1. Proportionality: Is the strength of Israel's military response justified in the face of the Palestinian actions?
2. Identifying combatants: Who on the Palestinian side is using deadly force and are they intermingling with civilians, thereby exposing them to Israel's response?
3. Collective Punishment: Are Israel's blockades of Palestinian population centers justified for security reasons, or a form of collective punishment?

To keep the interviews focused, we concentrated only on the current clashes, although they cannot be viewed in a legal vacuum. Indeed, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is rooted in international law. Israel was born out of a United Nations declaration and the Palestinians base their claims for statehood on UN resolutions. Both sides argue their positions by pointing to treaties and agreements dating back to World War I. To present a diverse set of voices and information, we have not limited these interviews to lawyers, although prominent specialists in international law provide the core legal analysis.

The opinions presented are those of the individuals and not of their institutions nor the Crimes of War Project.

The Experts

Steven Ratner
argues that the current clashes amount to a civil armed conflict and that therefore, Protocol II of the Geneva Conventions, which deals with civil conflict is the most relevant aspect of international law. He points out that the law prohibits the targeting of civilians, something that both sides have been accused of doing, and the use of proportionate force, which the Israelis have been accused of doing. Further complicating the conflict are armed Israeli settlers, who Ratner says are the equivalent of paramilitaries.