A Call Upon States to Realize Child-Specific Remedies in Conjunction with International Solidarity for Children

The preamble of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child calls for children to be brought up in “the spirit of the ideals proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular in the spirit of peace, dignity, tolerance, freedom, equality and solidarity.” These values form a foundation for a life in dignity and with aspirations for the future.  At present, many children around the world face trauma, exploitation, attack, and death through direct actions of both state and non-state actors as well as neglect or omission in spite of an obligation to protect.  There is a need for the international community to recognize child-specific remedies in solidarity with their aspiration for peace and enjoyment of human rights. What is at stake is the viability of the international community to uphold humanity at the universal level.

In the past two decades, the escalation of the typology of child-specific violations arising in both peace and war situations is astounding: forced transfer to impose a new nationality, maiming, forced early marriage, sexual exploitation and abuse, forced recruitment, denial of food, water, and/or medicine that inhibit growth and development, denial of education as a form of oppression/discrimination, separation from parents pursuant to immigration processes, arbitrary detention in conjunction with Counter Violent Extremism policies, and trafficking.  

Children’s vulnerability is multiplied by their inter-sectoral identities correlated with gender, race, ethnicity, religion, class, migrant status, and other identities. Although there is much attention on the risk of grave violations to children in the situation of armed conflict, there appears to be a lack of recognition of states’ obligation in relation to preventing and responding to child specific violations at all times. 

The media has provided heartbreaking imagery of the sacrifice of children’s rights throughout the 21st century: In 2018, the United States adopted a zero tolerance policy in which separated more than 2000 children from their parents at the border, some of whom were never reunited again. In 2020, during the pandemic, domestic abuse of girls in Latin America escalated significantly, followed by increased risk of trafficking and other sexual exploitation.[1] Since 8 February 2022, Russian Federation agents have taken at least 19,546 children to that country from Ukraine.[2] On October 7th, 2023, 32 children and babies were taken hostage by Hamas and UNICEF reported that since then over 1,000 children in Gaza have had one or both legs amputated while Save the Children stated that 10,000 children had been killed in airstrikes and ground operations.[3]

Moreover, the trend towards emergence of criminal actors to fill voids filled by defeated combatant groups in post-conflict countries, results in a transfer of risk of exploitation and abuse resulting in escalating chance of being subject to liability and incarceration for these connections.[4] The Global Risks Report 2024 highlighted the possibility of increased criminality and corruption within fragile states that will impact vulnerable groups, and this would include children.[5]

It is notable that UNICEF described the war in Gaza as a “War on Children” and that Gaza had become a “Graveyard for Thousands of Children”.[6] It is surprising that the ICJ Order of Provisional Measures on the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel) (26 January 2024) includes references to children only in the citation of the criteria of forced transfer of children as part of the definition within the convention[7] (but which was not included in the provisional orders issued), and the citation of the statements delineating the trauma and harm suffered by the children in Gaza made by the United Nations Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Mr. Martin Griffiths, on 5 January 2024[8] and the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), Mr. Philippe Lazzarini, on 13 January 2024.[9]

Judges Xue and Bhandari recognized children among the victims of the hostilities in their Declarations.[10] Judges Sebutinde and Judge Ad Hoc Barak also made reference to children as among the victims of hostilities but had additional focus, the former in relation to her opinion that South Africa could try to persuade Hamas to Immediately and unconditionally release the remaining hostages[11], and the latter referring to the historical case of the Nazi “Kinder Aktion” in 1944 and the fact that Israeli children were shocked and traumatized by the attack of October 7th.[12]  These reflections implicate the fact that children are often at the center of violence, hence it follows that they should be given priority in the design of peace.

The provisional orders issued by the ICJ were not child-specific-they were neutrally drafted in way in which children can be included: Israel must take all measures to prevent the commission of[13]:

killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

Israel must take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.[14]

A question arises as to what will be included in the reports filed by Israel in accordance with the provisional orders.  Will they provide information on any child-specific measures they may take in conjunction with their obligation to prevent genocide?

Realization of International Solidarity for Children requires recognition of state obligations in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child Article 38 (4):“to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict”, but the challenge is also to provide (according to Article 39) “physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child.”

In comparison, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issues child-specific provisional orders in cases involving violations affecting children, this may include orders of provision of psychological or physical support to child victims, including requiring transfer to institutions for proper care, supervision of detention, guarantee of sanitation and medical care, provision of education (including scholarships), in particular follow up for placement of orphans.[15]  The Inter-American Court of Human Rights espouses the Convention on the Rights of the Child Article 6(2) obligation upon states to “ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child”.[16] This includes physical, mental, spiritual, moral, psychological and social development.[17] The Court has held states responsible for two-fold violations of human rights of children, by failing to prevent children from living in misery, deprived of dignity, at risk of experiencing human rights violations, and deprived of the expectation to pursue a life’s project.

It may be suggested that reports on implementation of the Provisional Measures should also include information on physical and psychological recovery and reintegration of Palestinian and Israeli children who are deeply traumatized and injured. There is an urgent need to strengthen child-centered approaches within policies and programs supported by the international community.  Only when children are placed at the center can they participate in transition and consolidation of peace processes with actual enjoyment of human rights. Perhaps a child-centered approach can restore our humanity after decades of inhumane practice and policies by state and non-state actors around the world.


[1] https://reliefweb.int/report/world/surge-violence-against-girls-and-women-latin-america-and-caribbean

[2] https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15395.doc.htm#:~:text=internationally%20recognized%20borders.-,KATERYNA%20RASHEVSKA%2C%20Legal%20expert%20at%20the%20Regional%20Center%20for%20Human,and%20children%20deprived%20of%20parental

[3] GAZA: More than 10 children a day lose a limb in three months of brutal conflict | Save the Children International  and Gaza: 10,000 children killed in nearly 100 days of war – occupied Palestinian territory | ReliefWeb

[4] The New Dynamics of Child Recruitment in Colombia (insightcrime.org)

[5] https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2024/in-full/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc&utm_campaign=globalrisks&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiAzc2tBhA6EiwArv-i6fLVIf8DtlS7FcnZTQ3kB4ywd0Ld0ijz9wZ6pJ4LxR6pkMTCiSdGkhoCZhsQAvD_BwE

[6] Gaza has become a graveyard for thousands of children (unicef.org)

[7] Para. 43

[8]  Para. 47: “For children in particular, the past 12 weeks have been traumatic: No food. No water. No school. Nothing but the terrifying sounds of war, day in and day out.”

[9] Para 49: “This war affected more than 2 million people  the entire population of Gaza. Many will carry lifelong scars, both physical and psychological. The vast majority, including children, are deeply traumatized. Overcrowded and unsanitary UNRWA shelters have now become ‘home’ to more than 1.4 million people. They lack everything, from food to hygiene to privacy. People live in inhumane conditions, where diseases are spreading, including among children. They live through the unlivable, with the clock ticking fast towards famine. The plight of children in Gaza is especially heartbreaking. An entire generation of children is traumatized and will take years to heal. Thousands have been killed, maimed, and orphaned. Hundreds of thousands are deprived of education. Their future is in jeopardy, with far-reaching and long-lasting consequences.”

[10] Para 3 in both the Declaration of Judge Xue and the Declaration of Judge Bhandari.

[11] Dissenting Opinion Judge Sebutinde at para 34.

[12] Paras 5 and 25, Dissenting Opinion Judge Ad Hoc Barak

[13] Para. 78

[14] Para 80.

[15] The Rights of the Child in the Inter-American Human Rights System (oas.org) (2008) Provisional measures adopted by the Court to protect the human rights of children and adolescents

[16] Ibid

[17] United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 5 of November 27, 2003, para. 12.

International Solidarity for Children

One of the markers of the deep polarization between people interviewed in the media addressing the impact of both the hostage taking and the killing of children in Israel and Gaza is the repeated implied reference to the principle of Tu Quoque– that breaches of international humanitarian law, being committed by the enemy, justify similar breaches by a belligerent. This is principle is considered to be universally rejected in international humanitarian law, given that its obligations are considered to be unconditional and not based on reciprocity. It is imperative that the concept of international solidarity replace the narrative of revenge and division that is manifested in cycles of violence that is devasting children in Israel and Palestine.  

International solidarity is an expression of unity by which peoples and individuals enjoy the benefits of a peaceful, just and equitable international order, secure their human rights and ensure sustainable development.[1] It supports recognition of overlapping cross-border local to global solidarity network initiatives demonstrating a common empathy and shared aim between different peoples. This in contrast to unitary solidarity which is exclusionary as it centers on a common nativist, national segregated community orientation.  International Solidarity is intended to promote respect for, protection, and fulfilment of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all individuals, without distinction as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability or other status. All individuals, including children, have the right to participate meaningfully in, contribute to and enjoy a social and international order in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be realized. The aim is to promote solidarity between Israeli and Palestinian children and to encourage their right to engage in solidarity initiatives to build peace and enjoy human rights.

States, International Organizations, and Non-State Actors have a duty to respect the right of international solidarity and not breach obligations under international law. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 38 (4) sets forth the obligation to take precaution in relation to children in conflict: “In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict.” State and Non-state actors, including Hamas, are obligated to respect human rights and humanitarian law. This includes ensuring that children are not subject to attack (or taken hostage), that they are not forcibly displaced or separated from their parents, that they be given humanitarian assistance (including food, water, and medicine), that they are not subjected to arbitrary house raids or arrest and detention, that they not be used as human shields, and that they enjoy a clean and healthy environment. The current conflict has not only resulted in the severe psychological trauma and anxiety, but also deaths and injuries of children in Gaza and Israel.[2]

The urgency of pursuing full negotiations to secure the release of the hostages, with special priority for the children, women, elderly, and disabled persons is underscored.

Martin Luther King observed “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”[3]

Moreover, the spread of anti-Semitic and Islamophobic hate speech has incited violence in other countries, including the murder of a Palestinian 6 year old child and a Jewish woman in the United States.[4] As the Spokesperson for the OHCHR Ravina Shamdasani stated[5]:

“We call on political and other leaders to speak out, unequivocally, against such speech, and to take clear measures to stem any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. This is a time for the international community to come together in solidarity, advocating for the protection of all civilians, no matter where, no matter what.”

 King Abdullah suggested a vision of international solidarity that would be child centered at the Cairo Summit for Peace: “Our collective and unified message to the Israeli people should be: We want a future of peace and security for you and for the Palestinians, where your children and Palestinian children should no longer live in fear. .  .The only path to a safe and secure future for the people of the Middle East and the entire world—for the Jewish people, for Christians, for Muslims alike—starts with the belief that every human life is of equal value . . .”[6]

It is important that international and national actors within governments, international and regional organizations, civil society, and faith-based groups cooperate to pursue a cease- fire to be followed up by a peace and solidarity transitional justice mechanism that would be inclusive of participation by children. Positive News provides an overview of ten civil society groups that work for Israeli-Palestinian peace.[7] A future peace and solidarity mechanism should collect and share children’s stories of common losses as well as interdependent future aspirations to establish mutual recognition, empathy, and trust among the children of Israel and Palestine.  It should deconstruct the polarizing narratives in order to create a common commitment to promote a culture of sustainable peace and international solidarity.  This may help to promote support for expansion of peace and solidarity educational programs for Israeli and Palestinian children in the future.


[1] The revised Draft Declaration on Human Rights and International Solidarity, available at: G2306905.pdf (un.org)

[2] Children in Gaza ‘developing severe trauma’ after 16 days of bombing | Israel-Hamas war | The Guardian

[3] Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?. p. 67

[4] 6-Year-Old Boy Dead in Anti-Muslim Attack Near Chicago, Police Say – The New York Times (nytimes.com) 

US synagogue head killed as police warn against speculation over motive | Crime News | Al Jazeera

[5] Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories | OHCHR

[6] Remarks by His Majesty King Abdullah II at the Cairo Summit for Peace At the Cairo Summit for Peace | King Abdullah II Official Website

[7] Bridging the divide: 12 groups working for Israel-Palestine peace – Positive News – Positive News

Interview with Professor Noura Erakat

Noura Erakat is a human rights attorney and assistant professor at George Mason University. She has served as legal counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives and as a legal advocate for Palestinian refugee rights at the United Nations. Noura’s research interests include human rights and humanitarian, refugee, and national security law. She is a frequent commentator, with recent appearances on CBS News, CNN, Fox News, and NPR, among others, and her writings have been widely published in the national media and academic journals.

 

pid_26507Noura Erakat’s book, Justice For Some: Law and the Question of Palestine, was just published by Stanford University Press. I had the honor of interviewing Noura Erakat regarding her new book. The interview is transcribed below.

Milena Sterio: your book addresses an important topic – the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – but a topic that many others have already researched and written about. How is your book, Justice for Some, different? What is your “hook”?

Noura Erakat: This book is about the relationship between international law and politics and shows how that relationship narrates the Palestinian struggle for freedom between 1917-2017. Organized chronologically, the book focusses on five different and key junctures in Palestinian history, to explain how the situation evolved to the present day and to show that the law is both the site of oppression and resistance. The book also makes a theoretical intervention by emphasizing the role of legal work, as defined by Duncan Kennedy, in determining the meaning of law and its dynamic ability to change across time and space.

Milena Sterio: What role has law, and international law in particular, played in the story of Palestine, and how does your book tackle these issues?

Noura Erakat: Although international law has not commanded conduct nor effectively punished transgressions, I show that it has been incredibly consequential. Israel’s legal workers have used it to legitimize Israeli military action in Gaza as well as provide a legal analysis that has facilitated the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. It also shows how Palestinian legal workers have used it to inscribe their juridical status as a nation in international law and institutions as well as legitimate their use of force. The book explains how the law has become the site of struggle between Israeli and Palestinian legal workers, and the law has been used to justify oppression by the former, but also to inform resistance by the latter.

Milena Sterio: Was part of your goal in writing this book to offer a different historical narrative about Palestine?

Noura Erakat: Yes – most of Palestinian history has been viewed through the lens of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict- a framework that obfuscates the power imbalance between Israel- a state, the only nuclear power in the Middle East, and the 11th most powerful army in the world and Palestinians, a stateless people. I explicitly frame the book as one about the Palestinian struggle for freedom and draw on an alternative archive of Palestinian scholarship. This is especially unique in regard to scholarship on law and Palestine because that is dominated by Israeli scholars and scholarship, thus making their legal work appear as the norm.

Milena Sterio: How did you research Palestinian history? Did you travel to the region? Did you interview any historical figures?

Noura Erakat: I used a combination of legal analysis, archival research, and primary interviews for my research. I spent time in a rich archive at the American University of Beirut library; I also spent a significant amount of time in the Ramallah and Beirut offices of the Institute for Policy Studies which curates a remarkable archive that includes Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) annual yearbooks. There was a dearth of information on certain junctures including the negotiations that culminate in the Oslo Accords as well as the 1970s when the PLO turns to the United Nations and embarks on legal advocacy. To fill this lacuna, I conducted primary interviews. For example, I reconstruct the negotiations process by interviewing Palestinian negotiators who had participated in the Madrid and Washington negotiations. By doing this, I was able to describe, in this book, a completely different story about the Oslo Accords- one that did not just document how bad of a legal agreement it was for Palestinian interests but that also explained how and why the PLO ultimately endorses it. Much of this story has not been told before.

Milena Sterio: Who is the audience for this book?

Noura Erakat: This book is for a general audience – so anyone who wants to understand the Question of Palestine can benefit from it- in a formal classrooms teaching Middle East studies and beyond. its emphasis on law and its use of critical legal theory will make it particularly appealing to law students, practitioners, and scholars. I wrote this book as a tool of Palestinian knowledge production, where Palestinians are not portrayed simply as victims but instead where they play a central role in shaping the narrative.

Milena Sterio: Does your book offer any policy recommendations for the future?

Noura Erakat: No, this book does not offer policy recommendations. One of the goals of the book is to have a different conversation about Palestine that is not bound by the centrality of preserving Zionist settler sovereignty. It does this by proposing a different way to think about possibilities for the future by recasting the return of Palestinian refugees as the beginning of new futures rather than as the ultimate outcome of Palestinian struggle. How does the presence of six million refugees become an opportunity to forge new political communities that disrupt stark native/settler binaries? What is it that Palestinians have to offer to Jewish Israelis better than what Israel has been able to offer them? It also urges for abandoning a sovereignty framework – which has established the incommensurability of Palestinian and Zionist settler sovereignty – in favor of a framework of belonging which is not mutually exclusive. Part of this thought exercise is to think of what it would take to make Israel a part of the Middle East, rather than a satellite state in the Middle East. I suggest that this requires Jewish Israelis to accept and embrace everything indigenous to the region as the first step.

Milena Sterio: What is next on your research agenda? Do you have other projects lined up about the region or the conflict?

Noura Erakat: I have several research projects lined up. One research project looks at framing Israel’s shoot-to-kill policy in Gaza as a form of settler-colonial eliminatory violence. I am writing another article on the topic of surveillance and settler colonialism using Israel’s encroachment in one Palestinian village as a case study. And I have an additional project about the work of Israeli lawyers in the field of national security law.

My next book project begins where this book ends: namely at the “sovereignty trap,” which I define as a political arrangement of derivative sovereignty featuring native collaboration with settler-colonial and imperial powers, whereby good native behavior is rewarded with limited autonomy and perpetual subjugation. I am examining contemporary renewals of Black Palestinian transnational solidarity to explore the potential for freedom in excess of sovereignty. At this stage, my research consists primarily of interviews with activists involved in this movement.