(Last updated: June 22, 2016)
June 21, 2016 is the second and last day of this year’s second annual Conference called, “Towards a new Law of War”. The Conference has been sponsored by Israeli NGO Shurat HaDin (“Tuvia Brodie, “Shurat HaDin Conference, ‘Towards a new Law of War’, Day 1”, tuviabrodieblog, June 20, 2016).
June 21, 2016 is the second and last day of this year’s second annual Conference called, “Towards a new Law of War”. The Conference has been sponsored by Israeli NGO Shurat HaDin (“Tuvia Brodie, “Shurat HaDin Conference, ‘Towards a new Law of War’, Day 1”, tuviabrodieblog, June 20, 2016).
Yesterday, I
gave you a report of Day 1. Here’s a review of the second and final day.
Disclosure:
I’ve tried to be accurate here. If I have put errors into speakers' mouths, those errors are mine alone. For space reasons, this is a condensed account
Irwin Cotler
has served as an MK and Minister of Justice for Canada. He spoke of how the
United Nations delegitimizes Israel.
Each year in
the UN General Assembly, he said, the UN adopts something like 20 Resolutions
against Israel, and perhaps 4 for everyone else (I couldn’t tell if he was
exaggerating to make a point, or if these were ‘real’ numbers). This anti-Israel
bias has become a UN standard: make sure you condemn one nation, Israel.
There are many
committees at the UN working against Israel. Almost every day, people meet somewhere
in the UN infrastructure to condemn Israel.
This UN
behaviour is a form of ‘Lawfare’ against Israel. It’s the use of law and/or
international code as an instrument of war against Israel. We have to fight
back.
We can fight
by acting like a claimant—not the accused. We have to make the case that these UN
condemnations are prejudicial. We have to argue that this prejudice corrupts
the values of the UN—and hurts all of Mankind. He described how we can make
that case.
We also have
to reverse the conventional paradigm about the Arab-Israel conflict—that Israel’s
Apartheid is the sole problem that brings misery to the Middle East. We have to
argue the truth—that it’s Arab Apartheid that causes Middle East misery.
Prof Rachel
Vanlandingham, Former Judge Advocate, US Air Force, spoke about Judea-Samaria.
She asked, how should these ‘territories’ be classified legally? This is, she
said, an important question because the world uses a double standard for Israel
when classifying Judea-Samaria as ‘occupied’ (see below). She further argued that Judea-Samaria is
really sui generis, meaning it’s unique. Standard legal classifications for ‘occupied
territories’ don’t fit here.
Prof Eugene
Kontorovich, Northwestern University School of Law, stated that ‘occupation’ is
not fully defined. Existing definitions aren’t consistently applied.
When the
world says Israel ‘occupies’ Judea-Samaria (the West Bank), it means a
‘belligerent occupation’. That means that Israel maintains actual control of Palestinian
Authority (PA) land.
But there’s
a problem with ‘belligerent control’ as 'occupation'. Citing military takeovers in Indonesia
and Russia, Kontorovich showed that a belligerent military control of someone else’s land
is not always called, ‘occupation’. For example, Russia forcibly occupies two territories. But no one says that its demonstrably belligerent occupation of another is "occupation".
Israel is different. Despite its far less 'belligerency' in the 'West Bank', its presence there is termed, 'occupation'.
The same is true regarding an Armenia takeover of Azerbaijan territory. No one says that Armenian take-over is ‘occupation’. But a less ‘belligerent’ Israeli hold on territory claimed by the PA is called ‘occupation’.
Israel is different. Despite its far less 'belligerency' in the 'West Bank', its presence there is termed, 'occupation'.
The same is true regarding an Armenia takeover of Azerbaijan territory. No one says that Armenian take-over is ‘occupation’. But a less ‘belligerent’ Israeli hold on territory claimed by the PA is called ‘occupation’.
That means Israel is treated with a double
standard. As speaker Avi Bell (San Diego School of Law) put it, there’s an ‘Israel
rule’: what is permitted in war to Western [and some non-Western] nations is
forbidden to Israel.
Uzi Shaya of
Shurat HaDin spoke about how teenage terrorists find all they need on Social
Media to become killers. For example, after two 14-year old Arab Muslim youth
walked into a supermarket in Israel and murdered an IDF soldier, investigators made
a disturbing discovery. These teens didn’t belong to any terror group. They
weren’t religious. They came from good families. But they each had Facebook,
twitter, Instagram and youtube.
The boys had
used Social Media to become ‘home-made terrorists’.
Social Media
is like the Wild West. There are no controls. All things ‘terror’ are there: the
incitement to kill, the manipulation to create the desire to kill and
instructions how to kill.
With Social
Media, you can sit at home and become a radical terrorist. Nobody in the West
is prepared for this kind of terror. That has to change.
Servers like
Facebook show little interest in blocking anti-Israel hate sites. Recently, Shurat
HaDin did an experiment. It created two identical hate-filled sites. The sites
were identical except for one thing: one site called to kill ‘Palestinians’.
The other called to kill Jews. Then, Shurat HaDin sent Facebook two complaints,
one against the ‘kill Palestinian’ site, and one against the ‘kill Jews’ site.
Immediately,
Facebook took down the ‘kill Palestinian’ site. The ‘kill Jews’ site is still
up, several months later. That has to be fixed.
Twitter has
had similar issues. So has youtube. No Social Media will stop anti-Jewish and
anti-Israel hate postings. They all claim freedom of speech.
Hamas cannot
open a bank account. Hamas officials cannot get visas. But they can operate on
twitter, etc. They can spread hate with no restrictions.
Michah
Larkin Avni, founder of Stop Incitement Movement, called the use of Social
Media to foment terror a ‘Facebook Intifada’. Social Media is part of jihad. In
fact, IS (Islamic State) actually refers to Social Media as an ‘open-source
jihad’.
There was
much, much more about the dangers of Social Media. There were also discussions
of Syria, refugees and IS—and how UN code fails to address what’s happening in
Syria.
At the end
of the Conference, Israel Minister of Education and head of the Jewish Home
Party, Naftali Bennet, spoke. I won’t go into details. But he gave a good
speech.
I hope this short-hand
review was meaningful despite its brevity. I hope you can see how people from around
the world fight for Israel on multiple battlefields, all of them unconventional.
This fight
to defend Israel is the fight to change the laws of war so that moral nations can fight on the unconventional battlefield. Because of its enemies, Israel has become the driving
force behind innovative, legal strategies to counter the new ‘weapons’ terrorists
invent to attack us.
Thanks,
Shurat HaDin, for the work you’ve done for Israel (see the Shurat HaDin
website). Thanks also for a great Conference.
No comments:
Post a Comment