US officials said strikes were potentially legal, news outlets reported.
On the third day of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearing held in The Hague on Wednesday, a US delegation rejected the opinion held by more than 40 countries since October 2023 that Israel has violated international law in attacks on the United Nations and international organisations.
Josh Simmons, of the U.S. State Department’s legal team, said international law “does not impose an unqualified obligation on occupation,” regarding humanitarian assistance provided by international law, international organizations and third states.
“Occupation laws converge military and humanitarian interests,” said Simmons, senior director of the U.S. State Department’s Office of Legal Advisors.
Reflecting Israel’s views, Simmons questioned the fairness of UNRWA as a relief provider.
“There are serious concerns about UNRWA’s fairness, including information that Hamas is using the UNRWA facility and that UNRWA staff participated in the attack on Israel on October 7th (2023),,” a US official said.
Simmons mentioned Article 59 of the 4th Geneva Convention in 1949. It relates to the humanitarian obligation of the right of occupation, and it states that the provision does not impose an absolute obligation to grant relief to the population under its control.
The US Department of Justice recently decided that UNRWA will not be able to escape from US legal action.
UNRWA is a major source of humanitarian assistance to an estimated 5.9 million Palestinian refugees in occupied Palestine and its neighboring countries.
Since October 2023, Israel has killed at least 290 UNRWA staff and evacuated at least 830 attacks with agency grounds.
The third day of the hearing at the ICJ is ongoing, focusing on Israel’s obligation to promote humanitarian assistance in occupied Palestinian territory.
The United States and Hungary are the only two states that have defended Israel in the course of lawsuits.
MNA