tag:theconversation.com,2011:/global/topics/occupation-4556/articlesOccupation – The Conversation2023-02-01T19:43:21Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1989672023-02-01T19:43:21Z2023-02-01T19:43:21ZWhat international law says about Israel’s planned destruction of Palestinian assailants’ homes<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/507572/original/file-20230201-12-kckx64.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=35%2C44%2C5872%2C3888&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Palestinians block roads to protest home demolition</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/palestinian-man-crosses-a-blocked-street-during-a-strike-news-photo/1246688007?phrase=East%20jerusalem%20palestinian%20home&adppopup=true">Ahmad Gharabli/AFP via Getty Images)</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>After a deadly attack <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-64430491">that killed seven people</a> outside an East Jerusalem synagogue, the Israeli government responded by <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-seals-off-home-palestinian-synagogue-shooter-2023-01-29/">sealing off the home</a> of the Palestinian suspect in <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/29/israel-prepares-to-demolish-family-home-of-palestinian-gunman">preparation for its destruction</a>. The family home of a 13-year-old accused in a separate East Jerusalem shooting has <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israel-prepares-to-demolish-home-of-palestinian-gunman-who-killed-7-in-east-jerusalem">likewise been earmarked for destruction</a>.</p>
<p>This is not unusual. Israel has <a href="https://statistics.btselem.org/ar/demolitions/demolition-as-punishment?tab=overview&demoScopeSensor=%22false%22">demolished the homes of thousands of Palestinians</a> in recent years. <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-apparent-shift-us-pushing-israel-to-stop-demolishing-terrorists-homes/">Bulldozing properties of those deemed responsible</a> for violent acts against Israeli citizens <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=79877&page=1">or to deter such acts</a> has long been government policy.</p>
<p>But <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2015/11/515632">it is also illegal</a> under international law. As an <a href="https://www.wcl.american.edu/community/faculty/profile/goldman/bio">expert on international humanitarian law</a>, I know that holding the family of assailants responsible for their acts – no matter how heinous the crime – falls under what is know as <a href="https://casebook.icrc.org/glossary/collective-punishments">collective punishment</a>. And for the past 70-plus years, international law has been unequivocal: Collective punishment is strictly prohibited in nearly all circumstances. Yet, when it comes to the demolition of Palestinian homes, international bodies have been unable to enforce the ban.</p>
<h2>Not necessary, not legal</h2>
<p>Rules governing how occupying powers can treat civilians are covered by the Fourth Geneva Convention – one of four treaties adopted after the end of World War II, largely as a response to the horrific excesses of Japanese and German occupying armies. </p>
<p><a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-33#:%7E:text=No%20protected%20person%20may%20be,and%20their%20property%20are%20prohibited.">Article 33</a> of the 1949 convention states: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” It adds: “Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.”</p>
<p>Since Israel is an occupying power in the eyes of the <a href="https://news.un.org/en/tags/occupied-palestinian-territories">the United Nations</a>, as well as under the terms of both the Fourth Geneva Convention and the earlier 1907 Hague Convention, then Palestinian civilians under Israeli occupation would fall under the “protected persons” designation of the Geneva Conventions.</p>
<p>The Geneva Conventions reiterate their position on protected persons further in <a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-53">Article 53</a>: “Any destruction by the occupying power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons […] is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.”</p>
<p>That slight caveat would apply to instances in which, for example, an armed resistance group used a home belonging to a protected person to fire at an occupying power’s army. But clearly that is not the case in the deliberate destruction of a home belonging to an assailant who launched an attack elsewhere.</p>
<p>Collective punishment is banned not only by the instruments of international humanitarian law, but also by human rights conventions that apply during peacetime and armed conflicts, including occupation. </p>
<p>And such prohibitions are not a quirk of international law – they are common to <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780429318986/collective-punishment-human-rights-law-cornelia-klocker">almost all major legal systems</a> in the world.</p>
<h2>A narrow reading</h2>
<p>Given how clear the international laws are, the question arises: How does Israel square the practice of punitive home destruction with international law?</p>
<p>The answer is not very well, in the opinion of most <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/10/commission-inquiry-finds-israeli-occupation-unlawful-under-international-law">international humanitarian law experts</a> and <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/11/21/israel-stop-punitive-home-demolitions">human rights observers</a>. </p>
<p>Israel <a href="https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciii-1949/state-parties/IL">ratified the Geneva Conventions in 1951</a>. But successive Israeli governments have claimed that <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38458884">its protections do not apply</a> to those living in Palestinian territories, the status of which it disputes. </p>
<p>Other <a href="https://reliefweb.int/report/israel/opt-legality-house-demolitions-under-international-humanitarian-law#:%7E:text=Houses%20can%20be%20demolished%20only,purposes%20as%20a%20military%20operation.">arguments put forward by the Israeli government in defense of the demolitions</a> include that they affect only the properties of individuals engaged in terrorism, and that the aim is deterrence, not punishment.</p>
<p>But as early as 1968, Theodor Meron, a legal adviser to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2015-05-19/ty-article/.premium/israel-knew-all-along-that-settlements-were-illegal/0000017f-e70e-d62c-a1ff-ff7f9ff80000">warned that in his opinion</a> the destruction of homes of terror suspects in the occupied territories contravened the Geneva Conventions. In a top-secret document, Meron rejected a “narrow, literal” interpretation of international law in regards the destruction of homes.</p>
<h2>UN hamstrung by US veto power</h2>
<p>The United Nations has long condemned the destruction of Palestinian homes, with the body’s special rapporteur Michael Lynk <a href="https://www.un.org/unispal/document/israels-collective-punishment-of-palestinians-illegal-and-an-affront-to-justice-special-rapporteur-on-the-situation-of-human-rights-in-the-opt-press-release/">repeatedly pointing out</a> that collective punishment violates international law.</p>
<p>Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has dismissed such condemnation by the United Nations, claiming that <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-despicable-un-vote-says-jews-cannot-be-occupiers-in-their-own-land/">the body shows “anti-Israeli” bias</a>.</p>
<p>Either way, the United Nations is not in a strong position to take action. The U.N.’s Security Council is the one international body that can take effective measures to censure and take coercive action against member states. But the U.S. has <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/5/19/a-history-of-the-us-blocking-un-resolutions-against-israel">long vetoed resolutions</a> critical of its ally, Israel. Washington is also unlikely to assert unilateral pressure on Israel to end its practice of home demolitions under its current policy. The International Criminal Court <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/world/middleeast/icc-israel-war-crimes.html">ruled in 2021</a> that it had jurisdiction over territories occupied by Israel, but any investigation would be likely hampered by the noncooperation of the Israeli government, which <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56687437">refuses to acknowledge the court’s authority</a>.</p>
<p>As a result, despite the destruction of the homes being against the letter and spirit of the Geneva Conventions, there is little that can stop the Israeli government from doing so.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/198967/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Goldman is affiliated with the International Commission of Jurists</span></em></p>A decision to bulldoze the home belonging to the family of a man accused of killing seven people outside a synagogue in East Jerusalem has sparked questions over the legality of Israeli policy.Robert Goldman, Professor of Law, American UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/451172015-07-23T13:55:36Z2015-07-23T13:55:36Z#ImInWorkJeremy: why doctors are rejecting Jeremy Hunt ‘s seven-day roster<p>The secretary of state for health has caused quite a stir. The reason for this commotion was Jeremy Hunt’s plan to change doctors’ contracts regarding seven-day working. </p>
<p>By <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/jul/16/jeremy-hunt-nhs-consultants-work-weekends-video">the end of this parliament</a>, Hunt wants NHS contracts that allow consultants to opt out of weekend working to be changed and for the majority of hospital doctors to be on seven-day working week contracts. The issue has been particularly prominent because of reports about higher death rates for those <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15895663">admitted into hospital at weekends</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"622393657354756097"}"></div></p>
<p>Hospital doctors have been protesting on social media – numerous staff posting images using <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23ImInWorkJeremy&src=typd&lang=en-gb&lang=en-gb">#ImInWorkJeremy</a>, a hashtag created by <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/20/jeremy-hunt-hospital-doctors-iminworkjeremy-consultants-weekend?CMP=share_btn_tw">one particularly disgruntled</a> doctor. The number of doctors speaking out <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/33599959/number-of-nhs-doctors-speaking-out-unprecedented">has been described</a> as “unprecedented”. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"622402282039214080"}"></div></p>
<p>So why has this caused such a reaction? What is his motivation and is there an ulterior motive?</p>
<p>In one sense, the notion of seven-day working is appealing. Who could be against offering NHS services of equivalent quality throughout the week? Proponents make comparisons with retailing (as if there were a direct counterpart in the NHS). In another sense, and perhaps more significantly, Hunt’s speech offers an insight into a realignment between the government and the medical profession.</p>
<h2>A rocky relationship</h2>
<p>The health policy academic, Rudolf Klein, famously referred <a href="http://www.sochealth.co.uk/2015/03/19/25472/">to the relationship</a> between the government and the medical profession as “politics of the double bed” – the government secured an electorally popular and vital public service in return for the medical profession securing largely favourable terms and conditions (including pay). So, what do Hunt’s comments say about the state of this “double bed”?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89465/original/image-20150723-22836-17dpl6z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Another rocky patch.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Argument by Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The last major change to the hospital doctors’ contracts was in 2004. Although pay increases took most of the headlines at the time, the opt-out has become more highly significant in the current negotiation. Unlike junior doctors, consultants could choose whether or not to provide non-emergency care at weekends. Last week’s <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/445742/50576_DDRB_report_2015_WEB_book.pdf">report on contract reform</a> by the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration states this opt-out is no longer appropriate.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nao.org.uk/report/managing-nhs-hospital-consultants/">A 2003 contract</a> entailed significant “basic” pay increases (of 24% for lower grades, rising to 28% for higher grades). The consultants’ wage bill has topped £5.6 billion and the median annual total earnings of a consultant (from the NHS) were £109,000 in 2011-2012. These pay rises were not, however, matched by rises <a href="https://theconversation.com/radical-proposal-to-safeguard-the-nhs-fails-to-tackle-problem-of-productivity-33389">in NHS productivity</a>. Current negotiations of this contract stalled in late 2014, an impasse which the new government hopes to break. With 66% of hospital trusts <a>forecasting a deficit</a> by the end of 2015-16 and public sector pay to be <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/public-sector-pay-rises-to-be-capped-at-1-per-cent-for-another-four-years-osborne-announces-10374980.html">capped at 1%</a>, austerity lies behind much of Hunt’s approach to next few years.</p>
<p>Jeremy Hunt has form here. Not long after he assumed office, Hunt referred, in 2013, to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/08/nhs-hospitals-attacked-jeremy-hunt">the “coasting” NHS</a>; this did not endear him to staff. He was later more conciliatory. However, coming shortly after the election, last week’s comments point to a longer struggle with the medical profession for the duration of this parliament. But why would Hunt want to take on the medical profession this way? The next point suggests an answer.</p>
<p>Hunt’s speech was on the same day that the review body report on contract reform was published. Certainly, the report highlights the need to “improve patient outcomes across the week” but it also identified anomalies of other aspects of consultant pay such as Clinical Excellence Awards. In a written statement, also published last Thursday, Hunt reinforced this <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-vote-office/July%202015/16%20July/17-Health-Inquiry.pdf">and promised</a>: “We will also introduce a new performance pay scheme, replacing the outdated local clinical excellence awards”. </p>
<p>Currently, more than 60% of the 40,000 NHS consultants receive a (national or local) award, <a href="http://www.hsj.co.uk/comment/medical-pay-reaping-your-just-rewards/5061344.article#.Va5DUmOrMzM">costing more than £500m</a> a year. Yet, many organisations (including parts of the NHS) now refer to the “total reward” for staff groups. There is, however, no agreement as to what constitutes such a reward, with employers responding to local contextual factors. Such fragmentation of human resources policy accords with a decentralised NHS but it also undermines its collective approach to staff.</p>
<h2>A sense of vocation</h2>
<p>While it is easy to point to high (financial) rewards for consultants, two critical considerations also need to be borne in mind. Consultants (like most other NHS staff) have high levels of “donated labour”. In 2014, 84% of consultants <a href="http://www.nhsstaffsurveys.com/Page/1006/Latest-Results/2014-Results/">worked unpaid beyond their contracted hours</a>, with a third working more than six unpaid hours per week. Gains in contract reform may be achieved at the expense of eroding doctors’ sense of vocation (and donated labour) in the long-term. </p>
<p>However, we should also be mindful of the comparative position of the NHS. Many (if not all) of the challenges the NHS faces are facing other health systems. Although the NHS fares well in such comparisons, in this case, there appear to be few systems to compare it with, as the review body reported last week:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We also investigated the position in healthcare systems elsewhere in the world and it is our understanding that outside of accident and emergency services most international public healthcare systems are not providing a comprehensive 24-hour, seven-day service. We therefore conclude that the proposed new NHS arrangements would be trailblazing within healthcare systems.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Hunt (or his successor) may be able to reform the consultants’ contract but it is evident that such implementation will be far from straightforward and may well have unanticipated consequences.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45117/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Exworthy has received research funding from NIHR and Department of Health</span></em></p>If the relationship between the government and the medical profession is the ‘politics of the double bed’, then this couple are in a rocky patch.Mark Exworthy, Professor of Health Policy and Management, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/115652013-01-14T20:01:22Z2013-01-14T20:01:22ZEstablishing the facts about the boycott of Israeli academic institutions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/19191/original/9qbthkdx-1358138645.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Boycotting the Hebrew University of Jerusalem is not Anti-Semitic; it's a recognition of violations of international law.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr/delayed gratification</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The last weeks of 2012 saw a great amount of criticism levelled at the <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/">Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies</a> at Sydney University and its director Jake Lynch following their boycott of an exchange program with Hebrew University. </p>
<p>Critical coverage in The Australian newspaper has been particularly intense. Christian Kerr <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/sydney-university-peace-centre-rebuffs-israeli-civics-teacher/story-e6frgcjx-1226530838896">broke the story</a>, and wrote follow-ups <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/alp-hits-out-at-israel-boycott/story-e6frgcjx-1226535676088">here</a>, <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/foreign-affairs/sydney-university-body-slammed-for-ban-on-israeli/story-fn59nm2j-1226534848253">here</a>, <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/opposition-warning-on-bds/story-fn59nlz9-1226536432732">here</a> and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/no-funds-for-bds-backers-bishop/story-fn59niix-1226537177015">here</a> along with <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/centre-chief-jake-lynch-rebuked-over-israeli-snub/story-e6frgcjx-1226532467968">Milanda Rout</a>, <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/across-the-divide-boycott-shocks-unity-professor-dan-avnon/story-e6frgcjx-1226532541040">John Lyons</a>, and editorials <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/editorials/sydneys-university-of-conflict/story-e6frg71x-1226532467627">here</a> and <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/editorials/ugliness-lurks-in-the-cloisters/story-e6frg71x-1226534038506">here</a> </p>
<p>Lynch <a href="http://newmatilda.com/2012/12/13/what-impartial-means-oz">has said</a> this decision was made as part of a larger academic boycott of institutional ties with Israeli universities, called <a href="http://www.pacbi.org/index.php">The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel</a> (PACBI). </p>
<p>PACBI <a href="http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1108">justifies</a> this boycott by saying, “these institutions are complicit in the system of oppression that has denied Palestinians their basic rights guaranteed by international law”.</p>
<h2>Legal truths</h2>
<p>On the often emotive issue of Israel-Palestine, it is important to be clear on established facts. Critics of the academic boycott campaign seldom point out the legal fact of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. </p>
<p>The world’s highest authority on international law, the International Court of Justice, ruled in <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf">July 2004</a> that Israel is occupying Palestinian territory in violation of international law and international human rights treaties. </p>
<p>These violations include articles of the <a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/380">Fourth Geneva Convention</a>; <a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/195">the Fourth Hague Convention 1907</a>; <a href="http://www.david-morrison.org.uk/sadaka/briefings/BRIEFING-UN_Security_Council_resolutions_contravened_by_Israel.pdf">UN Security Council Resolutions</a> 446, 452 & 465; and articles of <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm">the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</a>, <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm">the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights</a>, and <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm">the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child</a>. </p>
<p>Israel is a member of the <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/">International Court of Justice</a> and has fully ratified all of these international standards, with the sole exception of the Fourth Hague Convention. This means Israel has committed to fully respect these international laws and treaties.</p>
<p>The Israeli government <a href="http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/Israeli+Settlements+and+International+Law.htm">denies these violations</a> of international law. Journalists should not take this denial as reason to avoid reporting the legal issues of occupation under the misguided idea that the facts appear “muddy” and they fear producing “unbalanced” journalism. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, as with most legal proceedings, one can’t simply take the accused, in this case Israel’s, word for it as to whether they have broken the law or not. The issue must be taken to the relevant legal authorities, which in this case is the the world’s authority on international law, the International Court of Justice. </p>
<p>As in domestic legal proceedings, a party who has been found to have violated the law may continue to publicly maintain their “innocence” no matter what the legal facts are, as the state of Israel continues to do. This refusal to accept the court’s ruling should not be read as overturning the actual legal validity of the ruling. Israel remains legally obliged to fulfil its promises regarding international law and human rights treaties.</p>
<h2>Supporting peace does not equal anti-Semitism</h2>
<p>The strange accusation that the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies and the academic boycott it supports are anti-Israel or anti-Semitic also needs to be corrected. Neither the centre nor the academic boycott call for the shunning of an individual or group based on their Israeli, Jewish (or any other) identity. The <a href="http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1108">PACBI guidelines</a> are very clear on this: “Mere institutional affiliation to the Israeli academy is … not a sufficient condition for applying the boycott”. </p>
<p>Indeed, the centre regularly hosts Israeli and Jewish academics and speakers. These include <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/2008.shtml">Dr Jeff Halper</a>, <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/index.shtml">Professor Ilan Pappe</a>, <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/2005.shtml">Dr Uri Davis</a>, <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/2009.shtml">Rabbi Michael Lerner</a>, <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/get_involved/2012%20CPACS%20brochure%20.pdf">Professor Noam Chomsky</a>, journalist <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/index.shtml">Antony Loewenstein</a>, the Sydney-based <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/latest.shtml">Palestinian - Jewish Dialogue Group</a>, author <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/2010.shtml">Anna Baltzer</a> and activist <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/news/2009.shtml">Angela Budai</a>. The centre also recently hosted a seminar supported by <a href="http://iajv99.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/invitation-to-keynote-address-for-un-international-day-of-solidarity-with-the-palestinian-people/">Independent Australian Jewish Voices</a>. </p>
<p>Ignoring these individuals’ many initiatives promoting peace in the Middle East is a dangerous mistake. In conflicts such as Israel-Palestine, governments don’t always have all the answers. Given the lack of success of official diplomacy in the region we should be encouraging, not dismissing, these additional non-official peace efforts. The centre was set up with stated goals of <a href="http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/about/vision.shtml">promoting a culture</a> of peace and reducing violence in all its forms. </p>
<p>The fact that pro-peace Israeli and Jewish voices often criticise Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine is not surprising given that the International Court of Justice has ruled Israel’s occupation of Palestinian is illegal under international law and human rights treaties. When it comes to established violations of international law, human rights and the violence which often accompanies these, a peace centre can hardly be expected to be “neutral” or disinterested.</p>
<p>Confusing opposition to the Israeli government’s violation of international law with being “anti-Israel” or “anti-Semitic” is as misguided as labelling any critics of Australian government policies “anti-Australian”. In international conflicts such as Israel-Palestine governments can’t simply be relied on to provide all the answers: free speech and open criticism of government are key.</p>
<h2>A fair play</h2>
<p>Sydney University’s special exchange program with Hebrew University, which Hebrew University academic Prof Dan Avnon hoped to take advantage of, was a legitimate focus for the boycott according to PACBI guidelines. </p>
<p>I note that Hebrew University is yet to publish an official statement condemning the state of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. What’s more, according to the Israeli-Palestinian Alternative Information Centre, numerous special programs at Hebrew University <a href="http://usacbi.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/economy_of_the_occupation_23-24.pdf">actively support</a> the Israeli military and its personnel, which the International Court of Justice makes clear are an active party in the illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. </p>
<p>The established fact of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory is a key reason given for the academic boycott of complicit Israeli academic institutions. </p>
<p>For journalists to ignore this shows a distressing ignorance, or fearful avoidance, of issues which are of obvious importance to Australians and audiences worldwide.</p>
<p>So I call on journalists and commentators: if you are concerned with serious reporting of the academic boycott and the wider Israel-Palestine conflict, show it by tackling the issues and facts, rather than tackling the man. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/11565/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Duffill works for the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies and has signed Jake Lynch's boycott petition. He volunteered for Project Hope on the West Bank in 2010.</span></em></p>The last weeks of 2012 saw a great amount of criticism levelled at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at Sydney University and its director Jake Lynch following their boycott of an exchange program…Paul Duffill, Researcher, Part-Time lecturer, Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies; Coordinator, Global Social Justice Network, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.