A new report, ‘Situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967’ by Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese and her team in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, concludes that “the ongoing genocide in Gaza is a collective crime, sustained by the complicity of influential Third States” and is “facilitated through Third States’ direct support, material aid, diplomatic protection and, in some cases, active participation”.
It is not an opinion piece but a carefully researched, factual work. And it paints a sad picture of the depth of depravity to which ‘civilisation’ has sunk. The UN should have presented this information as soon as the truth was known and when it might have concentrated global minds in good time.
Better late than never, the report pulls no punches and tells the international community what they should already know about lawfully resolving the long-running Israel problem and restoring to the Palestinians their homeland and rights to self-determination. Now there is no excuse for ignorance in the corridors of power.
The report is a long-ish read, but worth it. Most of the key points are lifted from it and listed here.
- On 9 October 2023, immediately after Israel announced a tightened siege on Gaza, key Western leaders expressed support for the “self-defence” of Israel – unwarranted under article 51 of the UN Charter. President Biden repeatedly cited unsubstantiated reports of “beheaded babies”. British opposition Leader Keir Starmer defended Israel’s right to cut off water and power to civilians.
- By 20 October 2023 international law experts, genocide scholars and human rights organizations had warned of impending genocide. On 26 January 2024, the International Court of Justice confirmed the serious risk of genocide in Gaza, giving rise to States’ obligations to prevent it and to punish incitement, commission or complicity.
- Post-October 2023, the United States used its veto in the UN Security Council seven times, controlling ceasefire negotiations and providing diplomatic cover for the Israeli genocide. The US was not acting alone. Abstentions, delays, and watered-down draft resolutions reinforced the diplomatic protection and political narrative Israel needed to continue the genocide. The United Kingdom maintained alignment with the US position until November 2024.
- By May 2024 the ICC Prosecutor had sought arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials, and Third States had “actual or constructive knowledge” of the ongoing international crimes they had failed to prevent, triggering a heightened responsibility on their part to act.
- In July 2024 the ICJ determined the illegality of Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and its obligation to withdraw totally, unconditionally and as rapidly as possible. The UN General Assembly subsequently declared that the occupation must be dismantled by 18 September 2025. Israel has failed to do so.
- On 16 September 2025, the UN Commission of Inquiry concluded that Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, reaffirming the obligations of all States to prevent genocide, to cease committing and/or aiding and assisting genocide, and to punish those perpetrating and/or inciting genocide.
- The ICJ’s ground-breaking ruling on the illegality of the occupation has yet to bring change. On 18 September 2024, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution ES-10/24, reaffirming the binding nature of the Court’s legal obligations and formulating a roadmap to end the occupation by 17 September 2025 through diplomatic, economic and legal measures which States have yet to implement.
- More States have declared recognition of the State of Palestine since October 2023, but with restrictive conditions (e.g., concerning governance, territorial integrity, political independence and demilitarization) that are incompatible with the very essence of self-determination and out of line with international law.
- Since October 2023 only Belize, Bolivia, Colombia and Nicaragua have suspended diplomatic relations with Israel, and only Bahrain, Chad, Chile, Honduras, Jordan, Türkiye and South Africa have downgraded their relations with Israel.
- Prolonged political and diplomatic support by influential Third States enabled Israel to initiate and sustain its assault on the Palestinian people. In the past two years their complicity has muted the urgent calls for action and obscured the web of political, financial and military interests at play. The longstanding failure to address flagrant violations of international law by Israel – threatening international peace and security – has normalized and deepened relations with it, entrenching oppression, domination and erasure.
- Many States have sought to undermine the ICJ’s arrest warrants, and at least 37 were non-committal or critical, signalling intent to evade arrest obligations. The United States imposed sanctions to paralyse the Court; the United Kingdom threatened its funding, while Prime Minister Netanyahu travelled freely across European airspace.
- On the other hand the Hague Group initiative, which includes Colombia, South Africa and 13 other States, have committed to enforce six concrete measures against Israel. 21 other States joined the third meeting of the Group in New York on the fringe of the 80th Session of the General Assembly. But despite their efforts Israel still holds its UN credentials.
- On 30 September 2025, many States, including Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Türkiye and the UAE, endorsed the “Trump Plan” despite its failure to even mention ending the occupation, ensuring accountability and providing transitional justice; and despite its imposition of imperial foreign governance for Gaza which, even if temporary, further undermines Palestinian self-determination.
- The United States has financially and militarily supported Israel since its creation. The 60-year strategic partnership has been underpinned by a legislated commitment to ensure Israel always has a “Qualitative Military Edge” over its neighbours, US military cooperation, a steady supply of military and economic aid and preferential access to US military sales. $3.3 billion/year in military financing plus $500 million/year for missile defence are guaranteed until 2028.
- US support to Israel has escalated since 7 October 2023. The Biden Administration announced it would request an additional $14.3 billion for Israel and in April 2024 this passed Congress as a $26.4 billion package. Israel was later exempted from the Trump Administration freeze on military aid.
- The UK has also played a key role in military collaboration with Israel. From its bases in Cyprus, the UK has enabled a crucial US supply line to Tel Aviv and flown over 600 surveillance missions over Gaza throughout the genocide, sharing intelligence with Israel. Flight numbers and durations, often coinciding with major Israeli operations, suggest detailed knowledge and co-operation in the destruction of Gaza, extending beyond “hostage rescue”. Furthermore, Israeli soldiers are trained at the UK Royal College of Defence Studies.
- In addition, thousands of citizens from the United States, Russia, France, Ukraine and the United Kingdom, among others, have served in the Israeli military since October 2023. Few have been investigated, and none prosecuted for crimes in Gaza.
- States frequently deploy two arguments to justify arms trade with Israel: such arms are said to be either “defensive” or “non-lethal”. The Arms Trade Treaty does not recognize either distinction, but requires a holistic assessment of how all arms, parts and components will ultimately be used. Given that the occupation of Palestinian territory is an ongoing unlawful use of force in violation of the UN Charter, nothing Israel does there can be understood as “defensive”.
- Israel profits from the decades-long occupation – and now genocide – by expanding its range of weaponry and surveillance systems ‘battle tested’ on the captive Gaza population. The value of its arms exports increased by 18 percent during the genocide.
- Attempts by civil society aid groups to break the siege by sea have been unlawfully intercepted by Israel in international waters – amid silence and inaction by Third States.
- No trade or economic agreement signed with Israel since 1967 has been suspended – States having largely avoided their legal obligations. Other countries have increased their trade with Israel during the genocide, including Germany, Poland, Greece, Italy, Denmark, France and Serbia, as well as Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Jordan and Morocco.
- The EU–Israel Association Agreement makes human rights and democratic principles an “essential elements clause”. However, these principles remain unfulfilled, the EU being determined to preserve business-as-usual despite evidence of Israeli violations of the terms of the agreement. The proposal of the European Commission to cancel core trade preferences on 37 percent of Israeli exports to the EU still awaits approval.
- Energy trade has often been subject to embargoes aimed at bringing countries in line with their international legal obligations. In the case of Israel, only Colombia, which banned coal exports to Israel in 2024, has acted. The European Union and Egypt have continued to import gas from Israel through the Eastern Mediterranean Gas pipeline, which illegally passes through the sea adjacent to the Gaza Strip, violating Palestinian sovereign rights. In August 2025 Egypt expanded its partnership with Israel through a $35 billion natural gas deal.
- Ports known to have facilitated the trans-shipment to Israel of F-35 parts, weapons, jet fuel, oil and/or other materials include Türkiye, France, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Greece, Morocco and the US. Airfields in Ireland, Belgium and the United States also support transfers. Many ports facilitate Israeli gas exports, including via the EMG Pipeline to Egypt.
- So it is clear that the genocide in Gaza was not committed in isolation, but as part of a system of global complicity. Rather than ensuring that Israel respects the basic human rights and self-determination of the Palestinian people, powerful Third States have allowed violent practices to become an everyday reality and continue to provide Israel with military, diplomatic, economic and ideological support. The horrors of the past two years are not an aberration, but the culmination of a long history of complicity.
- Their disregard for international law undermines the foundations of the multilateral order painstakingly built over eight decades. Justice must involve accountability and reparations: restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition, by Israel and by the Third States that have supported its crimes. The power structures that enabled these crimes must be dismantled.
- Third States’ acts, omissions and discourse in support of a genocidal apartheid State are such that they could and should be held liable for aiding, assisting or jointly participating in internationally wrongful acts.
Recommendations
At this critical juncture, it is imperative that Third States immediately suspend and review all military, diplomatic and economic relations with Israel. The report insists that States step up to their responsibilities. No State can credibly claim adherence to international law while arming, supporting or shielding a genocidal regime. All military and political support must be suspended; diplomacy should serve to prevent crimes rather than to justify them. Complicity in genocide must end.
The Special Rapporteur, in her recommendations, urges States to:
(a) Exert pressure for a complete and permanent ceasefire and full withdrawal of Israeli troops;
(b) Take immediate steps to end the siege on Gaza, including deploying naval and land convoys to ensure safe humanitarian access and mobile housing before winter;
(c) Support the re-opening of Gaza’s international airport and sea-port to facilitate aid delivery.
States must recognize Palestinian self-determination and justice as essential to lasting peace and security, and therefore:
(a) Suspend all military, trade and diplomatic relations with Israel;
(b) Investigate and prosecute all officials, corporates and individuals involved in or facilitating genocide, incitement, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other grave breaches of international humanitarian law;
(c) Secure reparations, including full reconstruction and return;
(d) Co-operate fully with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ);
(e) Reaffirm and strengthen support to UNRWA and the UN system as a whole;
(f) Suspend Israel from the United Nations under Article 6 of the UN Charter;
(g) Act under “Uniting for Peace”, in line with General Assembly resolution 377(V), to ensure that Israel dismantles its occupation.
To this I would add suspending the United States – or at least showing America the red card – and relocating UN headquarters away from US territory.
And any resolution brought to the Security Council for a mandate to resolve the Gaza+West Bank situation must, of course, conform strictly to international law. There is no sign of that so far, nor will there be, I think, as long as the international community allows the US to seize and keep “transitional authority”. The big unanswered question is, what gives Trump of all people the right to assume leadership in engineering peace and reconstruction?
Yet Trump’s plan, as per Resolution 2803, is accepted by the Security Council
So, what are we to make of the UN Security Council’s adoption of Trump’s ‘peace’ plan in the light of the UNHRC’s report on Third States’ complicity?
The Council welcomes the scheme announced by Trump on 29 September. The first phase established a fragile ceasefire, the release of hostages and detainees, a partial withdrawal of Israel Defence Forces and increased humanitarian aid. But there is no peace. And no real ceasefire. And humanitarian aid is still cruelly withheld.
The second phase calls for Hamas to disarm, further Israel Defence Forces withdrawal, the deployment of the Israel Security Forces and the creation of an interim technocratic government under a ‘Board of Peace’ before eventual Palestinian Authority control. The plan predicts a 20,000-troop enforcement mission next year.
The Board of Peace (BoP) is to be established “as a transitional administration” in Gaza that will coordinate reconstruction efforts and the resolution authorizes the BoP to establish a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF) in Gaza “to deploy under unified command acceptable to the BoP”. Countries will contribute personnel to the force “in close consultation and cooperation” with Egypt and Israel.
The Security Council has five permanent members: China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly. They are currently Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama, Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and Somalia. The resolution was adopted by 13 votes with Russia and China abstaining.
Algerian Ambassador Amar Bendjama stressed that genuine peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved “without justice for the Palestinian people who have waited for decades for the establishment of their independent State.”
According to Reuters the UN ambassadors of Russia and China complained that the resolution does not give the UN a clear role in the future of Gaza. Russia’s Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya said the Council was in essence “giving its blessing to a US initiative on the basis of Washington’s promises,” and “giving complete control over the Gaza Strip to the Board of Peace and the International Stabilization Force (ISF), the modalities of which we know nothing about so far”.
China’s UN Envoy Fu Cong also said after the vote that the draft resolution is “vague on many crucial issues” including the scope and structure of the ISF. And China’s Foreign Ministry said that the US-drafted resolution did not fully demonstrate Palestinian governance and the two-state solution. “There is ambiguity in the key issue of post-war arrangement of Gaza in the US resolution, and important principles of the Palestinians governing Palestine and the two-state solution have not been fully demonstrated. This is different from China’s consistent position. That’s why China didn’t vote for it.” Beijing supports the UN Security Council on “doing what is necessary to promote a ceasefire, de-escalating the humanitarian crisis, and restarting reconstruction. China will continue to take constructive measures and be responsible, and support Palestinian people in the just cause of resuming their legitimate rights.”
The Palestinian Authority issued a statement welcoming the resolution, and said it is ready to take part in its implementation. Diplomats said the Authority’s endorsement of the resolution last week was key to preventing a Russian veto.
Hamas repeated that they will not disarm and argued that their fight against Israel is legitimate resistance, potentially pitting themselves against the international force authorized by the resolution. “The resolution imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip, which our people and their factions reject.”
Trump celebrated the vote as “a moment of true historic proportion” in a social media post. “The members of the Board, and many more exciting announcements, will be made in the coming weeks.”
Netanyahu said that Israel remained opposed to a Palestinian state and pledged to demilitarize Gaza “the easy way or the hard way.”
The UK Government, in a press release, said it voted for the resolution because it is “a critical means of implementing the Peace Plan for Palestinians, Israelis, and the region – turning the page on two devastating years of conflict, towards a lasting peace”. Charge D’Affairs in New York, James Kariuki, explained that the UK will continue working to build on this momentum so an International Stabilisation Force can be deployed quickly, support the ceasefire and avoid a vacuum being left which Hamas can exploit. He reiterated the importance of implementing the transitional arrangements set out in the resolution in accordance with international law, with respect to Palestinian sovereignty and self-determination, strengthened unity of Gaza and the West Bank, and empowered Palestinian institutions which enable a reformed Palestinian Authority to resume governance in Gaza.
But adherence to international law in all this is sadly lacking so far. Third States’ complicity is still hard at work. When, if ever, will we see a UN-generated peace plan rather than a vanity project proposed by, and personally led by an avid enabler of the genocide who refuses to recognise Palestinian statehood?
A Russian counter-proposal was rumoured to be circulating… what happened to that?