Join on WhatsApp 
Join on Telegram As the atrocities in Gaza are unfolding before our eyes, people around the world are rising to express opposition to Israel’s war crimes, marching in the thousands and using various slogans.
Yet, at the back of every concerned human’s mind lies the same question: “How is Israel able to get away with murder?” Or, to put it more accurately: how is Israel able to get away with the genocide of the Palestinian people?
The answer to that question is not straight forward but looking at the Israeli constitutional law, International law, and the interaction between the two is a productive place to start.
First of all, Israel does not have a constitution. It has a set of basic laws that outlines the appointment processes and the functioning of the government. However, the basic laws do not mention civil rights or fundamental rights for the people.
While there was a resolution to constitute a committee that would be charged with writing a constitution protecting the citizens’ fundamental rights, this simply never happened and does not seem to be a priority. So, even Israeli citizens are not protected by their country’s constitutional law and do not possess a set of powerful laws that ensures their freedom and security.
For an institution that legitimizes its existence as a state around the narrative that the Jewish people need a safe haven, the least we can say is that the lack of commitment of Israel to protect those people’s rights is inconsistent and gives us a solid ground to question the real purpose of its existence: is it really a safe haven for the Jewish people?
Nonetheless, Israel has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights (ICCPR) by which discrimination is illegal and the rule of law ought to be the norm. The ICCPR has been a binding legal document for Israel since 1991.
Normally, Israel would have the legal obligation to act by its principles such as freedom, equality and non-discrimination. This technicality provides Israel with a somewhat credible cover to call itself a liberal democracy.
That being said, our attention must turn to the ICCPR’s Article 12 which stipulates that the freedom of others can only be restricted by measures necessary to protect national security.
National security is the loophole enabling the atrocities against civilians to unfold and the institution of Israel has found a creative way to use it relentlessly, constantly discriminating against Palestinians and killing them arbitrarily, and using the state of emergency and the special provisions it procures for the protection of national security.
Understanding the atrocities perpetrated by the institution of Israel in the region of Palestine is possible if we dive deep into the set of provisions around the state of emergency, elaborated upon by the Articles 38 and 39 of the Israeli basic laws that hold constitutional authority.
As a general rule, the state of emergency is applicable when there is a tangible threat that triggers it. Its declaration has to go through a process respectful of checks and balances and it may be used for a limited amount of time.
However, Israel does not fit into this framework. It has been under a state of emergency since the day of its creation. This enables the institution to take drastic measures for national security even when they are not justified. Moreover, both the government and the Knesset can declare the state of emergency unilaterally, leaving the powers of the state of emergency dispersed and easily abused.
But most importantly and most problematically, being under a constant state of emergency exempts Israel from operating under the rule of law. There are three main implications that arise from the constant state of emergency.
First, it becomes legal to discriminate against certain individuals, mistreat them or even kill them under the excuse that they represent a threat to national security.
Second, people can be arrested and prosecuted without any proof, and their human rights can be violated while still being shielded by the ICCPR because of national security.
Lastly, the government can govern by decree, operate like a dictatorship, and make a retroactive use of the law, which would otherwise be illegal.
This leaves everyone in Palestinian territories vulnerable to the abuses of Israel because although it is technically a democracy, it has consistently been under a state of emergency, allowing it to effectively act as a totalitarian regime.
You might think that organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC) must be able to stop these abuses. In fact, that is the very reason they exist. But I invite you to think twice.
Israel is not a member of the ICC, leaving the court with limited to no power over it. The only way to have the ICC take action against Israel would be if the United Nations’ (UN) Security Council signaled the situation in Palestine to the ICC and officially requested it to open an investigation.
The Security Council of course would do no such thing because Israel has powerful allies within it, namely the US, the UK, and France.
Now, you may legitimately wonder why these states have such a vested interest in Israel. One of the answers would be that their real vested interest is in their deep pockets.
To be able to make sense of this, we must go to Egypt in 1956 when Jamal Abdenasser nationalized the Suez Canal. This is where the colonial roots of this whole massacre start to become clear.
The Suez Canal is one of the most strategic points for world trade as it enables ships to pass from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea without having to go around Africa. In 2023, its revenue amounted to $9.5 billion.
The Suez Canal was owned by the French and the British from 1869 to 1956, meaning that until 1956, the colonial powers were making billions from the Egyptian territory. Today, on top of not making any money from the Suez Canal, these powers have to pay to use it which goes against their perceived interests.
Therefore, they have a strong financial incentive to seek an alternative to the Suez Canal. Conveniently, Israel has a solution to their problem… It is called the Ben Gurion canal. The Ben Gurion canal is an American-Israeli plan kept secret until the 1990s.
It aims to compete with the Suez Canal by building an alternative to it on Israeli territory. If the Ben Gorion canal becomes operational, the revenue of the Suez Canal is expected to drop to $4 billion. In 1963, the US Department of Energy made a classified plan under the Jimmy Carter administration to excavate the Negev desert with 520 nuclear bombs to help create the Ben Gurion canal.
However, the connection from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea is most feasible if it passes through the Gaza Strip. As such a canal is highly profitable, it would effectively alleviate the Palestinian people and empower them both economically and strategically as a fifth of the world trade is dependent upon the connection between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean.
It goes against the colonial agenda to empower the indigenous population, so Israel found a rather distasteful solution: terrorize the people and seize their land. It has been reported by Israeli soldiers that they got the following instructions: “Occupy, Cleanse, Settle.”
In fact, if Israeli forces are able to do so, they will be able to build their canal, operate it, and not risk empowering Palestinians.
If successful, Israel will be able to count on several billion dollars every year and it would undoubtedly give privileged access to its historical allies who are currently providing it with unconditional economic and military support.
These colonial powers are supporting the genocidal actions of the Israeli army when their citizens are loudly protesting them, with some governments even trying to silence the people who call for a free Palestine when they have the democratic duty to let the voice of the people govern.
But they will not stick to their principles because violating them satisfies their financial interest. Once the Ben Gurion canal becomes operational, if ever, it would charge less than the Suez Canal as its route is longer, taking down shipping costs. This leaves me wondering what are values worth if they can be bought?
The intricacies of power and colonialism have shaped peace and war for as long as civilizations have been rising and falling. In the name of profit, people are dying. In the name of security, the safety net of innocents is destroyed. And in the face of freedom and democracy, oppression takes the upper hand.
But we, as individuals, know that humanity can be better, we know that war is not a necessary byproduct of human existence, we know that our similarities outweigh our differences. Yet, our states do not seem to have caught up to that realization.
We can seek to understand how war comes about, why it is possible and which institutions are setting the ground for its flourishing but how can we capitalize on our individual powers to build the alternative? The revolution is within each one of us; in the way we live, theway we consume, what we fear and the fears we choose to conquer.
