 71(2) Medical transportation must be esteemed and protected at all times; they lose
their protection if they are used outside their humanitarian purpose to commit acts harmful to the
enemy. (Protocol I, art. 21)

Severe violations of international humanitarian law that are committed with criminal intentions
are considered to be war crimes. War crimes related to humanitarian relief include: Attacking
medical personnel, units or transport ; making persons involved in humanitarian relief the entity
of attack; using starvation of civilians as a tactic of warfare by depriving them of material
necessary to their survival, including by obstructing relief supplies; and imposing collective
punishments, among others. Individuals also may be held criminally liable for trying to commit a
war crime, as well as accomplishing in, assisting, aiding or supporting a war crime.

Persons who are involved in planning or prompting the commission of a war crime will also fall
in the jurisdiction of war crimes. Commanders and civilian leaders may be put on trial for war
crimes as a matter of command responsibility when they have knowledge or should have known
about the commission of war crimes and took unsatisfactory measures to avoid them or punish
those liable.

States are responsible to investigate and fairly take legal action against individuals within their
terrain involved in war crimes. Non-state armed groups should also look into and take action as
appropriate against any person who have been indulged war crimes.

Dilemmas of humanitarian Action & intervention in GAZA

It is equally important to discuss both the dilemmas faced by humanitarian organization for
intervention in Gaza to save people and there are obstacles for international community to
intervene in GAZA for humanitarian intervention in Gaza the main challenges which resist in the
deployment of international force for intervention

1) US unconditional Pro Israel policy:

Due to the US unconditional support to the Israel it become difficult to pass any resolution
against Israel no matter Israel have been involved in war crimes or violation of human rights but
they have the unconditional support of US and this is one of the main reason that any significant
step have not been taken yet according to Weiss “for any humanitarian intervention US is
required to be on board” due to the huge impact which US have it difficult to pass any resolution
from the security council

2) Israel Rigidity

Israel in Gaza have been indulged in the violations of human rights law and humanitarian law
Israel will never allow any international intervention in GAZA because Israel don’t want lose
the control over Gaza for an international peace keeping force it will be very difficult to save
People of GAZA from Israel

3) Hamas Attitude

One of the significant challenges for humanitarian intervention in Gaza is the

behavior and attitude of Hamas most of the western countries consider Hamas a
terrorist organization (USIP) and most of them have no sympathies for Hamas on
the other hand the Al Fatah of Mahmood abbas have good terms with western
countries

Dilemmas of humanitarian action in Gaza

The humanitarian situation in the GAZSA has been documented in detail by international and
local (Palestinian and Israeli) NGO as well as by the United Nations Office for the Coordination
of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) these organization has pointed out many challenges
working in the GAZA areas the challenges or dilemmas or of the following
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a good example of the dilemmas in addressing a humanitarian
emergency where there is little will to solve the political dilemmas that stand as the main causes
of the crisis: the only way-out to reconstruct humanitarian relief with the qualities of impartiality
and neutrality is be sure that the political bodies and state authorities address the political
problems within their circle of competence. I don’t agree with both “minimalist” and
“maximalist”explination of the humanitarian agenda. The first one talk about the neutral and
impartial goal as attainable only by taking politics on a side , while the latter thinks that
humanitarian aid must be used to achieve political objectives(Weiss 1999). Although
humanitarian agencies do their level best to portray themselves as nonpartisan, and their motives
as pure, but still it is difficult to believe not to be indulged and inclined by politics: all the
budget allocations and turf protection require immense care. it is one of the reason that many
international humanitarian organization did not respond to the catastrophe as in the other part of
the world . Humanitarians also negotiate with local authorities for transport services, issues
related to visas, which most of the time require compromises. They must decide whether or not
to expose human rights abuses, they choose when to look at a side when bribes take place and
food aid is used for military objectives. They provide foreign exchange and forcibly add to the
growth of war economies that reallocate assets from the weak to the strong.

We cannot do something as if we do not understand that there are important political reasons
behind the challenges to humanitarian action in these situations. it is clear that the only way we
may address this issue is to act as a neutral and impartial organization, primarily by discussing
and listening with all parties, and not only to those believed to be politically important. This
attitude is surely absent in the approach taken by UN agencies with the Middle East conflict, but
cannot be missed by the humanitarian world if we don’t want to be besieged by the other side of
ignoring politics: the over imposition of politics on humanitarian relief.

Talking in the context of Gaza crisis, it is unquestionable that Israel cannot keep endorsing
collective punishment on the residents of the Gaza Strip, with shocking impact to the civilian
population. This can only be attainable by making a dialogue between Israel and Hamas that will
press Israel to accept a third party assurance for the access of goods into the Strip. The
manifestation on the scene of a third party is especially required from the humanitarian point of
view. The blockade of Gaza is dictated on the name by the need for Israel’s security; this cannot
be disregarded and must be tackled in order to remove the possibility that Israel may use this
legal intention to achieve short-term political goals. However, the humanitarian situation in
Gaza is not so complicated entirely because of the problems with the state of Israel. The ruling
Hamas is not enjoying good relationship with international community and touched a very high
level of intensity at moments during the war time. On 6 February, for instance, following the
elimination of ten trucks of food aid by the Ministry of Social Affairs on 5 February, UNRWA
suspended its activities of aid into Gaza. This incident followed the cessation of food aid and
blankets from an UNRWA distribution centre on 3 February. UNRWA announced that the
suspension would remain valid until all aid was returned and credible guarantee were provided
that there would be no further obstruction to the import and supply of aid. On 9 February,
UNRWA start their activities of its humanitarian supplies into Gaza, after the Hamas authorities
returned all of the aid supplies confiscated on 3 and 5 February(UNOCHA 9-17 April )

The problems connected with the survival and the influence of Hamas inside the Strip is strongly
linked with the problems that Israeli authorities impose on the entry of humanitarian aid to the
Strip. One incident is the use of medicine bottles import from Israel into humanitarian aid
packages, was founded by the IDF as being used for making homemade bombs (IDF Feb 13
2009) by Hamas. As a result, Israel stopped the supply of medicines in bottles to the Gaza Strip,
creating a lot of difficulties, especially at the start of the crisis, where huge supply of medicine
was required due to the enormous number of injured people

CONCLUSION

From the above discussion it has been cleared that there are many challenges to the international
community both on the humanitarian intervention and the impartiality of the humanitarian action
if we have to work really for reducing the sufferings of people we have to make our intentions
clear both military and humanitarian intervention should be based on international law and
according permission granted to the security council

The role of Un is still questionable especially after 9/11 attacks and in the case of middle east
conflict it has been by passed many times it is not fulfilling the work for which it has been
created if the situation remains the same than may be it no more an impartial organization the
humanitarian intervention and humanitarian aid in the last decade have been exploited most of
the time for their own interest by the big powers as in the case of Iraq, Afghanistan and the tribal
areas of Pakistan there is an immense need of reshaping the polices regarding humanitarian
intervention and humanitarian action and if there is a genuine case like GAZA conflict is there
where all threshold level has been crossed by Israel the world should take bold step if not on
military side at least bringing a resolution in the united nation or imposing ban on Israel to ease
the blockade of GAZA people

RECOMMENDATIONS

To the Government of Israel

Take all possible steps to assist the work of humanitarian and medical agencies.

Support humanitarian passage and other procedures to facilitate access of medical and
humanitarian personnel, and civilians fleeing from the warfare. Open border crossings for the
flight of the wounded out of Gaza. Smooth the progress of the transfer of the wounded to
hospitals in Gaza and then, if necessary to referral outside Gaza.

Take all necessary actions to ensure that forces do not targeted humanitarian aid personnel and
their facilities, supplies, and transportation.

Considerably extend the humanitarian effort with more trucks allowed into Gaza every day,
more entry points opened, and greatly enhanced the internal distribution within Gaza. The
current daily three hour "humanitarian pause" is greatly poor for aid delivery. Specific
recommendations by humanitarian agencies include:

Prioritize increased wheat grain, fuel (industrial and regular), cooking gas and cash.

Open the Karni crossing for the delivery of wheat via the conveyor belt.
Allow the unimpeded flow of fuel through Nahal Oz, including industrial diesel for the power
plant, as well as ordinary diesel, petrol and cooking gas.

Allow the importation of spare parts and equipment essential for the rehabilitation of essential
civilian infrastructure.

Support efforts by the United Nations to create areas that have an enhanced capacity to protect
civilians from the ongoing hostilities. Take all feasible measures to avoid military operations in
or near such areas, such as UNRWA schools and other places accommodating displaced persons.

Cease all attacks on infrastructure essential for the survival of the civilian population, such as the
water infrastructure, the electrical grid, the sewage system

Allow independent observers, including journalists and human rights monitors, access to Gaza.

To Hamas

Hamas should ensure all possible actions to assist the work of humanitarian and medical
agencies.

Hamas must understand that they are going to behave as a responsible and reliable actor with
other potential than the continuation of violence, a situation that can, as a bonus, make Hamas
more liable for its actions in front of the Palestinian population, as well as achieving greater
legitimacy in the international community

Hamas should ensure that civilian should not be use as a human shield

Hamas should not provide Israel any opportunity to exploit the civilians of Gaza

Support efforts by the United Nations to create areas that have a considerably improved
capability to protect civilians from the ongoing hostilities. Take all solid actions to avoid military
operations near those areas, such as UNRWA schools and other places accommodating displaced
persons.

Support humanitarian corridors and other measures to facilitate access of medical and
humanitarian personnel, and civilians fleeing the fighting.

To the Government of Egypt

Egypt is somehow responsible for the crises in Gaza

It is the obligation of Egypt to Open Rafah crossing point to permit humanitarian aid to reach
Gaza and to allow civilians to seek safety from the conflict, ensuring that anyone who flees is
entitled to return upon completion of hostilities.

To the UN Security Council

Encourage respect for and accomplishment of the humanitarian provisions of Resolution No.
eighteen sixty passed on January 8, 2009.

UN should ensure that the trapped people of GAZA should be have access to the outer world for
their basic needs

Conduct inquiry for the Accident to the aid flotilla in international water and bring the
responsible into the court of law

Prompt Egypt and Israel to let the Gaza civilians cross their boarders for temporary medical
treatment

Pressurize the Israeli government to allow access to the independent observers, including
journalists and human rights Activist, access to Gaza so that exact and timely information about
the humanitarian crises is publicly available.

Press both Israel and Hamas to show respect international humanitarian law in all respects,
including allowing the supplies of humanitarian and medical relief and refraining from attacks
that deliberately, indiscriminately, or disproportionately endanger civilians.
References and Bibliography

1. “Gaza strip population” [online] available from

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_israel_palestinians/maps/ht
ml/population_settlements.stm> [5th Dec, 2010]

2. Ian Brownlie 2005, First report on the effects of armed conflicts on treaties, Official
Documents System of the United Nations, Geneva

3. M.E. Oliver and M.K. Xego 2003, The permissibility of unilateral intervention under
international law, ECNext Inc., http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-
173377_ITM Accessed (14th December 2010)

4. See, for example, Human Rights Watch, "Letter to Olmert: Stop the Blockade of
Gaza," November 20, 2008, http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/11/20/letter-olmert-
stop-blockade-gaza; Human Rights Watch, "Human Rights Watch written statement
on Gaza to the UN Human Rights Council," January 21, 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/01/21/human-rights-watch-written-stateme....

5. Israel ceased transferring tens of millions of dollars in monthly customs revenues to

Hamas in February. "Israel to impose Hamas sanctions," BBC News, February 19,
2006, available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4729000.stm (accessed
December 27, 2010) –

6. Jackson, Robert, the Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States, Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000.
 7. - Lillich, Richard B., “Humanitarian Intervention: A Reply to Ian Brownlie and a Plea
for Constructive Alternatives”, in John Norton Moore (ed.), Law and Civil War in the
Modern World, Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1974, pp. 217-228.

8 - Knudsen, Tonny Brems, “Humanitarian Intervention Revisited: Post-Cold War

Responses to Classical Problems”, International Peacekeeping, Vol. 3, No. 4,
1996, pp. 146-165.

9 T. G. Weiss, Principles, Politics, and Humanitarian Action, in Ethics & International

Affairs, Vol. 13, NO: 1, pages: 1-22, year: 1999

10 United Nation Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian affairs, Logistic Cluster,
Gaza Crisis Situation Report, 8 February 2009