- US, UK and other states are directly violating Articles II (c) and III (e) of Genocide Convention, warns international human rights lawyer Francis Boyle
- They are complicit with Israel’s genocide and can be sued by other states, says Boyle
- UNRWA controversy aims to undercut and diminish the significance of ICJ ruling, according to lawyer
- Allegations against UN agency for Palestinian refugees ‘could be another instance of non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,’ says Boyle
ISTANBUL
Just hours after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) announced an interim ruling in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel last week, there was another issue that started grabbing global headlines.
Allegations started circulating against the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, or UNRWA, with Israel accusing several members of the agency of being involved in the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks.
Israel’s allies, led by the US, joined the chorus, announcing they would be suspending funding to UNRWA, an agency viewed as a lifeline for millions of Palestinians, including those in the bombed and blockaded Gaza Strip.
The other nations cutting off funds are Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK.
The move has garnered fierce criticism from countries and top officials, including UN chief Antonio Guterres, and fueled more fears for the future of Gaza’s population.
Rights groups, activists and legal experts say it amounts to collective punishment and directly endangers the lives of millions in Gaza who, according to UN officials including UNRWA head Philippe Lazzarini, are facing a looming famine.
Among them is veteran human rights lawyer Francis Boyle, who argues that the decision is a direct violation of the Genocide Convention.
“All these states that have cut off funding for UNRWA are directly violating the Genocide Convention Article II (c),” he told Anadolu in a video interview.
Article II (c) refers to deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction, in whole or in part, against a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
They are also are in violation of Article III (e) of the Genocide Convention, which is complicity in genocide, he said.
“They are complicit with Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians,” he asserted.
“They are all starving to death and thirsting to death the 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza,” he added, terming it “criminal behavior.”
Coordinated decision to undermine ICJ ruling
Boyle, who won two requests at the world court in 1993 under the Genocide Convention for the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina against Yugoslavia, also believes the UNRWA controversy is linked to the ICJ interim ruling.
He said this is a coordinated decision by Western and Western-oriented states that have “ganged up on UNRWA and working in cahoots with Israel.”
“The International Court of Justice, just the day before, had ruled almost unanimously that massive humanitarian relief supplies had to be provided to the Palestinians in Gaza,” he said.
“This is intended to undercut and diminish the significance of that ruling.”
All of this is based on allegations that were produced by Israeli Intelligence and turned over to the American intelligence, “so we don’t know if any of them are true or not,” he argued.
“It could be another instance of the non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,” he said, referring to the false claims the US used as the basis for its invasion of Iraq in 2003.
He said Israel has been trying to “destroy” UNRWA since the day it was established in 1949 “specifically for the purpose of helping Palestinian refugees illegally expelled from their homes in Palestine by Zionist forces.”
“What we’re really facing here today is a second Nakba against the Palestinians in Gaza,” he added.
Legal action against countries targeting UNRWA
According to Boyle, the countries that have suspended funding can be sued by others states.
“The theory of the case here would be aiding and abetting Israeli genocide against the Palestinians and (committing) genocide themselves,” he explained.
However, the first step would be to “sue Israel,” he added.
Boyle recalled a similar situation when he was representing Bosnia against Yugoslavia.
“We had sued Yugoslavia and I won those two orders of provisional measures of protection on behalf of the Bosnians, but the Yugoslavs didn’t stop,” he said.
“I recommended to President (Alija) Izetbegovic that we sue the United Kingdom for aiding and abetting the Yugoslav genocide against the Bosnians.”
Izetbegovic approved the idea and everything was prepared for the filing, but “the British then threatened to starve the Bosnians if I actually pursued that case,” he said.
“We’re talking about early December 1993, so the Bosnians had no alternative but to withdraw that lawsuit,” Boyle explained.
“However, I did make it clear to the world court that the lawsuit was being withdrawn under duress, threats and intimidation, and I reserve the right to sue Britain at any time for Bosnia. So, yes, this could be done.”
Enforcement of ICJ ruling
About the next step after the top UN court’s order on provisional measures, Boyle said it will be taken up at the UN Security Council, which is scheduled to meet on Algeria’s request on Wednesday.
“Right now, it looks like (US President Joe) Biden and (British Prime Minister Rishi) Sunak will veto any enforcement,” he said.
“Then it gets turned over to the United Nations General Assembly, under the Uniting for Peace resolution, and they could enforce it.”
He strongly criticized the Biden administration for its support to Israel, saying it is “clearly guilty of aiding and abetting Israeli genocide against the Palestinians.”
“Israel could not be exterminating the Palestinians without the full support of the Biden administration,” he added.
