Yup. Live-streamed:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/defense-ministe... / https://x.com/KhalilJeries/status/1853905224320372923
"'I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,' Gallant says following an assessment at the IDF Southern Command in Beersheba."
> Food flows through Israel SMH...
This makes them more culpable, not less.
How's your memory? That lasted a few days only...
And again, what about Egypt? Why aren't they being charged? They've blockaded Gaza for 16 years now, even when Gazans were working in Israel Egypt still had their blockade going...
It has lasted significantly longer than that, to the point of the US threatening to withhold assistance as recently as last month over it (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-tells-israel-boost-gaza-huma...).
> And again, what about Egypt? Why aren't they being charged?
Because they are not a beligerent in the conflict, and don't even currently control the Rafah crossing; Israel took it in May. Even when open, Israel exercises control over who/what goes through under the treaty.
They're also apparently smart enough not to put out "we're gonna do a war crime" video announcements over it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention, to which Israel is a signatory, requires an occupying power to safeguard the civilian population they control.
> Has it ever happened in world history to anyone that's not Israel?
Yes; the Nuremberg trials. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan
The Holodomor is another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
> Ukraine certainly isn't expected to feed Russia...
Their troops currently occupying parts of Kursk absolutely are expected to safeguard the civilian population there. Blockading food supplies there would be a war crime.
You seem to have the roles reversed. Israel is behaving like russia here: occupying another country, displacing residents, saying the land should be theirs, repressing civilians, employing sexual violence and other torture, killing resisters, etc.
To your point: russia is obligated to provide food and medical supplies to civilians in occupied Ukraine, just as Israel is obligated to provide food and medical supplies to civilians in occupied Palestine.
Russia attacked Ukraine. Hamas attacked Israel. Those are the roles.
Israel hadn't occupied Gaza in 15 years prior to Oct 7.
More to the point, both russia and Israel have engaged in occupying another country, displacing residents, saying the land should be theirs, repressing civilians, employing sexual violence and other torture, killing resisters, and that's all before Oct 7.
Indeed, both present the same pretextual justification for doing all this: the occupation, displacement, repression, sexual violence, torture, and killing we see from russia and Israel are all allegedly for self defense, and because they claim the land was theirs at some point in the past.
In the same sense that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto mostly wasn't occupied by the Nazis, sure.
Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters.
> Russia attacked Ukraine. Hamas attacked Israel. Those are the roles.
Russia and Ukraine both hold some of the others' territory. They are required by international law to protect certain rights of prisoners of war and the civilian population of those areas under their control. Russia, in particular, is known for... varying compliance with the rule.
The same is true when Hamas went into Israel; they committed clear war crimes by not treating the civilians there during their very brief occupation according to international law.
Having a wall on your border is perfectly acceptable. Gazans were even allowed to work in Israel and many did (unfortunately lots of them provided intel to Hamas for Oct 7).
And no, having a wall isn't the definition of occupation.
Sure. Israel goes further; they demolished the airport in 2002, have blockaded the port since 2007, and by treaty control access even via the Egyptian crossings (which they currently physically occupy as well).
> And no, having a wall isn't the definition of occupation.
Correct, but that wasn't my assertion. Control of the population within that wall makes it an occupation. It's the same difference between "I'm gonna wrap up in a blanket and stay in tonight" and "I'm under house arrest".
> Gazans were even allowed to work in Israel...
That doesn't necessarily make you free.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schindlerjuden "survived the years of the Nazi regime primarily through the intervention of Schindler, who afforded them protected status as industrial workers at his enamelware factory in Kraków".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_Stat... "provide services valued at $9 billion annually and produce over $2 billion in goods".
Israel has maintained an explicitly colonial occupation on the West Bank and the Golan Heights, and a strategic occupation of Gaza (no longer involving settlement, but for the purpose of precluding any possibility of 2SS) for more than half a century. And yes, the latter is still considered to be under Israeli occupation by the international community (from the fact that it fully controls all 7 border crossings, along with air and maritime space). Meanwhile, its politicians are openly discussing the possibility of annexing part or all of the territory.
Hamas was another part of Likud's lunatic strategy for thwarting 2SS. Until one day, inevitably, that strategy didn't work out for them as well as they had hoped.
Those are the roles.