Quote:
Originally Posted by hiredgun
Except that customarily no one has interpreted this in the way that you are suggesting, and custom is the most important determinant of international law. That's all I've got on that subject.
|
And what is your source for that? Surely the lawyers interviewed in the reuters story aren't "everyone." I can point to several other lawyers who disagree.
And the catch is, for any of the laws of blockades to be valid, this has to be an international armed conflict, which means Hamas is a part of the war, and that therefore they are entitled to the protections of the Geneva convention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
And why not? If elections are held as a means of representing the wishes of the citizenry, the choice of Hamas wasn't exactly the most inspired. What kind of backward thinking does it take to elect a 'government' that you know is incapable of competent governance, is for the destruction of Israel, and is really only capable of bringing further pain and suffering to Gaza? And why wouldn't you as a concerned, responsible citizen who just voted in Hamas speak out against them after they started murdering members of other palestinian political parties??
|
Israel has certainly done it's share to make Hamas popular. It has "rewarded" the Palestinian Authority's willingness to negotiate and cease attacks with the fastest expansion of settlements in recent history, even as they withdrew from Gaza under Hamas' attacks. And then with the blockade, the population is heavily dependent on the services and contraband that hamas provides.
At the end of the day, the situation is so complicated because the people who can derail negotiations are also the ones profiting the most from the status quo.