By Yunus Soner, Siena / Italy
Francesca Albanese is the UN’s Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. She provides regular reports to UN human rights bodies regarding the situation here, including Israel’s violation of human rights.
Albanese has been very frank her reports and stated, in these official documents, that Israel was committing a genocide in Palestine. Since appointed to that position, she has been fiercely attacked by US and Israeli officials, engaged in social media polemics with French President Macron, but also received great support from the global intellectual community.
On October 7, she held a conference in the University of Siena, Italy, after which she responded to our questions.
Thank you for taking the time. Firstly, my Italian is horrible, it’s non-existent, so I would like to ask: Did I understand you right that you argued in your speech as an expert on international law that merely the foundation of the state of Israel was a violation of international law?
No, you clearly don’t understand Italian because I never said that. I said that Israel has been violating international law since its very foundation because it should have complied with the resolutions that were conditional upon its acceptance as a member of the United Nations. And since then, Israel has violated international law, international humanitarian law, resolutions of the Security Council, General Assembly, Human Rights Council. And again, it’s not the only violator of international law, but what it does is systemic, and it enjoys the support of the international community like no other state, particularly from the Western Bloc. And this is unacceptable.
Okay, how do you judge the situation? How did it evolve since October 7 last year till today in the occupied territories?
The situation for the Palestinians and their occupation has steadily been violent, particularly, I mean, for those in the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, the last 30 years have been of incremental violence, incremental dispossession, land confiscation, home demolitions, increasing mass arrests and forced displacement and mass killings. You looked at the number of those killed before October 7, just during the two years, one year and a half, have been special rapporteurs.
There were around 400 against the six Israelis killed. So clearly it was not a conflict, there was something else, which has escalated as of October 7th under the pretense or the pretext of using self-defense. And Israel, I have no doubt whatsoever, as I’ve argued in my report in March this year, that Israel has committed genocide, which has led to the complete destruction of Gaza. But why so? Genocide has been, and it is a means to an end to erase the Palestinian presence from the occupied Palestinian territory, what remains of historical Palestine in fact.
Israel shows intent to destroy the Palestinians “as such”
So you refer to genocide as a crime against the law?
Yeah, being a lawyer… Not just equal to mass killing. Mass killing is mass killing. Genocide is when you do not commit mass killing, but with intent to destroy the group as such. It’s this mindset that is the characteristic of genocide.
And Israel’s intent of destroying the Palestinians is pretty much ingrained. Now it’s spelled out, but how can you disassociate it, how can you disentangle it from the idea of having a land for one group only, which leads to the forced displacement, the eradication and the destruction of the other. So it was the writing of the wall and now it’s happening.
Ad hoc tribunal for Palestine needed
How do you judge the proceedings in the International Court of Justice in that context, the case brought forward by South Africa, which is expected to take a long time until it gets to a sentence?
It’s not expected to take a long time. It could take a short time. The thing is that there are other cases that the court is considering. This is not a permanent trial… We should have an ad hoc tribunal on Palestine only to deal with all the crimes and all the violations happening in this situation. Because of course there is a saturation of the other international justice mechanisms like the ICC or the International Court of Justice with Palestine issues.
This year the ICJ has been very busy with Palestine, with the advisory opinion that declared the occupation completely illegal and to be dismantled, henceforth, together with the colonies, and then with three sets of measures, three sets of preliminary measures to stop the acts of genocide, acts that plausibly look like genocidal according to the court without looking into the merit.
But the point is that states have obligations to bring this to an end and can do that, but they need to stop providing weapons to Israel, they need to suspend the financial and economic relations, and then if needed political and diplomatic relations. Israel at this point, as a state that is committing genocide, is to be isolated as other states.
How are the reports that you provide to the United Nations received within the organization and within the participating states of the UN?
It depends, it’s not the same. There are the few countries like Israel and the US who are notoriously disappointed. The others understand, the others see, I mean, they pretend not to see other member states in the European Union, for example. And this is, I mean, this speaks to their hypocrisy. But then the Global South is, again, is supportive, but also we are talking of governments, Member States.
And then, look, I’ve been really touring like many countries this past 12 months, and not once there was not such a level of response, because young people and others, they cannot stomach the killing of civilians anymore, the killing of children anymore. They want this to stop. And there is this schism between the popular demand and the government’s decision that is also extremely problematic and needs to be solved.
UN Resolution 377
One is, there is a call that the General Assembly can vote and demand a kind of protective measures against Israel to be enforced by force.
I think you’re talking of Resolution 377, Uniting for Peace. In case of stagnation of the UN Security Council, there have been cases historically where the General Assembly took significant steps. And it might happen.
My fear is that individual member states, especially influential member states, both in the global north and in the Global South, need to make up their mind. They need to, firstly, to have their house in order.
Questions for the future of UN system
Because there are many, there are some European Member States who are very good when it comes to rhetoric, but then they still have investments in the settlement. So there should be coherence and consistency in both advocacy and action. And this will also reflect in the capacity of giving legs or teeth to such a General Assembly resolution.
How is the situation of the UN agencies in the occupied territories? And what’s going to happen with the UN if there is no process forward because some are already questioning the functioning of the UN itself.
Yeah, I think that the problem is that international law and the UN system for, I mean, looking at the purpose they have, or they are supposed to have, especially as of the system which has kept many of us protected for 75 years because you cannot apply international law as a pick-and-choose menu. Because you see, by destroying hospitals after hospitals this means violating international humanitarian law through and through. This becomes a practice because member states, I mean Russia, what is the incentive for Russia not to bomb hospitals or for Sudan if it’s always tolerated? And Israel has been doing that for decades now. So it’s difficult to invoke the full application of international law when, again, it becomes a pick and choose menu, a menu à la carte. So you say it applies to this state but not to the other.
It has no credibility. So this is why I say I feel a huge sense of responsibility, both for the Palestinians and Israelis, but So this is why I say I feel a huge sense of responsibility, both for the Palestinians and Israelis, but for others, for all of us.
This interview was conducted on behalf and first appeared in Spanish on TeleSUR Tv.