NAME: MATIOP MACHUEI
SID: 142-911
UNIT: ADR CAT2
The Gaza-Israel conflict is a complex issue requiring mediation grounded in international
law to ensure legitimacy, fairness, and sustainable peace. Using the FILAC framework, this
analysis evaluates the mediator’s role in resolving the conflict, integrating international
legal principles to address the identified issues.
Facts
The conflict between Gaza and Israel has persisted for decades, underpinned by
occupation, blockades, and violence. Israel controls Gaza's borders, airspace, and
resources despite its 2005 withdrawal, while Hamas has governed Gaza since 2007
following a political and military standoff with Fatah. Israel, citing security concerns,
imposed a blockade on Gaza that has devastated the economy and led to significant
humanitarian issues.
The October 2023 escalation, triggered by a Hamas-led attack on Israel, resulted in
massive casualties on both sides and exacerbated the humanitarian crisis. These events
have further entrenched mistrust, making negotiations challenging.
The Qatari leader, as mediator, must navigate a volatile environment, addressing both
immediate concerns—such as the humanitarian crisis—and long-term structural issues,
including Palestinian self-determination and Israeli security.
Issues
1. How can the mediator effectively address Gaza’s humanitarian crisis?
2. What framework can balance Israel’s security concerns with Palestinians’ right to self-
determination?
3. How can the mediator rebuild trust and ensure compliance with agreements?
4. How can systemic issues, such as the blockade and statehood, be addressed to achieve
sustainable peace?
Laws
The mediation process must align with key international laws:
1. United Nations Charter (Article 33): Mandates peaceful dispute resolution through
mediation and negotiation.
2. Right to Self-Determination (ICCPR, Article 1): Protects the Palestinian right to
autonomy and statehood.
3. Geneva Conventions: Obligates protection of civilians and prohibits collective
punishment during armed conflict.
4. UN Security Council Resolution 2334: Calls for an end to actions that undermine the
peace process, such as settlement expansion and violence against civilians.
Application
1. Addressing the Humanitarian Crisis
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, which
require the protection of civilians in armed conflict and prohibit collective punishment.
The blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt has crippled Gaza’s economy, restricted the
flow of essential goods, and caused widespread suffering.
The mediator must advocate for humanitarian corridors to allow the delivery of aid while
referencing the Geneva Conventions to highlight the illegality of actions that harm civilians
indiscriminately. For instance, Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly
prohibits collective punishment, providing a legal basis for demanding an immediate easing
of the blockade.
In practical terms, the Qatari mediator can propose monitored aid delivery systems
involving neutral international organizations like the Red Cross. By ensuring compliance
with international humanitarian law, these measures can serve as a confidence-building
mechanism.
2. Balancing Security and Self-Determination
The ICCPR’s Article 1 emphasizes the right of all peoples to self-determination, making
the Palestinian demand for autonomy legally valid. Simultaneously, Israel’s security
concerns, rooted in the threat of militant attacks, must also be addressed.
The mediator can use the UN Charter’s Article 33 to propose a phased resolution process:
1. Immediate ceasefire monitored by neutral observers, ensuring both sides de-escalate.
2. Gradual lifting of the blockade in exchange for Hamas ceasing rocket attacks and
ensuring arms control monitored by international bodies.
A historical precedent is the Good Friday Agreement, which balanced sovereignty and
security in Northern Ireland. Similarly, a phased approach that ties security measures to
steps toward Palestinian self-determination can provide a roadmap for sustainable peace.
3. Rebuilding Trust and Ensuring Compliance
The profound mistrust between the parties necessitates confidence-building measures
(CBMs). UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which condemns actions undermining the
peace process, provides a legal framework for such measures.
The Qatari mediator could propose:
Temporary Suspension of Settlements: A freeze on Israeli settlement expansion as a gesture
of goodwill.
Humanitarian Exchanges: The release of hostages by Hamas and Palestinian prisoners by
Israel.
Independent Monitoring: Involving UN observers to ensure adherence to agreed measures.
A historical example is the Dayton Accords, where NATO monitors ensured compliance
with peace terms in Bosnia. Applying this approach, the Qatari mediator could involve
international agencies to verify the implementation of CBMs, fostering mutual trust.
4. Addressing Systemic Issues for Long-Term Peace
The root causes of the conflict—occupation, blockades, and the absence of Palestinian
statehood—must be resolved to achieve lasting peace. The ICCPR’s Article 1 on self-
determination and UN Security Council Resolution 2334 on illegal settlements provide a
legal basis for addressing these issues.
The Qatari mediator can propose a phased roadmap:
1. Short-Term: Immediate humanitarian relief and cessation of hostilities.
2. Mid-Term: Gradual lifting of the blockade and establishment of economic cooperation
zones.
3. Long-Term: Negotiations on Palestinian statehood, supported by regional and
international actors like Egypt, Jordan, the EU, and the US.
South Africa’s transition from apartheid provides a useful model for systemic change,
involving inclusive dialogue, international support, and legal frameworks to dismantle
structural injustices. The Qatari mediator can draw on these lessons to advocate for a two-
state solution backed by international guarantees.
Conclusion
By grounding the mediation process in international law, the Qatari leader can address
immediate concerns and lay the foundation for long-term peace. The Geneva Conventions
emphasize the urgency of humanitarian action, while the ICCPR and Resolution 2334
provide a roadmap for addressing structural issues like self-determination and illegal
settlements.
The mediator’s success hinges on balancing these legal principles with practical measures,
including phased agreements, confidence-building measures, and systemic reforms. This
approach ensures the process is legitimate, equitable, and aligned with international
norms, fostering a sustainable resolution to the Gaza-Israel conflict.
