UN human rights expert: Here's why we need an arms embargo on Israel

Many people across the world are feeling powerless as they witness the relentless horror of the Gaza war. Almost 100,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed or injured in the short time since 7 October 2023. Most are women and children.

Over 60 percent of civilian homes have been destroyed or damaged. Devastation has been wrought on hospitals, schools, water and food supplies, religious places, and infrastructure. Humanitarian supplies have been denied, spurring widespread starvation. Hospitals operate on children without anaesthetic. Around 85 percent of people have fled their homes.

Israel has not taken the level of care required by international law to protect civilians. An appeals court in The Netherlands recently banned Dutch exports of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel because it found "many indications that Israel has violated the humanitarian law of war in a not insignificant number of cases."

The court highlighted Israel’s prolific use of imprecise "dumb bombs"; deliberate, disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks; failures to warn civilians of attacks; and incriminating statements by Israeli soldiers.

Israel has rebuffed demands from even its closest ally, the United States, to respect international humanitarian law. It has not changed tactics since the International Court of Justice ordered it last month to take steps to avert a plausible genocide.

Indeed the humanitarian catastrophe has worsened, with relief supplies dwindling, starvation mounting, deaths rising, and a devastating offensive looming against the last civilian refuge in Rafah. Israel has also sought to discredit humanitarian organisations and the United Nations. It has shrugged off the global outcry for a ceasefire.

Like any country, Israel should not be above the law. Decades of impunity have encouraged Israel to believe it is untouchable. But the international community has the legal power and the practical tools to stop Israeli violations and to hold it accountable.

I recently spearheaded a call by 43 independent United Nations human rights experts for all countries to stop transferring weapons or ammunition to Israel for use in Gaza. We warned that such transfers would be likely to violate international law and may involve criminal complicity by foreign state officials in Israeli war crimes.

We also emphasised that arms transfers to Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups are prohibited, given they reportedly violated international humanitarian law on and since October 7.

Our call to ban arms exports has struck a chord with ordinary people worldwide, and has been viewed over a million times on social media. It has also circulated widely within the governments that allow arms transfers to Israel, prompting them to review their actions.

Many countries have already suspended arms transfers to Israel, including Belgium, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, as well as the Japanese company Itochu Corporation. The European Union has also discouraged arms exports to Israel. These are all welcome developments.

Sadly, a few countries are thwarting the enforcement of international law, despite often claiming they are committed to a "rules-based international order."

The United States and Germany are by far the largest arms exporters, and shipments to Israel have increased since Oct. 7. Other military exporters include France, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia.

There are a number of reasons why arms transfers to Israel would violate international law. First, all countries have a legal duty to "ensure respect" for international humanitarian law by the parties to an armed conflict.

The duty arises under the Geneva Conventions of 1949, to which almost all countries have agreed. It requires all countries to refrain from transferring any weapon or ammunition – or parts for them – if it is expected, given the facts or past patterns of behaviour, that they would be used to violate international law.

Such transfers are prohibited even if the exporting State does not intend the arms to be used to violate the law, or does not know with certainty that they would be so used, as long as there is a clear risk. That risk is crystal clear given Israel’s many violations in Gaza.

Secondly, countries that have accepted the Arms Trade Treaty of 2012 have additional obligations to deny arms exports if they "know" that the arms "would" be used to commit international crimes; or if there is an "overriding risk" that the arms transferred "could" be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law. European Union member states are further bound by EU arms export control law.

Thirdly, the Genocide Convention of 1948 requires countries to employ all means reasonably available to them to prevent genocide in another state as far as possible. This necessitates halting arms exports in light of the ICJ's recent order to prevent genocide.

Finally, state officials involved in arms exports may be individually criminally liable for aiding and abetting any war crimes, crimes against humanity or acts of genocide. All States under the principle of universal jurisdiction, and the International Criminal Court, may be able to investigate and prosecute such crimes.

States must do more than merely halt arms exports in response to atrocities in Gaza. The duty to "ensure respect" for humanitarian law additionally requires all countries to do everything reasonably in their power to prevent and stop violations of international humanitarian law by Israel, particularly where a country has influence through its political, military, economic or other relations. The duty to prevent genocide requires similar action by states.

Measures could include diplomatic protest, sanctions, referral to the Security Council and General Assembly, suing in the International Court of Justice, supporting the investigations of the International Criminal Court, launching national criminal investigations under the principle of universal jurisdiction, and calling for a meeting of countries under the Geneva Conventions.

Companies or investors involved in the supply of arms to Israel must also refrain from being complicit in Israeli violations.

International law does not enforce itself. All countries must not be complicit in international crimes through arms transfers. They must do their part to urgently end the unrelenting humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. My hope is that the heart-breaking human suffering of so many innocent civilians in this war will wake countries up to their duties to enforce the law.