Public opinion remains polarized regarding the Israeli blockade and aid to Gaza. There is strong support for Israel's measures, viewed as essential for self-defense against Hamas and preventing arms smuggling. Many hold Hamas accountable for the humanitarian plight in Gaza due to its governance. Conversely, there's significant condemnation of the blockade, seen as exacerbating the humanitarian crisis, particularly for civilians, and potentially violating international law. Debate exists over the roles of international organizations and neighboring states in addressing the crisis, questioning Israel's responsibilities as an occupying power.

Israel

Hamas

Civilians in Gaza

International Community

[deleted]

Your premise is that Israel is doing something wrong, or excessive.

Maybe you are correct, but here is the test that is use for EVERY other nation besides Israel:

What OTHER solution should Israel pursue that would EQUALLY protect their interests in (1) self defense by eradicating Hamas and their apparatus, (2) self-defense by deterring future attacks of that same nature, (3) recovery of the kidnapped citizenry?

Simply criticizing Israel for the unfortunate consequences of their military action is meaningless and unreasonable.  Of course there will be some consequence to the nation that attacked them.  The threshhold question is excessive, and to show excessive behavior, you have to honor Israel's legitimate needs, and then show how they can be equally accomplished with less consequence to the Gazans.

And lest we go into the fallacy that it was Hamas who attacked, and not another nation; Hamas is the democratically elected leadership of the Gazans, whom they voted for knowing full well that Hamas had a genocidal agenda against the Jews.  In other words, Hamas is living up to their promise by doing what the Gazans elected them to do.  And 63.6% of Gazans support the October 7th attack, and only 20% oppose it.  Add to that that there were several hundred to several thousand civilians who accompanied Hamas and participated in the looting.

I say this not to suggest that all Gazan citizens are as culpable as Hamas or deserve to be treated as combatants.  The point is that the Gazans bear responsibility for Hamas.  Had they not voted Hamas in with this goal in mind, it never happens.

So, back to the question... what should Israel do differently that would equally protect their interests?

Jack_stone_reddit

&gt;how do you justify it?

I don't play in justifing it, I don't point *the finger* on Israel but on Hamas.
Mainly, I think Hamas is responsible for the Palestinian in gaza, Hamas has failed to take care of the Palestinians in every opportunity and the blame for the humanitarian crisis is more on hamas than on Israel.
Because hamas is responsible, the pressure on ending the humanitarian crisis is on them. If they surrender, Israel could supply this again to the citizens of their enemy.

For example, they shouldn't be dependent on Israel for water and especially at war israel doesn't have to supply it to them. The reason they can't use their groundwater is because hamas used parts of the sewerage system to build rockets and contaminated the ground-water. The broken sewerage in gaza created so many health problems prior to this war.

&gt;But the children of Gaza do.

So the public calls for ending these horrific conditions should be on Hamas. 


I want to note that I believe Israel has failed to live up to it's responsibilities in the years prior to this war. The blood of the massacre in Israel and of many of the lives lost in gaza is on Hamas's hands, But Israel had responsibility in allowing it to grow and gain all this power. There were 56 years of occupation in the west bank and 12 years of siege on gaza, during this time violence and hatred had a fertile greenhouse provided by Israel.

Most_Role116

&gt;no matter how radicalised the Palestinian population is as a whole, children under 15 are clearly innocent

🤔

https://youtu.be/cD2FezhJgqA?si=DLxLKPh947X05tUI

Clearly.

Reese_Withersp0rk

The same way Egypt justifies it...they are a security threat and refuse to prevent terrorism and weapons transport accross their border.

Amonfire1776

War. Unfortunately, collateral damage is simply apart of war. If you open the corridors then you give the enemy a chance to slip through.

vallynfechner

You simply do not grasp the extent of the threat. Open humanitarian corridors and they are unavoidably blown apart by suicide bombers. It's a terrorist state.

Tykeil

Same reason Egypt justifies it. They are terrorists.

MasterpieceNo6796

The only way to defeat Hamas without raising Gaza to the ground is door to door CQB, civilians will still die and IDF deaths will sore further driving the desire for revenge. Hamas knows this and they are doing everything in their power to make sure israel either has to A. Keep going exactly as they are or B switch to CQB which is the only chance Hamas has to meet the IDF head on. Really the only thing Israel can do is get it over with sooner

noodles_the_strong

It is really a question of whether it is morally ok to accept intense the "collateral damage" of civilian suffering -- even if not desired -- in order to defeat Hamas.  One would think there has to be a better way of defeating Hamas, though I admit I am not sure what it is.  I am generally pro-Israel but hate seeing Palestinian children getting killed.

Mysterious_Wayss

That wasn't right. And it hurt Israel badly. Like how can even the Israeli government think that shutting down supplies for the civilians would affect Hamas? Hamas has all the backups while Palestinians suffer.  This action helped Hamas gain more sympathizers and their stupid narrative went viral.

I live in Israel and support Israel's military campaign.

However, I did not support the initial siege on Gaza, in which food, water, and medicine was initially cut off. This approach was blunt and very untargeted, and I feel like there's little justification for it.

However, Israel has increased its inspections and now permits 100 trucks per day of supplies, which is the amount that the Red Crescent said was needed to avert a humanitarian crisis. It has even started a few days ago to allow two trucks of fuel every day.

So to say the siege has continued is highly misleading, and I don't know why people haven't moved on to express the actual situation on the ground. Israel has mostly reversed its policy, whilst insisting that Israel inspect all shipments of goods that enter Gaza, which is reasonable in a time when surreptitiously importing weapons in to Gaza that will be used to kill Israelis is a serious risk.

Complete-Proposal729

Are you kidding? Look what they do when they get into Israel?  How many more rockets would they have to shoot at is if they could import them freely from Iran? Without a blockade (as feeble as it was) Hamas would be armed like Hezbollah.

randokomando

Question for people in these comments: do you support Saudi Arabia’s blockade/siege of Yemen?  They also justify it based on the risk that Houthi fighters will appropriate humanitarian aid.

SuitableTumbleweed58

rockets firing from Gaza predate the blockage, that says a lot. As for war, blockade is quite common, especially when Hamas is stealing humanitarian supplies( confirmed by the un),especially when closing your own boarder.

I understand people are suffering, but may I ask, what alternatives do you propose ?

PomegranateBoth8744

Since the blockade is a result of Hamas coming to power and not a desire to simply oppress the Palestinians, I am of the opinion that it is terrible but justified. First remove Hamas (all the radical fundamentalist groups in Gaza) and there will be no point in the blockade. If after this Israel still blocks Gaza, then we can talk about morality.

damnhotteapot

Weak-Joke-393

Not really justification but rationale (because people deserve water and there’s no justification): Hamas has had 17 years to make their people water-secure by establishing desalinization or some other form of water treatment in their territory. They’ve had billions in aid which would’ve made it possible to do so. The water in Israel is mostly not drinkable either, they use desalinization plants to treat the majority of it, and are expected for humanitarian reasons to donate this water via pipeline to what should be a sovereign nation. Israel isn’t withholding water it’s just failing to continue to donate it. Maybe someone has a more detailed understanding of the historical context there, but that’s the jist of it.

DrHaruspex

ill-independent

I believe it was was a military strategy to:

A: locate tunnel entrances (areas having light/heat signals)

B: try to force Hamas into a ceasefire/hostage return.

C: they know Hamas has plenty of reserves so they tried to get the Gazans would turn on Hamas to get at the resources. 

The unfortunate reason there are so many casualties is due to the population density. What’s worse is they can’t leave the border because of Hamas. 

Why aren’t other Arab countries helping more? They are, one country is hiding Ismail the Hamas leader and several are funding and arming Hamas. 
I’m regards to the poor Palestinians, well unfortunately they don’t really care. They’re just pawns.

Earlohim

&gt; prick

/u/WhiteyFisk53. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity)


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

Hamas gets weapons from Iran. They use them to kill Israelis. 

There's no justification for me. I would defer to some sort of panel of military strategists, sociologists, historians and other allied  heads of state. 

I don't know if it's right or wrong or even doing more good than bad in the long run.

Obviously the short term is horrific for the Palestinians.

freshasadaisy33

Hell, I’ve had diarrhea for 30 of the last 50 days.

You have to remember the reason why Israel is in a position to blockade necessities. First, restrictions and barriers were put up slowly over time. This was due to terror attacks coming from Gaza, and the unwillingness of the Gaza government to stop them (they were behind them all). Second, Israel left Gaza in 2005, Hamas is solely responsible for the well-being of the Palestinian people as the government of Gaza. They’ve had 18 years and billions of dollars to modernize Gaza’s infrastructure, water works and electricity. Thy have done none of this, aid money is stolen to line the pockets of Hamas leadership, water pipes are used to make rockets and Gaza’s infrastructure is dismal even without the war. These things they continue to blame on Israel, who is not required to provide these things. Humans are suffering and have been suffering in Gaza, the fault is with Hamas.

GR1ZZLYBEARZ

I think the blockade was a mistake. Part of the same mistake of trying to limit, contain, and deter Hamas. In 2006 when Hamas took over and started smuggling in weapons, instead of trying to stop the weapons, Israel should have taken out Hamas then. 

There would have been large collateral damage and the world would have criticized Israel for overreaching to a few bullets. But that would have overall been better for everyone. 

This war should have happened in 2006, and delaying it for 17 years made it a lot for deadly for both sides. 

Even now, there are calls for a ceasefire and return to calm, which is insane. It would just kick the can down the road again. 

As long as Hamas is in power a blockade is a necessity. But a blockade is also very harmful to the Gazan population. That is why Hamas must be removed, and Gaza be de-Hamas-ified

bb5e8307

They've been running out of electricity, gas, and food and water for 25 days now. The real issue at play her is the honesty of the humanitarian groups reporting. After the Al-Shifa footage we cannot trust anything the UN, UNICEF, WHO, AI, HRW have all shown zero credibility thus far. It's a terrible situation, but to determine the morality that Israel has displayed requires a credible accounting. 

Total blockades are completely normal in wars on the short term. So I do defend that, and so far I've seen Israel provide humanitarian aide, another major reason I lost faith in humanitarian NGO's we saw the 31 kids that they all reported died in Al-Shifa alive and Israel transporting them to the UAE. So can you understand my hesitation to believe anything coming out of Gaza at the moment that I can't verify with geolocation, footage etc?

Nacilep_

Israel was only supplying Gaza with 10% of their water, it doesn’t help that Hamas used water infrastructure resources to make weapons.

Israel is not obligated to give supplies to a nation that declared war on them, no nation in history has ever had that expectation put on them.

Gaza also borders Egypt and can also coordinate getting resources through them.

Also sieges and blockades are legal through the rules of war. 

That being said Israel is now sending supply trucks in again, out of kindness

Longjumping-Cat-9207

Terrorists can't stay comfy. That's all. It is standard siege, and people aren't dying of thirst (2 millions of people cannot survive one month drinking sea water, nobody can believe that) or because of no electricity, except sadly those patients in hospitals who were attached to life saving devices.

In my opinion:

1) It is standard siege strategy.

2) People just really don't want terrorists to have good freedom of movement. Both in Gaza and into other States like Egypt. 
Nobody wants palestinian refugees because they have many, many radicalised people and terrorists or terrorist supporters (Hamas politicians, propagandists, financial managers, workers, police and so on...).

Wolven_Edvard

I believe it is also due to Israel internal politics.  After its epic security fail Israeli government has no choice. People of the country where extremely shocked and they couldn't understand how Israel will provide resources to the people of Gaza praising  "HAMAS victory" Oct 07.

You know currently a limited supply is resumed, and every time the government is under sever critic of Israeli radicals.

Any_Echidna5011

Because any food they send will just get stolen from the people its actually intended for and would just let hamas hold out for longer getting more people killed from them starving anyways and siege dragging out longer. They send no food or at least hold off as long as possible they could deal with hamas first with more of an advantage while they're all starving half to death then after that hand out food but in a controlled way that forces them to leave the city and follow the food trucks out of there then just kind of herd them as far as possible

Obvious_Fee_9471

All their tunnel city that vast majority of them are in it at a time requires fuel to have power,
It set up the missiles used to aimed at israeli civ areas in pure terror shellings like russia in ukraine and one side in ww2 on london,

They must have fuel to operate the air filtration system in the tunnel or they will all choke to death / forced to go up for a fight above ground

Almost all israelis dont even see it as a blockade, 
We are tired to give them water / power / fuel / border checkpoints / cell towers of our own country as they kill us in ww2 style racial liquadation radis, or work visas used by hamas agents to plan the autrocities, in the future they will never be allowed to work or enter israel for any reason forever or get any service from us for any reason including israeli supplied power and water, they will have to get what they need from egypt or leave gaza

heyllo549

Unfortunately this is war, and I have never heard of any war where one side is expected to supply an area controlled by the opposing party. EVER.

Any area that is now under Israeli control, they have full responsibility to supply them with necessities, but NOT areas controlled by the opposing party.

Some people may say that they had air and sea control of Gaza, but that's not how you deliver necessities to a population, you need ground control for that and Israel is only now getting some of it over Gaza.

supermap

You do realize Israel has no legal obligations for power and water in Gaza right? They have retreated since 2005.

The people of Gaza deserve water and electricity from their own government. The deal they have with Israel and PA is a business venture.

If their government spent more on their people instead of rockets. They would have electricity, and subsequently water.

LocationCivil5935

There was no blockade just after 2005 when Israel pulled out of Gaza. After Palestinians started coming into Israel with suicide bombs, they decided to blockade.
Why don’t you also denounce the blockade imposed by Egypt?

SluggyThrow

?

Because it's war and you shouldn't supply your enemy with electricity if you want to wage war against him since it it strategically stupid?

This is war, plain and simple.

Israel does that for several reasons:

The goals are free the hostages and disarm / destroy hamas. The altter is unlikely to be solved dimplomatically.

But they also need to show strength, Hamas and hezbollah are looking fr weakness, Not responding to the attacks invites more attacks from them and other extremist groups.

drunkenbeginner

with all of these things it is difficult to get the whole picture. Every time I debate about these things people pull out facts that I was not aware of. But, having said that, I was told that Egypt still supplies water to Gaza. Also, there have been a lot of funds given to Hamas/Gaza for the purposes of developing independent water sources and these were never actually used for that due to corruption. So from the Israeli perspective, there is an enemy state, which for some reason Israel provides water to, and the enemy state attacked and you are asking why they cut off this free service of providing water. How does a country justify to its citizens providing any service to an enemy state during war time? It seems quite unheard of. This whole argument is based on the "facts" i have heard which is that Gaza has had ample opportunities to develop its own water sources.

gaoromn

Israel restored power for south Gaza. Israel had been supplying power despite no longer officially having any legal obligation after leaving in 2005; but, even supposing you said they did have legal obligation because they partially isolated Gaza, an emergency situation existed which still made their temporary suspension of power reasonable. Same with food, water, and medicine. Israel has allowed convoys into Gaza, they’ve simply suspended and slowed traffic during an emergency situation.

ElectrifiedCupcake

It's just curious you didn't say Egypt supporters

avbitran

Your last bullet point is the whole thing. It legit sucks for the Palestinians who do not want to blow up Israel but the blockade was an act of self defense. It started as a result of multiple rocket attacks.

Embarrassed-Golf-931

Absolutely. If Hamas is fine with hiding in civilian properties, using human shields, and killing children, then as far as I'm concerned, they deserve to starve.

Captain_Kruch

Yes.  Hamas is becoming [unable to pay its fighters](https://www.timesofisrael.com/cash-strapped-hamas-cant-pay-fighters-as-israeli-offensive-hits-funding-sources-report/amp/) because of the blockade since they were confiscating the aid to do so.  Sucks for the civilians, but this is war.  The notion that Israel should supply their enemy is not only ridiculous, it’s counter-productive. It prolongs the war.

Ok-Yogurt-5552

As a former Israeli, at this point I don't think Israel has any moral ground to exist. Im disgusted I grew up there.

TheaEldermere

I support, supplying your enemy prolongs the war and the suffering

Few-Remove-9877

By accepting $50 BILLION annually from the US taxpayer and all the weapons, LEECH Israel is absolutely obligated to avoid civilian casualties in no combat zones and allow essential civilian aid in these zones. Israel openly violated and then broke the ceasefire, and continues to break international law since the start. THERE WILL BE POGROMS in the West if this continues.

Pretty-Yesterday-302

Israel is not obligated to give aid to enemy's civilians. Not even to allow it in from it's own territory. The fact they gave aid till now is insane, Israel is just too merciful.

No_Instruction_2574

Yes. The blockade never should have been lifted. The conflict would have ended a year ago. But... Israel values their hostages, even dead ones. More than Hamas values their women and children. So they have allowed in aid, released hundreds of murderers,  etc. Any attempt to make war humane only extends it.

TripleJ_77

Has hamas surrendered yet and turned over their leadership for justice? Have all the hostages; dead and alive been returned?  Are hamas supporters so blind and insulated that they think the Israelis would do otherwise until they do?  Just saying, we seen to have a very different standard when it comes to Jews. I wonder why?

thebeorn

I knew this was going to be a cesspit of inhumanity but I am still amazed what people are willing to justify here.

Go read First They Killed my Father and The Elimination and get back to me on what your feelings are on mass starvation.

Even threatening a group of people with those horrors is deplorable. Defending the active steps of Israel towards that kind of outcome is genuinely some of the most disgusting things I have read here. 

This is not a matter of Israel not being responsible for what happens in Gaza. Israel has chosen to take responsibility for what happens in Gaza by denying **anyone** the opportunity to supply aid.

"Oh there's no famine..." Seriously. Piss off. Taking deliberate steps towards even making that a possibility is almost as low as humanity can go. How many people have to die of starvation or disease as a result of malnutrition before something can be condemned?

Go read the books and tell me this is ok.

We are talking about **MILLIONS OF PEOPLE**. 

Absolute scum of the earth. Truly unbelievable.

jimke

Yes.

1) The concepts behind the objections for any type of siege/blockade being imposed were based on 2 nations who had equal respect for the boundaries of warfare.
Hamas has not followed any of the recognized rules of warfare. 

Example: If an opponent were to say use chemical weapons against US troops the US would use chemical weapons in retaliation.

2) Supplies for civilians is supposed to be based on reducing civilian casualties. But if this actually significantly lengthens the conflict then it produces the opposite result.

3) The insistence of foreign aid and rebuilding funds after each conflict has massively reduced the opportunity cost for Hamas and the Gazan people to start about 15 wars/conflicts since 2006. 
Each of these prior wars ended with a UN mandated cease fire and funds. Which then setup the next conflict with 1-3 years.

We are not only producing a longer conflict but a continual pattern of conflict that is becoming multi generational. 

Doing anything else at this point is basically cruel to the next few generations of Gazan children. 

4) when Reuters covered this on March 10 the bakeries only had flour for a week….4 weeks later……so maybe don’t believe everything the press is printing..see bottom

Especially since they contradict themselves in the article:


End of Lead paragraph:

“Emergency meal distributions are ending, bakeries are closed, markets are empty.“

Last paragraph:

Every Gazan can now quote the fantastical prices for the little food remaining in markets: a 25 kilo sack of flour that used to sell for $6 now costs ten times as much. A litre of cooking oil, if you can find it, costs $10 instead of $1.50. The lucky few might stumble on a tin of sardines if they can afford $5.”

This would suggest markets aren’t empty no?



https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-halt-food-aid-deliveries-worsens-gaza-conditions-2025-03-10/

Jaded-Form-8236

Nothing bad.
So a group resisting a blockade is not unsurprisingly, and totally understandable too right?
I mean you don't expect hamas to just sit by and let it happen right? Right?

No-Resolution6524

The question essentially is- 

Is Israel justified in trying to prevent the arming and nourishing of the very forces that pine every moment for its destruction in the most violent animalistic ways.. 

And of course, the answer is a resounding yes.

Dobratri

As the occupying power, Israel has unequivocal obligations under international law – including international humanitarian law and international human rights law.


Yet currently no humanitarian supplies can enter Gaza.


Meanwhile, at the crossing points, food, medicine and shelter supplies are piling up, and vital equipment is stuck.


Unimpeded humanitarian access must be guaranteed.


And humanitarian personnel must be given the protection that they are accorded under international law.

darthJOYBOY

I think FAE are the only way to settle this forever

I just don’t understand why Israel is obligated to support Gaza. It left Gaza in 2005, and Hamas is responsible for the hellish situation Gaza is in. Instead of developing agriculture, they burned down greenhouses in the name of ‘resistance’. Why is Israel obligated to support them?

mrgefen

Do we support current blockade of North Korea ?

Bast-beast

Unfortunately,  this is mostly propaganda. Gaza is "running out of last something " is for last year. Almost every week they invent news. "Electricity in gaza is left for 3 days", etc. Hamas has enormous amount of supply. So it should distribute it between gaza population. While people ignore real famine in Yemen, more people died from famine in France, than in gaza.

Yes, I do. This war can’t go on forever

hollyglaser

Israeli soldiers are in Gaza. They should be the ones distributing aid to populations of Gazans who are considered to be non- combatants.  The UNRWA and Hamas should not be trusted with aid going into Gaza.

Nikonglass

Not a total blockade , Israel still allows electricity and water into Gaza

Latter_Ad7526

Gaza started the war and is free to surrender at any time.

Israel has the right to control what comes across Israel's border and has no obligation to assist Gaza in its quest to murder every Jew on Earth.

NINTENDONEOGEO

No, too many lDF posting their sadistic behavior proudly as if Palestinians were lesser human. Too many killings with claims for "investigation" like Hind Rajab has been silenced. Too many warcrime is not held accountable, too many injustice. It is not Justified at all to level the whole place and blame it for few individuals for few individuals.

White_Hairpin15

Yes to both, with the asterisk that civilians should be offered evacuation out of the Gaza Strip altogether, probably to the West Bank since that's also Palestine and can't really refuse to take Palestinians. It's fair enough to want to eradicate Hamas, bombs and tanks don't seem to be able to finish the job; and actually evacuating civilians would get them out of the line of fire and out from under Hamas's thumb; and this is a strategy that would put Hamas on a short clock, where just bombing them is something they're pretty good at weathering/replenishing after.

Twofer-Cat

CypherAus

Of course not! It's inhumane and cruel, and it breaks ANOTHER international law.

FishermanOrnery1602

Yes, and it is justified.  It can all be stopped when Hamas returns the hostages and surrenders.

DiamondContent2011

I don’t support the policy, and I don’t think it’s just. 

It is risking mass starvation for no conceivable tactical advantage. Maybe someone can enlighten me, but I don’t see it making any strategic sense. There is every reason to believe that when food starts running out, the most likely scenario is a breakdown of law and order where people will fight for food. The people most likely to win that fight are people who are armed in Gaza, ie Hamas. In other words, from an Israeli perspective, you’ll likely starve everyone else in Gaza before you start to starve Hamas. From a Palestinian perspective, just as you were starting to protest against Hamas, you’ll now have Israel blocking food whilst Hamas steals your food, which is just awful.

Having said that, I don’t really buy the “brink of famine” narrative anymore as it’s been on repeat for 2 years - I think it’s still far from it, and Palestinians aren’t exactly known to be shy about showing their suffering, so if there was famine we would have wall-to-wall coverage across the media with pictures of emaciated skeletons. Right now there seems to be concerns about stockpiles, which is still a stretch from famine.

Besides, I actually have the impression that Israel now wants to restart the flow of aid, and I saw [an article](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-chief-rejects-new-israeli-plan-control-gaza-aid-2025-04-08/) a few days ago saying that UN agencies publicly refused a plan under which the IDF would bring in the aid and distribute it itself. If that’s true, then sorry but the UN will have a huge responsibility in the starvation of innocent civilians, and this should be pointed out a lot more than it is.

OtherAd4337

I think the blockade is definitely understandable from the Israeli point of view, considering how Hamas conducts itself toward Israel. But I do think sometimes the blockade is a bit extreme and a little too harsh towards ordinary Palestinians. The simplest solution though is Hamas leaves and transfers Gaza to its rightful authority, which is the PA. Let’s remember that Hamas wrested violently the region from the Palestinian government.

mearbearz

Starvation of a civilian population is a war crime, a crime against humanity and it is a act of genocide. No matter your reasons, no matter how fast you are trying to eliminate your threat, war crimes and genocide should never be protected nor should excuses be made for it.

Glass_Resource3763

I want to hear discussion about alternatives. I understand the necessity of keeping Hamas out, but there ought to be ways to accomplish the same goal with less human cost.

SirShaunIV

At a certain point it’s necessary. I find it odd that Israel is solely responsible for the welfare of Gazans despite their overwhelming desire to destroy Israel and neighboring countries don’t give a fig. 
In any other conflict the people defending themselves against invasion wouldn’t be tasked with feeding and giving utilities to the people attacking them. 

CommercialGur7505

&gt;*Six weeks since Israel imposed total Gaza blockade, last food is running out*

The premise of your question is flawed and Reuters often parrots HAMAS propaganda with no journalistic integrity. Cogat has stated Gaza has plenty of food for 6 months at least due to the flood of AID during the ceasefire and unfortunately Hamas has enough for much longer than that.

The intention of questions and statements and articles like this is to put Israel under pressure to stop its seige before Hamas is removed from power. It won't work.

Gaza has a border with Egypt if they are so worried they can send in food that has never been a legitimate  concern.

cl3537

Yes, blocking all humanitarian aid into Gaza violates international law. There is a [customary obligation] (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule55) to allow rapid and unimpeded humanitarian aid. There are also treaty obligations that apply.

Article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention provides a general obligation that applies to parties to an international armed conflict, and it does allow for the restriction of the free passage of aid in some circumstances. However, there are other obligations that apply to Occupying Powers that do not allow for the restriction of aid. Because Israel is the Occupying Power in Gaza, article 23 is not relevant here. 

Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires the following:

&gt; To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.

Isreal is obligated to ensure there is sufficient food and medical supplies for the civilian population in Gaza. 

Article 69(1) of Additional Protocol I provides a further obligation:

&gt; In addition to the duties specified in Article 55 of the Fourth Convention concerning food and medical supplies, the Occupying Power shall, to the fullest extent of the means available to it and without any adverse distinction, also ensure the provision of clothing, bedding, means of shelter, other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory and objects necessary for religious worship.

Israel is obligated to provide these necessities, as well.

Similarly, article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires an Occupying Power to facilitate relief to the civilian population of the occupied territory:

&gt; If the whole or part of the population of an occupied territory is inadequately supplied, the Occupying Power shall agree to relief schemes on behalf of the said population, and shall facilitate them by all the means at its disposal... 

&gt; All Contracting Parties shall permit the free passage of these consignments and shall guarantee their protection.

Article 59 allows an Occupying Power 

&gt; the right to search the consignments, to regulate their passage according to prescribed times and routes, and to be reasonably satisfied through the Protecting Power that these consignments are to be used for the relief of the needy population and are not to be used for the benefit of the Occupying Power." 

However, this right is limited. As the commentary notes, "[a] State granting free passage to consignments can check them in order to satisfy itself that they do in fact consist of relief supplies and do not contain weapons, munitions, military equipment or other articles or supplies used for military purposes," but "[t]hese safeguards, which were prescribed in the interests of the Powers granting free passage, must in no case be misused in order to make the rule itself inoperative or unduly delay the forwarding of relief." 

Article 70 of Additional Protocol I also regulates collective relief. It says, in relevant part:

&gt; The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party shall allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel provided in accordance with this Section, even if such assistance is destined for the civilian population of the adverse Party.

&gt; The Parties to the conflict and each High Contracting Party which allow the passage of relief consignments, equipment and personnel in accordance with paragraph 2 *[quoted above]*:

&gt; (a) shall have the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted;

&gt; (b) may make such permission conditional on the distribution of this assistance being made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power;

&gt; (c) **shall, in no way whatsoever, divert relief consignments from the purpose for which they are intended nor delay their forwarding, except in cases of urgent necessity in the interest of the civilian population concerned.**

As an Occupying Power, Israel is bound by article 70 of Additional Protocol I and must facilitate rapid and unimpeded relief into Gaza.

Article 70 of Additional Protocol I also abrogates the provision of article 23 that allowed for the restriction of aid. The commentary to article 70 provides that:

&gt; Article 70 of the Protocol in this respect modifies Article 23 of the fourth Convention, and the second paragraph of that article should be considered as obsolete in any armed conflict to which Protocol I applies.

Edit: While Israel is not a party to Additional Protocol I, many of its provisions reflect customary international law, including those related to humanitarian aid, as noted in the ICRC customary IHL study linked at the top of this answer.

But even if none of the above were the case, and article 23 did apply, Israel's conduct would still be unlawful. Article 23 allows for the restriction of humanitarian aid in the following circumstances:

&gt; (a) that the consignments may be diverted from their destination,

&gt; (b) that the control may not be effective, or

&gt; (c) that a definite advantage may accrue to the military efforts or economy of the enemy through the substitution of the above-mentioned consignments for goods which would otherwise be provided or produced by the enemy or through the release of such material, services or facilities as would otherwise be required for the production of such goods.

However, according to Benjamin Netanyahu's office, Israel is not stopping aid for any of those reasons. From [this BBC article] (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9q4w99je78o), quoting Netanyahu's office: "With the end of Phase 1 of the hostage deal, and in light of Hamas's refusal to accept the Witkoff outline for continuing talks - to which Israel agreed - Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided that, as of this morning, all entry of goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip will cease. Israel will not allow a ceasefire without the release of our hostages. If Hamas continues its refusal, there will be further consequences."

Denying basic necessities to civilians to attempt to pressure another party to a conflict to capitulate is entirely unlawful. It also satisfies the elements of the war crime of starvation, one of the crimes that was the basis for the ICC warrants issued for Israeli officials.

There is absolutely no justification for stopping all humanitarian aid into Gaza. It is a violation of international humanitarian law and a *prima facie* war crime.

As for ICJ provisional measures, stopping all aid does appear to multiple measures indicated by the ICJ in January, March, and May 2024. Violating provisional measures orders is an internationally wrongful act and the ICJ could take violations of its orders into account at the merits stage of the case.

Calvinball90

The main problem isn’t that Israel isn’t *providing* aid to Gaza (though they should, since they are the occupying power), the main issue is that Israel is preventing *any* aid, from anywhere in the world, from getting into Gaza. This is a humanitarian catastrophe and a war crime.

You cannot starve civilian populations to death and block medicine from getting to them just because it would be to a military advantage.

Archarchery

Starving a population goes against international law

Altruistic_Date_7716

This post appears to relate to the Israel/Palestine conflict. As a reminder: this is a legal sub. It is a place for legal discussion and analysis. Comments that do not relate to legal discussion or analysis, as well as comments that break other subreddit and site rules, will be removed. Repeated and/or serious violations of the rules will result in a ban.


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationallaw) if you have any questions or concerns.*

veerKg_CSS_Geologist

jrocislit

Isn’t similar to the UN ending shipment of aid to Yemen because the un workers were kidnapped. Does that mean that the UN is also violating international law 

Braincyclopedia

As I understand the current restriction of aid going into Gaza, what isn't being widely reported is that Israel has advises that there is enough aid inside Gaza to last 4 to 6 months.

If correct, and there is no reason to doubt it, then that would likely negate any claim of "war crimes" as some seem to be doing.

Cannon_Fodder888

Yes. And it’s been violated multiple times for a while now. Like over a year.

Ok_Election9009

Israel is within its right to block aid per article 23

&gt;(a) that the consignments may be diverted from their destination,  
(b) that the control may not be effective, or

Hamas is clearly stealing and diverting aid, and control is not effective.

Israel does not have to assist Palestinian war efforts against it.

triplevented

The prohibition on starvation as a method of warfare applies specifically to civilians. making it prohibited to deliberately starve civilian populations. 

The problem here is that HAMAS is taking some of the food that would otherwise sustain civilians. As such cases, the food qualifies as a military objective and become targetable.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/10/world-news/hamas-steals-humanitarian-aid-trucks-from-gaza-strip/

Rear-gunner

Yes yes yes it does. Not sure that this needed  to be asked. Not sure that what you asked was a serious question

You’d have a better case for it if Israel hadn’t spent the prior 42 days sending in 600 trucks a day of aid, giving Gaza a 4 month stockpile.

Dvjex

Aren't both sides committing repeated illegal acts?

Wilson-95816

Israel isn’t blocking all humanitarian aid. It’s shutting its borders. The aid can still come through  other means aka Egypt

Unlucky-Day5019

Question ? I’ve seen tons, I mean tons, of gofundme’s, charities, fundraisers, etc specifically for Gaza. Where is all that money going if nothing is getting through?

rhixalx

"The foreign ministers of three key European allies of Israel issued a strongly worded joint statement Wednesday calling on Israel to end its “intolerable” aid blockade on Gaza while singling out Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz’s recent comments on aid as “unacceptable” and harmful to “prospects for peace.”

The statement, from the foreign ministers of Germany, France and the United Kingdom, called on Israel to lift its bar on aid from entering the war-decimated enclave since March 8, warning of “an acute risk of starvation, epidemic disease and death” for Palestinian civilians.“The Israeli decision to block aid from entering Gaza is intolerable,” it read. “

This must end. We urge Israel to immediately re-start a rapid and unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza in order to meet the needs of all civilians.”

The United Nations warned this week that the blockade has pushed the humanitarian situation in the war-ravaged enclave to its worst point of the 16-month conflict.

The three European foreign ministers said that Katz has politicized humanitarian aid in recent comments that they deem to be “unacceptable” and which “harm prospects for peace.”

“Humanitarian aid must never be used as a political tool and Palestinian territory must not be reduced nor subjected to any demographic change,” it said. “Israel is bound under international law to allow the unhindered passage of humanitarian aid.” - The Washington Post

Crossstoney

&gt; Calls it "intolerable"

&gt; Proceeds to tolerate it

Yeah, that's on you really.

Fighterdoken33

Has Hamas tried releasing the hostages and surrendering? Of course not! They double down by committing to continuing October 7th style attacks until Israel no longer exists. The instigators of this war continue to show they don't care about Palestinian civilians and any death caused by the war they started is simply martyrdom for the cause. 

0 demonstration of desire for peace will ensure the war continues. Is it time to demand accountability from Hamas yet?

thepoliticator

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has authorized a limited allowance of humanitarian aid, including baby food and basic supplies, into the Gaza Strip amidst international pressure.

Israeli Blockade and Aid to Gaza

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want