Ever since Israel’s creation in 1948, which involved the dispossession and ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Palestinian people, armed conflict has not stopped. Israel’s settler colonial project has resulted in constant grievances to the Palestinians and other populations of the region, causing geopolitical tensions and hostilities.
When the latest Israeli assault on Gaza in October started, there have been constant fears of regional spillover. Most recently, the brazen Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus in grave violation of international law heightened the risk of the proliferation of war.
Since Israel launched its most recent attack on Gaza, which now seems to have reached genocidal proportions, the Israeli army claims to have killed more than 33,000 Palestinians, injured more than 75,000, and obliterated civilian buildings and infrastructure across the strip.
Tel Aviv is at present in violation of the International Court of Justice’s provisional measures requesting the protection of Palestinian rights, and the UN Security Council’s resolution calling for a ceasefire.
Atrocities in Gaza are part of Israel’s settler colonialism, which infringes on the most basic international legal principles and is a threat to global peace and security. In such a context, all statements of condemnation are empty of meaning if not followed by action.
When international peace is under threat and genocide is being committed under international law, states and corporations must act. Among the measures, they can resort to are embargoes as a form of economic pressure to stop violations of international law. Such measures are necessary to force Israel to stop its violations and to protect the Palestinian people against further atrocities.
Considering the legal case for embargoes against Israel, it is important to understand their applicable contexts. Under international law, member states are required to act when there is a threat to global peace and security – that is, violations are taking place that cross the red line at the core of the UN Charter.
None is denying the fact that the prolongation of the illegalities committed by Israel is a threat to international peace and security. The UN General Assembly has validated this position and repeatedly noted that the continuation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a threat to international peace and security, including in Resolutions 67/23 of 2012 and 70/17 of 2015.
The ICJ in its 2004 decision on the Israeli separation wall case also declared that Israel’s violations of international law pose a threat to global peace and security.
The past has repeatedly shown that colonial states will only stop their subjugation of colonized populations when their domination is no longer economically and politically viable.
The French did not leave Algeria out of goodwill; they did so because their colonization project became too costly. A more recent case illustrating this point is South Africa, where the apartheid regime fell after international sanctions threatened its economy.
Tel Aviv continues waging its war on Gaza because of imports of foreign weapons and ammunition, the production of which involves complex supply chains. Raw materials can come from one state, in another, the weapons’ production takes place, and the third one exports them and a fourth one transports them.
Countries like the Netherlands, Australia, and the UK send spare parts to Israel required for its US-made F-16 and F-35 fighter jets. Each one of these states can influence the Israeli state by imposing an embargo on arms and dual-use materials. They must use all means to protect the affected population in every way.
The industries that facilitate the war effort, such as the arms, and the oil and gas industries must face the embargoes. The international legal struggle against the apartheid regime in South Africa has taught this lesson.
