Below are some common questions that tend to prevent concerned bystanders from taking action. We hope you find them helpful in developing your own perspective. To suggest additions to this FAQ, feel free to contact us.
The history in the region is so complex. Both sides have rights. The related debates seem endless—arms exports, how to deal with extremists, self-determination and statehood for both, and on and on. It’s overwhelming. Given this history, how could I possibly take a stance?
Human rights and international humanitarian law are not complicated. While the region’s history is long and complex, the International Court of Justice has determined what’s happening now in Gaza may be plausibly characterized as genocide. Attacks against civilian populations, collective punishment, and starvation are all war crimes. Put bluntly, we can’t “both sides” what is happening and you can support Palestinian human rights without any other expertise in international relations or foreign affairs.
There are many other places where people don’t have food and water. Similarly, there are war crimes happening around the world – am I expected to take a stand on all of them?
You can support human rights and oppose war crimes unequivocally in a single sentence. “Whataboutism” is a distraction. Stay focused on the central issue of the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Palestine to help you speak up with clarity and purpose now. If other governments see that it’s possible to get away with genocidal war crimes, they will be encouraged to do the same.
Why focus on Palestine? What about the other genocides?
First, justice is not a zero-sum game. It is possible to advocate for human rights in multiple countries simultaneously, and many decolonial and liberatory struggles are connected. It is absolutely true that civilians are suffering horrendously in Sudan, Congo and elsewhere. These conflicts all deserve more international attention.
We are centering the plight of Palestinians in this project for the following reasons:
– Two of the world’s most militarised countries (notably Israel & USA) together with the support of major powers (e.g. Germany, UK) are actively targeting civilians under siege. It’s a battle between wealthy, tech-enabled militaries and an occupied population – not a war between two armies – that is being actively aided and abetted at the highest levels in the West.
– If the world accepts Israel’s model of genocidal war crimes, we can be certain it will be exported. The “battle tested” technology, the extremist politics, the unprecedented levels of destruction – all of it. This makes us all less safe.
– Palestinians have faced 70+ years of violent oppression and occupation. The only difference now is that the trampling of their universal human rights is finally on display for the world to see. Their time has come – they deserve justice.
– This conflict has huge potential to trigger wider global wars. If Palestine weren’t so strategic for so many world powers, this tiny patch of land linking the Middle East to Africa would have been abandoned long ago.
Perhaps most positively, if the global community can force the most powerful nations to adhere to international law in Palestine, lessons will be learnt about how to manage other armed conflicts in a more humanitarian way. The power of the people will be undeniable. Precedents will be set.
Again, none of this means other genocides should be ignored! If you are called to focus elsewhere, you can do so without using whataboutism to undermine solidarity with Palestinians.
Given what Hamas did on October 7, 2023, doesn’t Israel have the right to do anything it needs to defend itself?
No. International humanitarian law sets limits. The laws of armed conflict (e.g, Hague Law, Geneva Law) only function if all countries adhere to them, including the wealthy and powerful ones. We cannot allow a world where there are no limits to the use of violence..
I’m very upset about what has happened and is happening to the Israeli hostages. Will speaking up about Palestinian human rights help or hurt these hostages?
Taking hostages is illegal under international law and should be totally unacceptable whoever does it. Many Israeli and Jewish commentators – not to mention the relatives of the hostages – have highlighted that the Netanayhu government has shown little real interest in securing the release of the hostages held by Hamas. It has been widely reported that Hamas was willing to release the hostages in early October but the Israeli government refused the deal; this is the same for the current ceasefire deal which Hamas accepted but Israel rejected. Israel has said it is determined to attack Rafah, putting its own hostages and Palestinian civilians at risk. Since 1967 Israel has detained approximately one million Palestinians, including tens of thousands of children. As a percentage of population, this is enormous; at least four out of every 10 Palestinian men will spend time in Israeli jails, with 70 percent of Palestinian families having at least one relative detained. During the November 2023 ceasefire, Hamas released 110 Israeli and foreign nationals held captive in Gaza, in exchange for the release of 240 Palestinians held in Israeli jails, of which 107 were children and three-quarters had not been convicted of a crime. This repressive system needs to be changed.
Some commentators say that Palestinian human rights (such as the right to food and water) are not being infringed and if they are then, Israel isn’t the cause – how can I know who to trust?
Trust your own eyes and critical thinking skills. The long lines of trucks that Israel is preventing from delivering humanitarian aid have been photographed and filmed extensively. Firsthand accounts are also widely available. For example, see U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR), reporting on Israeli checkpoints intentionally bottlenecking aid.
“Israel has set up a very complicated system to inspect the trucks beforehand. They had such an inspection system before October 7th, and they were able to inspect and allow 500 trucks a day to enter. But they’ve set up a convoluted system now that Senator Van Hollen and I witnessed at Rafah crossing, where truck drivers, after loading up their supplies, often wait up to a week to get permission to pass into Gaza — a week.”
On 7 May, Israel seized and shut down the Rafah crossing cutting off all aid supply lines. The area is now an active war zone.
Palestinians also have the right to self-determination, to live in security and in dignity without Israeli military rule. This right – to sovereign statehood – is enshrined in many UN resolutions but has so far been denied. We must not allow Israel to keep infringing this right.
Doesn’t speaking out for Palestinian human rights during this conflict benefit Hamas?
Speaking out for Palestinian human rights benefits everyone who believes in shared international norms and a rules-based international order. If any state actor is permitted to violate this architecture with impunity, the structure loses its credibility and value.
As the US government and many experts have admitted in private, Hamas cannot be defeated militarily and even if this did happen, another group will spring up in its place. The only way to end the cycle of violence is to make progress on a political solution based on international law and the right to self-determination. This means ending Israel’s occupation and supporting sovereign statehood for Palestinians. Such a political solution starts with a ceasefire and de-escalation.
Could I be accused of being antisemitic or supporting terrorism? Won’t this create career risk / social risk / legal risk / physical safety risk?
Yes, accusations tend to fly when the status quo is challenged. Antisemitism is real and should be condemned. Islamophobia and anti Palestinian racism is also real and should also be condemned. Always secure your position from a place of shared humanity rather than a place of hate. Supporting Palestinian human rights doesn’t mean you hate the people of Israel or support terror – there are many Jewish people who are highly critical of what the Israeli government is doing.
Power and privilege are never given up without a fight, and this may include bad-faith smears and accusations. Everyone has to decide their own level of risk and involvement based on how they want history to remember them.
You don’t have to know international law chapter and verse, but you can refer to a few basic facts:
1. The right to self determination is enshrined in international law.
2. Palestinians have been living under Israeli military occupation since 1967. The International Court of Justice is currently considering whether the occupation has become illegal and has to end immediately without negotiation.
3. The UN has repeatedly affirmed Palestinian right to self-determination. Palestinian statehood is the majority wish of the international community.
These basic international legal principles are neither antisemitic nor are they supporting terrorism.
What if I don’t use social media for political issues?
It is possible to support Palestinian human rights meaningfully without social media. Use whatever platform you have, even if it’s simply calls to your elected officials or conversations amongst friends or family. If you are on social media, look at how others are using it to support Palestinian human rights. Supporters are even speaking up on career site LinkedIn.
All the real decisions are made by powerful vested interests at a much higher level than me. What’s the point of expressing my view?
It’s easy to feel powerless (even a sense of doom) on issues of human rights or any other major crisis. This defeatism, while understandable, only serves to keep things the way they are. The underlying power structures are clearly threatened by our growing influence, but it will take many more of us to turn the tide. Change doesn’t happen on its own. We must speak up and make it happen.
It may help to know that it only takes a small percentage of a population, properly mobilized, to make a nonviolent campaign successful.
My main focus is on something else – what about the damage to my relationships with clients, funders, or stakeholders if I comment about Palestinian human rights)?
Standing up for equal rights requires bravery. Movements for civil rights, voting rights, etc. have all been met with resistance throughout history. We all have to weigh what we know is right in the long term against short term reputational, professional, and other risks. Millions of us are speaking up for Palestinians because we feel morally compelled to do so in this critical moment.
“Many of us like to ask ourselves, ‘What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?’ The answer is, you’re doing it. Right now.” – US Airman Aaron Bushnell, who died after setting himself on fire outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington DC. This is a brave but extreme act of protest which we do not recommend others copy. But his question is highly relevant to all of us who are silent despite being concerned about what is being done in our name.
Is this a genocide?
Many people who study the subject think so. Some spoke up early and courageously. Now, experts who previously declined to use the g-word say it is. Journal of Genocide Research has published a range of pieces on the topic since last year.
Beyond academics, courts are answering the question with a “yes”. In January 2024, the International Court of Justice found that Israel’s actions in Gaza constituted a “plausible case” of genocide. The case will take years to prosecute. Widely-reported tactics like siege warfare and restricting the flow of food into Gaza—witnessed by U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley, among others—are evidence of collective punishment designed to starve all Gazans. The ongoing targeting of refugee camps, hospitals, aid workers, and journalists are all evidence of intent to harm the general population and those who aid them.
Genocide is a process, with multiple steps. It can vary in speed and method(s). As the situation continues, risks accelerate and become more grave. We simply do not wait for a genocide to be completed to act.
If you prefer to ignore the genocide scholars and use a different phrase like “genocidal war crimes” or “mass killings”, then that’s fine too. It’s what you do about what’s happened and unfolding that really matters.