Interviews by Mark Dennis

Photo: Ilkka Uimonen / Gamma Press Israeli soldier shoots at Palestinian protesters in Ramallah. Sept. 30, 2000 Click here for larger photo.

The current clashes between Israelis and Palestinians have refocused world attention on a conflict many had hoped was nearing resolution. There is no shortage of news stories from the region, but the reports of pitched battles and political proclamations rarely address crucial points of international law. To understand exactly which violations of international law are being committed in the region, the Crimes of War Project assigned Mark Dennis, a former Newsweek correspondent in the Middle East, to interview legal experts from Israel, Palestine and the United States. Not surprisingly, viewpoints on some issues diverged sharply, but the group came to a strong consensus on what parts of international humanitarian law are relevant to the current clashes.

Photo: Ilkka Uimonen / Gamma Press Palestinians throw rocks at the Israelis in Ramallah. Sept. 10, 2000. Click here to see larger photo.

They disagreed as to whether or not the current clashes amounted to war. However, all agreed that the Fourth Geneva Convention, which specifies how states must behave in regard to occupied territories, is the guiding instrument. That in itself presents a problem because although Israel was one of the first countries to sign on to the convention, it has never recognized the Fourth Geneva Convention's applicability to its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, arguing that the areas are "administered areas," not "occupied territories." However, Israel claims that it still adheres to the Fourth Convention's humanitarian provisions especially regarding proportionate use of force and protection of civilians. Our experts help explain this complicated rationale below.

Three major issues emerge from the interviews, all of which hinge on the dynamic of the clashes.

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.

• Steven Ratner, University of Texas Professor and a member of the Crimes of War Project's advisory board.


• Charles Shamas, Palestinian lawyer from Ramallah in the West Bank and an advisor on international law for the Palestinian Authority during recent talks with an Israeli delegation in Switzerland.


• Eyal Benvenisti, Israeli legal scholar and an expert on the concept of "belligerent occupation."


• Yaron Ezrahi, Political Science Professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem is one of Israel's foremost experts on democracy.


• Mustafa Barghouthi, Palestinian doctor who heads a non-governmental organization that leads an effort to gather facts about the clashes in the West Bank.