War on Gaza: Does international law even matter anymore?

By Selçuk Aydın, M Behesti Aydogan

At this moment of crisis, the right to Palestinian self-determination should be championed and backed by global institutions

There has been a widespread global outcry against the ongoing genocide in Gaza, but it has yet to be translated into concrete steps at the international level to stop Israel. 

Amid the ongoing violence and oppression in Gaza, this discrepancy between global popular will and state/institutional action has fuelled the public’s growing distrust in the international system, and perhaps most importantly, in international law itself.

Amid this backdrop, the need to reevaluate the functions of international law has become extremely pressing. 

Earlier this month, a conference at Bogazici University in the Turkish city of Istanbul, titled “Rethinking International Law After Gaza”, explored this very issue, raising important questions about decolonisation and the future of international law. Participants included renowned lawyers, experts, academics and lawmakers from around the world.

International law regulates global political and economic relations at different levels, purporting to facilitate peace, human rights and environmental protections. 

Yet, in reality, it has served to further western colonialism and privilege the liberal West. Both the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court have been asked to take steps towards prosecuting Israel, but they have been slow to act, with the latter long accused of over-focusing on African states. 

International law’s colonial roots and western bias have led to marginalisation of the Global South. It is Eurocentric in its production of knowledge, systematically disregarding other regions and their experiences. 

Double standards

Israel’s latest war on Gaza not only constitutes a genocide, but it also involves other large-scale crimes, such as domicide, or the systematic destruction of housing.

And yet, despite regularly criticising Russia for failing to adhere to international law, western states have not taken the same approach with Israel.

Great-power competition is a term used to define contemporary world politics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the decline of US hegemony. In a multipolar world, US hegemony is in direct competition with the rise of China and Russian revisionism. Within this fragmented structure, why are states not taking clear steps on the crisis in Gaza?

The colonial roots of the international liberal order are also manifested in its institutions

In the post-Soviet era, the triumph of the international liberal order is claimed to have advanced human rights, the rule of law and democratic values. But liberal values do not translate into equality or prosperity in the Global South; rather, they serve to suppress its peoples, including Palestinians.

The colonial roots of the international liberal order are also manifested in its institutions. The absolute veto right of the five permanent UN Security Council members, which undermines equal sovereign state relations, has caused fractures in global politics. 

Both the US invasion of Iraq and the Russian invasion of Ukraine illustrate this. In addition, veto rights and military strength have been used to turn many regions into conflict zones through proxy wars.

The UN Security Council has stymied any comprehensive action on Gaza, while individual states have fallen short of taking concrete steps. The current international system is a significant obstacle to global justice. International law needs to be decolonised.

Colonial relations

Indeed, the modern international legal order is extensively shaped by colonial relations, as scholars such as Antony Anghie and Makau Mutua have long argued. 

Although the post-1945 period witnessed a decolonisation movement, undermining the colonial roots of international law, the global system persistently marginalised the newly independent Third World states during the Cold War era. It upheld neocolonialism, to the detriment of countries in the Global South.  

The UN has been unable to respond to contemporary problems. There is now broad acceptance of the fact that the UN needs transformation, and that representation issues must be resolved.

In the current context of Israel’s war on Gaza, the need to reform UN structures is more pressing than ever.

Israel’s illegal occupation, and the displacement and suffering of the Palestinian people, are well-documented. Going forward, the global strategy must include recognising the state of Palestine along its former borders, and ensuring the Palestinian right of return. 

The right to Palestinian self-determination should be championed and backed by international organisations, courts, states and the global public. As the World Court recently noted: “It is for all States … to ensure that any impediment resulting from the illegal presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory to the exercise of the Palestinian people of its right to self-determination is brought to an end.” 

All states, bound by international law, should comply. More pressingly, it is the responsibility of each and every one of us to take action to halt Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza.