Discussion on Gaza Conflict and International Law

Because there is supposedly a deal

that's been proposed by the Americans

where Hamas have apparently agreed,

if the Israelis leave Gaza,

that they will demilitarize.

Do you think that is remotely likely to happen?

Well, let's start with the basics.

I usually start with international law.

And you'll forgive me if it sounds pedantic.

And as international law has become more and more marginalized,

fewer and fewer people are believing in it.

But I still believe in its basic precepts.

In July 2025, the International Court of Justice,

the supreme legal body in the world,

ruled that Israel's occupation of Gaza,

Israel's occupation of the West Bank,

including East Jerusalem and Gaza,

are illegal under international law.

And Israel has to leave as quickly, as rapidly as possible.

That's the first precept for me, or foundation stone for me.

The ICJ... Hamas disarming.

The highest group...

He asked you about Hamas disarming.

Sir, Mr. Morris, this is not the West, man.

You're not answering his question.

You have to carry on in a civilized fashion.

Very difficult for you, but try.

Okay? Thank you.

So, the bottom line is,

Israel has no title to any of Gaza.

Number two, under international law, there

is no prohibition on a people

using armed force to expel an occupying power.

There is no prohibition on that.

Number three,

it's odd that we should discuss Hamas having to disarm.

Hamas committed a crime of significant magnitude on October 7th.

Israel executed a genocide in Gaza,

and it continues in its aim of

trying to expel the entire population.

So why is it that Hamas has to disarm itself,

but Israel, the genocidal state,

also the state that has breached the prime precept

of international law by launching an aggression,

a brazen, flagrant aggression,

the most brazen, the most flagrant in the modern world,

against Iran?

Why are we talking about Hamas having to disarm?

For more UN videos visit www.un.org