Gaza’s power authority has said the blockaded enclave’s sole power plant will run out of fuel within hours, leaving the Palestinian territory without electricity after Israel cut off supplies in retaliation to the recent attacks by Hamas, the armed group that runs Gaza.
Palestinian Energy Authority Chairman Thafer Melhem told Voice of Palestine radio on Wednesday that the plant would shut down in the afternoon in Gaza, where about 2.3 million people live in one of the most densely populated areas in the world.
“This threatens to plunge the Strip into complete darkness and make it impossible to continue providing all basic life services, all of which depend on electricity, and it will not be possible to operate them partially with generators in light of the prevention of fuel supplies from Rafah Gate,” said a statement issued by Gaza’s authorities on Wednesday.
“This catastrophic situation creates a humanitarian crisis for all residents of the Gaza Strip,” it said.
The statement referred to Israel’s retaliation “as the dirtiest crime of collective punishment against defenceless civilians in modern history”.
It called on the international community to move quickly to stop “this crime against humanity and this multi-form mass murder”.
Meanwhile, Health Minister Mai al-Kaila said “the fuel stock to operate the generators in the Gaza Strip hospitals will end tomorrow, Thursday, which will exacerbate the disastrous conditions in the hospitals”.
All of Gaza’s crossings are closed, making it impossible to bring in fuel for the power plant or the generators on which residents and hospitals have long relied.
In what way Gaza isnt occupied? Can the inhabitants leave? Can you get stuff in and out of that area? Just because it doesnt have actual israeli occupiers inside Gaza, doesnt mean that it isnt occupied.
If you live in a place and armed guards dont let you leave or get anything in or out, are you free?
It would be odd if it were a war crime not to provide a hostile enemy territory with supplies while being attacked by them.
When the territory was never independent and was always dependent on you and you never allowed it to become independent, then yes, you have an obligation to keep those people alive. And thats the bare minimum legal obligation that you have. Dont take my word, literally the EU’s foreign policy chief Josep Borrell says so
“Israel has a right to self-defence, but it has to be done within international law … cutting water, cutting electricity, cutting food to a mass of civilian people is against international law,”
Even if you ignore the moral thing of you know, not letting people die for no reason, Israel has a legal obligation. Similarly to how when a country occupies a territory, they have an obligation to provide for that territory. So unless Israel decides to recognize Gaza as a sovereign, free and independent state, they are responsible for it and its inhabitants.
In what way Gaza isnt occupied?
Because Israel unilaterally left Gaza in 2005, as per the above link, and dismantled their settlements there.
Can the inhabitants leave?
Until very recently, yes, into Egypt. They probably won’t be allowed to return if they leave, though. Egypt just now closed their border to refugees and is now refusing to let people through, and there’s also been some damage to the crossing from recent air strikes so I don’t know when it will reopen.
Can you get stuff in and out of that area?
Egypt has agreed to allow supplies through, and air shipments are happening until the crossing is clear. Under normal circumstances they only let people out and oil and some humanitarian aid supplies in, everything else goes through Israel.
Just because it doesnt have actual israeli occupiers inside Gaza, doesnt mean that it isnt occupied.
It literally does. What exists now is called a blockade.
If you live in a place and armed guards dont let you leave or get anything in or out, are you free?
Moving the goalposts from occupation now, but okay. I’d say no, but no one here is making the claim that Gaza is totally free as far as I know.
When the territory was never independent and was always dependent on you and you never allowed it to become independent, then yes, you have an obligation to keep those people alive.
The reason Gaza wasn’t allowed total freedom and autonomy has something to do with its regular attacks against civilians, and also Israel wanting leverage over them, leverage they are now using now to get their kidnapped back. When Gaza was given autonomy they used it to elect Hamas to run their government, which recently orchestrated the mass murder and kidnapping of hundreds of Israeli civilians and caused this situation. This is a hostile territory at war with Israel. Why would they encourage its growth or help arm it while it remains belligerent? Why would they provide it with supplies with which to wage war on them?
Even if you ignore the moral thing of you know, not letting people die for no reason, Israel has a legal obligation. Similarly to how when a country occupies a territory, they have an obligation to provide for that territory. So unless Israel decides to recognize Gaza as a sovereign, free and independent state, they are responsible for it and its inhabitants.
Israel recognizes them as a hostile territory, not a state because of political reasons.
Has anyone died of starvation or lack of water in Gaza? If you have any reports I’d be interested to see them. As far as I know, supplies have not yet run out but may soon.
Bold of Gaza to launch a massive terror attack on a state they are dependent on, then complain about human rights abuses when they stop assisting them. If Israel went by Hamas’ playbook, there would be no Palestine.
Because Israel unilaterally left Gaza in 2005, as per the above link, and dismantled their settlements there.
Having the prison guards live next to your house instead of inside your house makes little difference.
Egypt has agreed to allow supplies through, and air shipments are happening until the crossing is clear. Under normal circumstances they only let people out and oil and some humanitarian aid supplies in, everything else goes through Israel.
So they cant move things.
It literally does. What exists now is called a blockade.
So was Vichy France independent just because it technically wasnt occupied by nazi troops? In fact, it was occupied a few years later, when the war started going to shit for the nazis.
The reason Gaza wasn’t allowed total freedom and autonomy has something to do with its regular attacks against civilians, and also Israel wanting leverage over them, leverage they are now using now to get their kidnapped back
So how do you think this will ever end? Are you saying that the only solution, is the final solution?
Bold of Gaza to launch a massive terror attack on a state they are dependent on, then complain about human rights abuses when they stop assisting them. If Israel went by Hamas’ playbook, there would be no Palestine.
So you think it is unfair for the rest of the world to demand from Israel to be a law abiding nation while fighting a terrorist organization? Do you think Israel should be allowed to kill thousands of innocent palestinians just because Hamas did it?
And does it make that big of a difference if you kill people with an AK or if you bomb and starve them?
I just want you to imagine some other state deliberately going out of its way to cut all water, electricity and food to a region with 2 million people because 1000 “x” people attacked and killed 1000 “y” people. Let’s say if Azerbaijan did it to the Nagorno-Karabakh armenian enclave(well not anymore). Do you think that would be morally acceptable?
I am ok with ethnic cleansing, i am actually a big proponent. But if Israel thinks this is the solution, they should come out and state it. Because honestly, i cant justify Israel’s actions(cutting water, food and electricity) in any other context.
Having the prison guards live next to your house instead of inside your house makes little difference.
It does legally.
So was Vichy France independent just because it technically wasnt occupied by nazi troops? In fact, it was occupied a few years later, when the war started going to shit for the nazis.
Military Occupation: control and possession of hostile territory that enables an invading nation to establish military government against an enemy or martial law against rebels or insurrectionists in its own territory
The Nazis established a military government in Vichy France. Israel let Gaza elect their own leaders, they chose Hamas. Therefore Vichy France was a military occupation, current day Gaza is not. Definitions matter when we are talking about law.
So how do you think this will ever end? Are you saying that the only solution, is the final solution?
I think the most viable solution would be for Palestine to make serious concessions and negotiate seriously for peace. Since they seem unwilling to negotiate or cease hostilities despite not having any viable path to victory, I would not be at all surprised if Israel systemically levels every structure in Gaza and forces the population there to leave for their own safety. Final solution implies killing them all, which Israel won’t do, but it will deny them everything.
So you think it is unfair for the rest of the world to demand from Israel to be a law abiding nation while fighting a terrorist organization? Do you think Israel should be allowed to kill thousands of innocent palestinians just because Hamas did it?
I think Israel has a right to defend itself, and this “terrorist organization” is the elected government of the Gaza territory. This is more like a war between states even though many countries do not recognize one or both parties as states. When a state declares war on and attacks another one it puts their entire population in peril. Unlike Hamas, I don’t think Israel is interested in killing civilians, but Hamas has created a situation where many civilians, civilians they are hiding among, will die when Israel predictably defends itself. They will then predictably blame Israel for the consequences of their own bloody, genocidal war crimes.
Let’s say if Azerbaijan did it to the Nagorno-Karabakh armenian enclave(well not anymore). Do you think that would be morally acceptable?
I am not familiar enough with the situation there to weigh in.
I am ok with ethnic cleansing, i am actually a big proponent.
Well that’s troubling, ethnic cleansing is never okay.