Israel’s world-leading COVID-19 vaccination campaign quickly became the envy of the globe, and news articles followed. Many gave a clear picture, but some implied or even outright stated that Israel is shirking its obligations to supply the Palestinians with vaccines, in violation of international law.
One particularly dramatic example was this article in The Guardian, with suggestive language about “settlers” and featuring a photo of an Orthodox Jew.
Palestinians excluded from Israeli Covid vaccine rollout as jabs go to settlers https://t.co/ETQ3ZDAB5h
— The Guardian (@guardian) January 3, 2021
The Guardian included the phrase, “Human rights groups accuse Israel of dodging obligations to millions in occupied territories who may wait months for vaccination” and, indeed, groups such as Amnesty International had made the spurious claim that Israel is violating international law. Otherwise positive articles in the Washington Post, The New York Times and others made similarly inaccurate statements regarding international law.
Former CNN correspondent Marc Lamont Hill summed up a common mindset on his Instagram (as shown in this HonestReporting Tweet):
The guy is literally obsessed with smearing Israel.
To think this was the mindset of a prominent @CNN analyst…@marclamonthill pic.twitter.com/NCqULPAoWZ
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) January 5, 2021
Yet, despite political commentators, talking heads and various NGOs calling for Israel to vaccinate Palestinians, there is one entity that, at the time, was conspicuously not doing so: the Palestinian government.
In fact, Palestinian Authority (PA) officials were quoted as saying:
We are working on our own to obtain the vaccine from a number of sources…we are not a department in the Israeli Defense Ministry. We have our own government and Ministry of Health, and they are making huge efforts to get the vaccine.
To be clear: Israeli citizens and permanent residents are all afforded the same access to healthcare and vaccinations, regardless of religion, ethnicity or national origin. This raises an interesting question: if the Palestinian government doesn’t want Israel’s assistance in procuring vaccines, is Jerusalem required under international laws and treaties to assist anyway?
In short: not only is Israel not required to provide assistance, but, at the time that the above-mentioned articles were published, Israel was legally prohibited from doing so without cooperation from the PA.
In fact, the PA government only on Wednesday reportedly changed its policy and made its first request for vaccine assistance, a development that will be addressed later in this piece.
Join the fight for Israel’s fair coverage in the news
International Law
It is disturbingly common for pundits, talking heads and NGOs to say that something “violates international law,” but without saying which law it violates, and without providing any legal analysis as to how it violates that law. This is a clue that the statement may be misleading or even outright wrong. At the very least, it should be a clue to savvy news readers and to savvy, professional journalists that further investigation is required.
International law is not “law” in the legislative sense — it is not a set of rules passed by some body with overriding authority over countries across the world. Instead, international law is a combination of treaties and agreements between and among numerous sovereign nations. In this case, there are three international agreements that are relevant: the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV), the Hague Convention and the Oslo Accords. All three must be read together in order to fully understand the obligations of the parties.
The most general concept comes from the GCIV, in particular Articles. 55, 58; API Art. 69, which states:
The occupying power has the duty to ensure that the adequate provision of food and medical supplies is provided, as well as clothing, bedding, means of shelter, other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population of the occupied territory, and objects necessary for religious worship.
There is debate among Israelis, as well as among legal scholars, as to whether Israel’s relationship to the West Bank constitutes an “occupation” in the classical sense. However, the Israeli Supreme Court has ruled in numerous cases dating back to 1971 that Israel must follow the international laws related to occupation, whether Israel calls it that or not. This conclusion is therefore Israeli law, and the Israeli government takes its obligations seriously.
The Hague Convention (in particular Articles 42-47) goes into greater specifics on the same topic as the GCIV, and finally the Oslo Accords describe the way these obligations play out between the State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority government (specifically, the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip of 1995, also known as “Oslo II,” Annex III, Article 17).
This phrase from Oslo II is especially relevant:
Israel and the Palestinian side shall exchange information regarding epidemics and contagious diseases, shall cooperate in combating them and shall develop methods for exchange of medical files and documents
Oslo II does not by itself say that Israel has a duty to provide health supplies to the PA, but the GCIV does. To be precise, the GCIV doesn’t say Israel must provide aid, but that Israel must “ensure the adequate provision.” This means aid can also come from global foreign sources, as long as Israel ensures it is provided.
The GCIV usually deals with situations where the occupied people do not have a government of their own, so there is no issue about coordination and the occupying power simply acts as a direct authority. However, Oslo changed that by creating the Palestinian Authority government, and so Israel has to respect the PA’s autonomy and its right to refuse certain aid.
This makes perfect sense: imagine if Israel were to force aid upon Palestinians. How would that play out? Would Israel soldiers enter Palestinian towns and forcibly inject people with vaccines? Would they break into hospitals and deposit supplies that are not wanted? To do so would obviously be morally wrong and, based on the Oslo Accords, also a violation of international law.
Related Reading – Media: Israel Leaves Palestinians Waiting For Vaccines; Truth: Palestinians Never Asked Israel for Help
Why Refuse Aid?
As of last week, Palestinian statements such as, “we are not a department in the Israeli Defense Ministry. We have our own government,” demonstrated an attitude of pride and a desire to show self-sufficiency. One can argue about whether this decision is a wise one: is the PA sacrificing the health of its people to make a political statement? Perhaps. Or perhaps the PA is right to emphasize self-sufficiency and independence. Moreover, conspiracy theories have caused many Palestinians to distrust Israeli medical supplies, thus this could be a reason for the PA to shun such aid.
What can be said definitively is that the PA has the right to decline Israeli assistance, and that Israel is prohibited from attempting to overrule such a decision.
The Palestinian Authority Requests Vaccines
That said, the PA government this Wednesday apparently requested assistance with vaccines. Information about exactly what the PA requested and what exactly Israel has provided is still not fully known, but Israel has already started providing vaccines to the PA in small amounts for cases involving urgent humanitarian need. Some two million doses are expected to arrive in Ramallah next month.
It is unusual that a GCIV obligation to provide aid happens in a context where supplies are so limited and timing is so urgent that providing aid would actually harm the citizens of the country providing it. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as adopted by the United Nations, makes it clear that nations have a duty to protect the safety and welfare of their own citizens.
Yet, GCIV creates a duty to protect groups of people who are not citizens. Both documents carry the force of international law, and thus Israel must carefully balance its obligations to its own citizens against its obligations to the Palestinian Authority.
