On Thursday UK MPs will debate the motion “That this House has considered the obligation to assess the risk of genocide under international law in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territories”. This follows an application from SNP MP Brendan O’Hara way back in June last year. As O’Hara said in his request, “it is to allow Members to have a better understanding of the Government’s reasoning and to examine how the Government’s policy impacts the United Kingdom’s legal obligation to continually assess the risk of genocide”.
He claimed there hadn’t been a proper debate on Palestine in the main Chamber since February 2024, and I noticed that the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee is none other than the notorious ‘Friend of Israel’, Bob Blackman, who of course hasn’t seen any need for urgency. The motion’s wording is no doubt chosen to avoid obstruction; however, we are no longer arguing about the “risk” of genocide, it’s a plain fact – as confirmed by the UN itself, the International Association of Genocide Scholars and countless other law experts. The Government and Opposition have never been open about their legal advice.
So I’ve written to my MP as follows.
The definition of genocide is easy enough to understand so it’s pointless denying that is what we have all witnessed for nearly 28 months. Over 71,000 known deaths plus countless thousands more under the rubble. And the public want to know what concrete action UKgov is taking to stop it. But matters have moved on. The genocide, which continues deliberately and with impunity, is now morphing into something even more sinister.
A recent report by the UN’s Special Rapporteur summarised the situation thus:
The ongoing genocide in Gaza is a collective crime, sustained by the complicity of influential Third States that have enabled longstanding systemic violations of international law by Israel…. This live-streamed atrocity has been facilitated through Third States’ direct support, material aid, diplomatic protection and, in some cases, active participation. It has exposed an unprecedented chasm between peoples and their governments, betraying the trust on which global peace and security rest. The world now stands on a knife-edge between the collapse of the international rule of law and hope for renewal. Renewal is only possible if complicity is confronted, responsibilities are met and justice is upheld.
The accusation of complicity is levelled at the UK among others, and justly so.
I would like to know please why Britain, a founding member of the UN, made no objection to Trump’s fake and obviously criminal ‘peace’ plan being put to the Security Council when the UN’s own team of experts had already listed over a dozen serious objections to it. And why the UK and most of the other Security Council then approve it knowing all that.
We are now treated to the bizarre spectacle of the two perpetrators of the genocide – Israel and the US – sidelining the UN, calling the shots and continuing their extermination and land grab with impunity… and with the international community’s ‘approval’.
UKgov, in a press release, said it voted for the SC resolution because it is “a critical means of implementing the Peace Plan for Palestinians, Israelis, and the region – turning the page on two devastating years of conflict, towards a lasting peace”. Charge D’Affairs in New York, James Kariuki, explained that the UK will continue working to build on this momentum so an International Stabilisation Force can be deployed quickly, support the ceasefire and avoid a vacuum being left which Hamas can exploit. He reiterated the importance of implementing the transitional arrangements set out in the resolution in accordance with international law, with respect to Palestinian sovereignty and self-determination, strengthened unity of Gaza and the West Bank, and empowered Palestinian institutions which enable a reformed Palestinian Authority to resume governance in Gaza. But adherence to international law is sadly lacking.
In case UKgov hasn’t been paying attention, the 28 independent human rights experts appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council warned that any peace plan must absolutely safeguard the human rights of Palestinians and not create further conditions of oppression. They also advise that key elements of Trump’s so-called peace plan are inconsistent with fundamental rules of international law and the 2024 Advisory Opinion of the ICJ which demand that Israel ends its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Their warnings include the following:
- Any peace plan must respect the ground rules of international law. The future of Palestine must be in the hands of the Palestinian people – not imposed under duress by outsiders.
- The ICJ has ruled that fulfilling the right of self-determination cannot be conditional on negotiations. Who governs is a matter for the Palestinians only, without foreign interference.
- The ICJ has been crystal clear: Conditions cannot be placed on the Palestinian right of self-determination. The Israeli occupation must end immediately, totally and unconditionally, with due reparation made to the Palestinians.
- The United Nations – not Israel or its closest ally – has been identified by the ICJ as the legitimate authority to oversee the end of the occupation and the transition towards a political solution in which the Palestinians’ right of self-determination is fully realised.
- The Trump plan does not guarantee the Palestinian right of self-determination as international law requires; and vague pre-conditions put Palestine’s future at the mercy of decisions by outsiders, not in the hands of the Palestinians themselves as international law commands.
- The “temporary transitional government” is not representative of Palestinians and even excludes the Palestinian Authority, which further violates self-determination and lacks legitimacy.
- The plan does not provide a leading role for the UN General Assembly or Security Council, or for UNRWA which is vital to assisting and protecting Palestinians.
- An “International Stabilisation Force”, outside the control of the Palestinian people and the United Nations as a guarantor, would be contrary to Palestinian self-determination.
- The plan largely treats Gaza in isolation from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, when these areas must be regarded as a unified Palestinian territory and State.
The full list of objections are on the UN’s website. How can our Parliament be so ignorant as to dismiss them? When, if ever, will we see a UN-generated peace plan rather than a vanity project proposed by, and personally led by the genocidists and their chief enabler whose stated aim is to deny Palestinians their statehood?
Meanwhile suspicions are growing that the recent behaviour of Western powers is designed to undermine and eventually destroy the United Nations and all it stands for so that self-serving leaders can escape justice from UN agencies like the ICC and ICJ. The UN is already on the verge of financial collapse. And we’ve just been watching its moral demise and easy capitulation to lawlessness.
The post Is the UN Being Wrecked So Western Leaders Can Escape Justice from the ICC and ICJ? first appeared on Dissident Voice.
This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Stuart Littlewood.