On February 23, 2024, the United Nations held a meeting to discuss the armament path of the Israeli side, given the Western arms supplies Israel receives, which are used in its systematic war against Palestine. This is considered a violation of international humanitarian law. This meeting was held following a call from a group of UN experts for an immediate ban on the arms supplied to Israel.
This situation led Israel to accuse the UN of aligning with Hamas and not addressing Israel’s interests and its right to self-defense, according to statements by Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz. The discussion on Israeli armament under the UN framework can be outlined as follows:
United Nations’ Stance on Armament Processes
The UN generally operates in relation to armament processes under the framework of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which is an agreement among UN member states that regulates international trade in conventional arms, ranging from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft, and warships. Negotiated at a UN conference in New York on July 27, 2012, it entered into force in December 2014 after being signed by 130 countries, including Lebanon and Palestine. Its primary objectives include preventing and eradicating the illicit trade in conventional arms and taking measures to prevent their diversion, as outlined in Article 11 of the treaty.
In this context, the parties to the Arms Trade Treaty held a meeting on February 21, 2024, in Geneva, Switzerland, as the 10th Conference of the States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty (CSP10), to discuss arms transfers to Israel. According to the official website of the treaty, this three-day meeting, for the first time, officially addressed non-compliance under the Arms Trade Treaty, which stipulates that no State Party should authorize any transfer of conventional arms or related parts or components “if it is aware at the time of authorization” that they will be used to commit genocide, crimes against humanity, or war crimes. All member states are also required to prevent genocide and other international crimes.
Following this context, a group of UN experts submitted a memorandum on February 23, 2024, regarding Israeli armament, warning against the transfer of arms or ammunition to Israel for use in Gaza. They urged all countries to “ensure respect” for international humanitarian law by parties to armed conflicts, as required by the 1949 Geneva Conventions and customary international law. Therefore, states should refrain from transferring any arms or ammunition if they are aware, based on facts or past patterns of behavior, that these will be used in violation of international law. The necessity for EU member states to adhere to the EU’s arms export control law was also emphasized, with States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty having additional treaty obligations to prevent arms exports.
The need for an arms embargo on Israel was further reinforced by the International Court of Justice’s ruling in January 2024, which found a reasonable risk of genocide in Gaza and ongoing severe harm to civilians. The 1948 Genocide Convention requires States Parties to use all reasonably available means to prevent genocide in other countries.
Israeli and Palestinian Perspectives on Armament
Israeli Perspective: This view was evident in the Israeli working paper submitted by the Permanent Mission of Israel to the UN on February 21, which included messages aimed at legitimizing its genocide practices and its approach to acquiring arms through Middle Eastern deals and arms transfers to non-state actors and terrorist organizations. This situation poses severe consequences for the international security landscape and is a major factor in escalating armed violence, including gender-based violence. Additionally, the paper indicated that conventional arms are being illicitly traded and spread throughout the Middle East in unprecedented quantities, exemplified by arms transfers to Hamas. This was revealed following the events of October 7, 2023, when large quantities of conventional arms were found in Hamas’s possession, used in attacks against Israelis.
The Israeli paper also highlighted gender-based violence, including narratives of gender-based mutilation, justifying this with Article 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty, which emphasizes that States Parties should consider the risk of conventional arms being used to commit or facilitate serious acts of gender-based violence when evaluating arms exports.
Palestinian Perspective: The Palestinian working paper, submitted on February 23, 2024, by the Permanent Observer Mission to the UN, focused on limiting arms transfers, exports, and the politicization of the passage of arms, aircraft, and military items (including components and spare parts) to Israel over the past four months. The paper indicated that Israel’s systematic use of armament to commit genocide in Gaza had not ceased, and Israel had intensified its military operations in Gaza and explicitly threatened a ground invasion in Rafah.
In this context, the paper condemned the facilitation of arms transfers by some States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty and non-compliance with treaty laws and provisions, including Articles 6 and 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty, Article 1 common to the Geneva Conventions, the Draft Articles of the International Law Commission on State Responsibility, and the Genocide Convention. It called for engagement with exporting or transit countries, including the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, France, the Czech Republic, Canada, Australia, Japan, Norway, and other potential “transit countries” such as Greece, Cyprus, and Belgium.
This development in armament for Israel necessitates halting all military equipment, aid, component, and ammunition transfers to Israel until it ceases violating international law and humanitarian law. Furthermore, agreements for military cooperation, including training and intelligence collaboration, should be avoided, and countries should refuse to use their ports and airports for transferring arms to Israel.
UN Actions on Armament Issues
The UN has shown a qualitative shift in its approach to armament issues concerning Israel, highlighted by the meeting mentioned above and the Israeli non-compliance with treaty provisions. This is a precedent at the UN since the Arms Trade Treaty’s implementation in 2014, indicating the seriousness and escalation of the situation due to increased military aid and the “politicization” of arms transfers to Israel, implicating several States Parties in treaty violations.
As a result, Italian and Spanish Foreign Ministers have announced that they will not export arms to Israel. Additionally, a Dutch appellate court ruling on February 12, 2024, demanded the Dutch government halt exports of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel due to legal obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty and EU law.
The UN statement also highlighted evidence of the extensive use of “dumb” bombs, deliberate and disproportionate attacks, failure to warn civilians of attacks, and condemnation of Israeli leaders and soldiers.
The situation requires a firm response from states to curb violations of international humanitarian law by Zionist forces and gangs, with the EU recently discouraging arms exports to Israel while Belgium, Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands, along with Itochu Corporation of Japan, have suspended arms transfers.
Additionally, the US must reconsider its support for Zionist forces with aerial and naval weapons and reevaluate the losses sustained by US forces in the Middle East since October 7, especially after encounters with Houthi forces in the Red Sea. American arms manufacturers involved in producing and transferring weapons to Zionist forces are also held accountable under international humanitarian law.
Despite these developments and the international community’s efforts, many armed conflicts continue worldwide, particularly non-international conflicts involving severe humanitarian crimes, such as the massacre in Gaza. Historical precedents, such as the failure of the League of Nations during World War I to achieve its main goal of maintaining international peace and security through collective security mechanisms, led to the establishment of the United Nations in 1945. The UN’s role in internationalizing and resolving non-international armed conflicts remains problematic, often facing criticism for its dual standards in addressing international peace and security issues. Major powers, especially the United States, have used the UN to serve their national interests at the expense of the international community, undermining the credibility of the UN.
