State Dept. Deceits on Geneva Convention
Blinken and his underlings clearly aim to give the public the impression they are not eviscerating a major cornerstone of international law when that's exactly what they are trying to do.
The State Department continues to duck, deceive and dissemble about what should be a simple question: Does the US government recognize the Geneva Conventions as applying to Gaza, or is it the great exception? (Very special thanks to
for video compilation.)I repeatedly raised questions about the Fourth Geneva Convention, which protects civilians, not being adhered to beginning in November and continuing to the present. I specifically raised the alarm about such a false legal posture being part of the US government greenlighting Israel to treat Gaza like a Free-Fire zone, killing civilians at whim. (Past articles and recent transcripts below.)
AP State Department correspondent Matt Lee raised the issue of the Geneva Conventions at the end of a news briefing late last week, eventually resulting in this exchange with him, Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel and myself:
Patel talks about the “principles reflected in” the Geneva Conventions — not the actual legal obligations themselves — and how they “should be” complied with, not must be complied with.
When I asked, “Is Israel the occupying power in Gaza?” Patel responded: “That is not what we believe to be the case” and refused to take the followup: “So Israel is exempt from the obligations of being an occupying power in Gaza?” as he ended the news conference and the State Department cut off my microphone. (See critical statements from legal experts below. Spoiler: of course Israel is the occupying power and thus has obligations under Geneva.)
Secretary of State Tony Blinken was questioned on the issue by The Grayzone's Liam Cosgrove on Monday and refused to engage about whether the Geneva Conventions apply to Gaza on the record:
As part of my recent questioning (partly shown in the top video above), I asked about a recent report from Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor about Israel using drones to broadcast recordings of crying children so they could shoot Palestinians who were lured out. This obvious targeting of civilians is a brazen violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
Prof. Francis Boyle commented:
Of course Israel is The Occupying Power in Gaza.
Notice he deliberately refuses to say that the Fourth Geneva Convention itself applies.
Michael Lynk, who served as the UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, from 2016 to 2022, is now a non-resident fellow at Democracy for the Arab World Now. He stated:
“The United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1860 in January 2009 (the last few weeks of the Bush II presidency), during the 2008-09 Israeli war on Gaza. The US abstained in the vote. The Resolution is legally binding. It stated that:
“‘Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state,’
“Which means that the international community considers Gaza to be occupied and therefore the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law apply in full. This was four years after Israel removed its settlers and abandoned its settlements. Every major humanitarian and human rights organization which pays attention to Palestine, Israel and Gaza considers that Gaza remains occupied.”
Similarly, Prof. Richard Falk:
“Israel's purported 'disengagement' from Gaza in 2005 had no effect internationally on its status as an Occupied Territory because it retained full control of security, including borders, air space, security and coastal waters. Neither the US nor Israel has the legal competence to change that status as long as Israel physically retains control of Gaza. The key to ending Occupying Status is the implementation of unanimous UNSC Res. 242 adopted immediately after the 1967 War, which requires Israeli 'withdrawal' and a just solution of refugee claims.
“As such, the relevance of the continued Occupied status of Gaza deeply compromises Israel's claims and behaviors pertaining to its retaliation after October 7.
“Most relevant, Geneva IV on Belligerent Occupation applies, with its specification of the duties to the Occupied Society, especially the obligation to render its protection and ensure access to adequate food and medical supplies, as well as unconditional prohibition of all forms of collective punishment.
“Somewhat amusing, was Vedant Patel's 'escape.' Either he did know what to say or he knew, and refrained, believing it would lead to strong reaction internationally and at the UN. Either posture is shameful!”
Transcript from Wednesday, April 17, 2024
HUSSEINI: Thanks. Euro-Med Monitor, human rights monitor, reports that Israel is using drones to lure residents and then shoot them. They explain the sounds of women screaming and babies crying were heard late at night on both Sunday and Monday. When some of the residents went out to investigate and tried to help, they were shot at by Israeli – quadcopter drones. The sounds they heard were in fact records played by the Israeli drones with the intent of forcing the camp residents out into the streets where they could be easily targeted by snipers and other weaponry.
PATEL: I have not – I have not seen that report, Sam, so I’m not going to comment on it. But broadly – not relating to this particular circumstance at all – because, again, I haven’t seen the report and I’m not sure if it’s accurate or verifiable – at every conversation that we have with our partners in Israel, we continue to stress the moral and strategic imperative that they have to work on deconfliction mechanisms and to ensure that civilian harm is minimized in every which-way possible. And we’ll continue to stress that every way we can.
Go ahead.
HUSSEINI: Will you look at this report?
PATEL: I’m sure we’ll look at this report, Sam. I don’t have any comment for it – on it right now.
HUSSEINI: Do you recognize —
PATEL: Go ahead.
HUSSEINI: — the Geneva Conventions as applying in this instance?
PATEL: I’ve answered your question, Sam.
HUSSEINI: No, you haven’t.
PATEL: Go ahead.
QUESTION: You’ve evaded it, and your colleague deceitfully responded to it. Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions?
PATEL: Go ahead.
QUESTION: It’s a simple question.
PATEL: Go ahead.
QUESTION: Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions as applying to Gaza?
PATEL: When you interrupt me that’s not – it’s not a matter of —
HUSSEINI: I’m not interrupting you. I’m asking for a simple —
PATEL: I’m not going to take additional questions.
HUSSEINI: — simple answer to a simple question.
PATEL: Go ahead. You got two questions. I’m —
HUSSEINI: No, it’s totally – no, I didn’t get two questions.
PATEL: You did. You —
HUSSEINI: No.
PATEL: You asked a question about your report —
HUSSEINI: I asked a question and you didn’t (inaudible) —
PATEL: — and you asked a follow-up. Please go ahead.
HUSSEINI: (Inaudible) you’re not – you’re refusing to answer it.
PATEL: Go ahead, sir.
HUSSEINI: Do the Geneva Conventions apply to Gaza or not?
PATEL: Go —
HUSSEINI: Apply to everywhere on the planet except for the Palestinians; isn’t that right?
PATEL: We continue —
HUSSEINI: Isn’t that U.S. policy?
PATEL: — to stress everywhere – at everywhere that international humanitarian law —
HUSSEINI: Do the Geneva Conventions apply?
PATEL: — needs to be abided by and respected.
Go ahead. [motioning to another reporter]
HUSSEINI: Do the Geneva Conventions apply?
PATEL: You are now interrupting your colleague. Go ahead.
HUSSEINI: No, I’m interrupting you – I’m not interrupting you.
PATEL: Go ahead.
HUSSEINI: I’m insisting on an answer to a critical question.
PATEL: Go ahead, sir.
QUESTION: I’d like to ask about the sanctions —
HUSSEINI: So you’re deceiving the American public.
QUESTION: — against Iran. …
[at end of news conference:]
LEE: Yeah, sorry, I just want to go back to something that was raised a little bit earlier. Can you ask – can you find out from L [Office of the Legal Advisor] or from whomever if the United States believes that the Geneva Conventions apply universally – in other words, to everywhere on the planet as – and also the same question on the Vienna Conventions? And obviously, the question before was about whether Geneva Conventions apply in Gaza, but then specifically it would be whether the Vienna Convention applies in Syria. Or are there – or do you – does the administration think that there are certain exemptions to these conventions? That’s —
PATEL: Sure.
LEE: I don’t expect you to have an answer, but maybe you could —
PATEL: Well, Matt, let me just – let me close out by saying that I will echo again what I – when I – when responding to your colleague that it is our sincere belief that international humanitarian law needs to be abided by everywhere. And that continues to be the policy we’ll pursue.
At the end of the news briefing on Thursday, April 18:
MATT LEE: One more. And that is: Did you ever – did – were you able to find out from L or anyone else if there’s any place in the world that the Geneva Conventions do not – that you do not believe the Geneva Conventions apply?
PATEL: I – to my knowledge, I cannot think of a region or a jurisdiction where we don’t, Matt. Our long viewpoint is that the principles reflected in the Geneva Convention – that those are principles that should be complied with.
LEE: Everywhere?
PATEL: Everywhere.
HUSSEINI: So it applies in Gaza?
PATEL: It – we have said that it’s up to both Israel and Hamas to comply with the international law, including the principles that we believe are laid out in the Geneva Conventions.
HUSSEINI: So is Israel the occupying power in Gaza?
PATEL: That is not what we believe to be the case. But we have long said it is important that both Israel and Hamas comply with international law, including humanitarian law that’s reflected in the Geneva Convention.
HUSSEINI: So Israel is exempt from —
PATEL: All right. Thanks, everybody. Thank you.
HUSSEINI: — the obligations of being an occupying power in Ga— [State Dept. cuts mic] Gaza? Can't answer that?
PATEL: Thanks, all.
Some past pieces:
It is imperative that those who care, and are located in Washington D.C., bring a court action, perhaps a Writ of Mandamus, directing a government office to do its duty and enforce the law. The law is clear. 18 U.S. Code § 1091 is the statute that incorporated the Genocide Convention in US criminal law. The Department of Justice, under the Biden Administration will not voluntarily enforce this law, but a court could mandate that they do. Back in the Nixon break-in day, a Special Counsel was appointed to look into that case. We need the same for this. I'm far away, so I can't go to court. But I am sure you, or someone you know could. There is also when they leave office.
They may feel they are immune now, but let's get them considering what is possible when they aren't in office anymore. After all, they have set the precedent of charging former presidents. They should have visions of prison all the days of their lives. Let us find the way.
So good to see you continue to push them on this (I'm actually a little surprised they are even calling on you). The more you do it and the more they deflect, the more other journalists will feel obligated to raise the issue, as we're now seeing.