Top UK barrister: Israel is carrying out ‘destruction of humanity' in Gaza
London, United Kingdom – Ten British citizens, including dual nationals, who have served in the Israeli army are being accused of war crimes in Gaza.
They are suspected of acts such as 'murder, extermination, attacking civilians, and deportation or forcible transfer of population', according to the Palestine-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and the UK-based Public Interest Law Centre, which last week submitted a 240-page report to the Metropolitan Police's War Crimes Unit.
Michael Mansfield, 83, a leading English barrister who has worked on several high-profile cases throughout his career and is dubbed 'the king' of human rights work, was among those who handed over the dossier that took a team of lawyers and researchers in Britain and The Hague six months to compile.
Dozens of other barristers, lawyers, researchers and human rights practitioners have signed a letter of support, urging the Met's war crimes team to investigate the complaints.
Due to legal reasons, neither the names of the suspects, some of whom worked at the officer level, nor the report in full are being made public. Alleged war crimes from October 7, 2023, to May 31 are documented in the file, which is based on open-source material and witness testimonies.
Al Jazeera interviewed Mansfield about the landmark case, his views on Israel's genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and why he believes legal efforts against those involved in the onslaught remain important, even as critical rulings are ignored by those in power and mass killings continue unabated.
Al Jazeera: What can you tell us about the case?
Michael Mansfield: The reason I can't talk about the detail of it is perhaps obvious: … The people [accused] would immediately know who they were.
If a UK national commits any serious crime abroad, … you are liable to be and are investigated, arrested, charged and tried here in the United Kingdom. This is nothing out of the ordinary in that sense.
The out-of-the-ordinary bit, of course, is that it is linked to war crimes and crimes against humanity, which are international crimes.
The United Kingdom can obviously investigate themselves, or the International Criminal Court can investigate and charge and so forth.
Nobody can be unaware of the extent of the devastation, particularly in Gaza, although that's not the only place in the world where such things are happening. And in relation to those matters, the public are asking, 'What are we doing about it? What can we do about it?'
The international institutions of justice and conventions on human rights were established just after the Second World War in order to prevent this happening, if at all possible, by intervening.
[But] the United Nations's ability to intervene has been emasculated by the major nations – Russia and America nearly always opposing each other. On top of that, the United Kingdom sitting on the fence and abstaining on most of these issues.
Slowly but surely, all the principles to do with the rule of law and rules-based democracy have been, essentially, denuded from practicality.
The court finds it very difficult to do anything because the countries [allegedly behind war crimes] are seemingly immune. They don't mind what the international courts may think – either the International Criminal Court [or the] International Court of Justice.
Al Jazeera: As most monitors and observers are unable to enter Gaza presently due to the Israeli siege, how did the researchers and lawyers behind the report identify those accused?
Mansfield: Linking the individual [to the alleged crimes] is the problem. You've got to be able to provide investigators with at least enough evidence for them to say this is worth investigating.
They might say, 'We can't do this. It's too difficult.' Then they might hand it over to the International Criminal Court, which has more resources.
There's something called the Berkeley Protocol, which is focused on how you would gather evidence from publicly available sources.
Publicly available sources could be Al Jazeera [footage]. It could be somebody doing a selfie on their own phone.
The research has already been done to ensure that the material on these 10 is sufficient for the police to take a decision whether they can do more or not.
Al Jazeera: This month, Hungary withdrew from the International Criminal Court, which has issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, ahead of a visit by the Israeli premier. If the global institutions that are meant to uphold human rights laws are under threat, decisions are sidestepped, and massacres continue in places like Gaza. What impact can legal efforts like yours have?
Mansfield: I think they do make a difference for those of us who care.
I mean, they don't make a difference to the perpetrators. They never have. And that's why they had the Nuremberg trials at the end of the Second World War.
As a lawyer, I can't just sit back and say I've wasted 55 years of my career. I've got to be able to say I have strived hard to get a situation in which people are made accountable.
The law has been unable to deliver. The law is there, the institutions are there, but until governments … start paying respect to the rule of law and not ignoring it, there are lots of different ways in which people can be made accountable. As lawyers and as thinking members of the public, we have to be at the ready to get the authorities to actually do their job because if we don't, no one else will, and it'll just get worse.
The basic freedoms you and I enjoy when we can – freedom of association, movement, speech and so on – they're not divisible. What I mean by that is you might live on the other side of the world, but if it's your rights being attacked in this way, it's me as well. Make no mistake, when it's happening there, it could be you next.
That sort of approach to human rights is not a sort of woke topic that just a few liberal lawyers think of. It's been fought hard for by other people. Lawyers in the past have fought very hard to set it all up.
Al Jazeera: Do you classify what's happening in Gaza as a genocide?
I do, yes, no question.
In this particular instance, if you're attacked personally in the domestic sense or in any other, you're entitled to defend yourself but only up to a point.
If you're attacked with somebody holding a wooden spoon, you can't use a machinegun to kill them. … This has gone far beyond self-defence.
Of course, they [aggressors, in this case Israel] will always justify it and say that it's self-defence, but you only have to see what they've done.
A lot of the victims are women and babies and children and doctors and journalists. … They are protected individuals under the law.
In my view, it's clearly a genocide because they've [Israeli officials] made it very clear in various statements. They're talking about a bigger Israel. There's a political ambition that lies behind the whole thing, not for all, you know, members of the [Israeli military] and so on, but I think a sizeable proportion.
[They] obviously are adhering to that principle that they want to see Gaza wiped off the map, and yes, they would like it reinstated as a Riviera resort of the Trump empire.
It's gone beyond plausible.
[Note: The International Court of Justice said in January 2024 that it was plausible that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza.]
Al Jazeera: How will the world look back on this moment in history?
Mansfield: I hope it will bring about change of some kind in people's hearts and minds.
The leaders of the world have the right to do something about it, and I think that our own prime minister [UK Premier Keir Starmer] should do more than he's doing.
Originally, we [the UK] objected to the issue of arrest warrants. However, that was the previous [Conservative] government and when [Labour's] Starmer was elected, he changed that. He withdrew his objections on behalf of the United Kingdom, so that was one step in the right direction.
I think we'll look back and say, actually, thousands turn out for marches. Thousands of people are globally angry, upset and feeling hopeless, which is why keeping the law alive in the way the chief prosecutors tried to do, not just for Israel, but for other perpetrators as well, including [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and Russia and Ukraine.
We've got to keep the caring alive. You can't get away from it. You can't hide in your bedroom and think, 'Oh, I didn't start this.' No, you didn't, but if you're a member of the human race, I'm afraid you have a responsibility.
If I don't spend every waking hour trying hard to keep what others set up in the first place [the rule of law], I feel I will have failed.
You can't just back away from it and hope that it'll blow away because, well, that's what the politicians hope, that we'll all give up. I think it's [about] creating a well of public opinion, so that the politicians realise there's nowhere to go because actually they're not supported.
You've got to connect, engage and then do as much as you can. That's all that can be expected. Once you do that, you'll find hundreds and thousands of others doing the same, and then eventually politicians go, 'Oh, right, there are votes here. We better do the right thing.'
It's moving opinion all the time and keeping the flame alive.
Al Jazeera: How would you summarise the ongoing atrocities?
Mansfield: I would describe it as a mass assault and destruction of humanity. It doesn't get worse than that.
Al Jazeera: You've worked on high-profile cases, such as representing the family of Stephen Lawrence, the Black British teenager stabbed to death in a racist attack, and the Birmingham Six, the group of Irishmen wrongfully arrested for bombings in 1974. What binds the work you've done together?
Mansfield: It's the effect and impact on a community. Now the Lawrence case, as it turned out and as it was at the time, had a huge impact on a community. It represented a much bigger issue than, you know, the stabbing of Stephen Lawrence, which was horrific.
Although it wasn't on your TV screens like Gaza and you didn't see destruction of the kind you see in Gaza, it had a similar effect on people.
And there have been other cases like that. It's not about whether it's just one individual or thousands. It's about the impact on the principle of fairness.
Note: This interview was edited for clarity and brevity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Israel's strategic failure is now apparent
Since the mid-1960s, Israel has received significant military and diplomatic support from successive administrations in the United States. But never has it enjoyed such unconditional support as it has in the past eight years – under the first and second administrations of President Donald Trump and the administration of President Joe Biden. As a result, Israel has started openly pursuing its greatest Zionist dream: expanding state borders to achieve Greater Israel and accelerating the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people from their homeland. Although the Israeli state may appear more powerful than ever and overly confident that it will achieve regional dominance, its current position paradoxically reflects a strategic failure. The reality is that after nearly eight decades of existence, Israel has failed to achieve legitimacy in the eyes of the region's peoples and lasting security for itself. Its present resurgence will secure neither. And that is because its foreign, domestic and military policies are based on a settler-colonial logic which makes them untenable in the long run. Since its founding in 1948, Israel has sought to convince the world and its Jewish citizens that it was created 'on a land without a people'. While this narrative has successfully caught on – particularly among the younger generations of Israelis – the forefathers of the Israeli state openly spoke about 'colonisation' and settling a land with a hostile native population. Theodor Herzl, considered the father of modern Zionism, planned to reach out to well-known British colonialist Cecil Rhodes, who led the British colonisation of Southern Africa, for advice on and approval of his plan to colonise Palestine. Vladimir Jabotinsky, a revisionist Zionist who founded the far-right Zionist group Betar in Latvia, strategised in his writings on ways to address native resistance. In his 1923 essay The Iron Wall, he wrote: 'Every native population in the world resists colonists as long as it has the slightest hope of being able to rid itself of the danger of being colonised. That is what the Arabs in Palestine are doing.' This settler-colonial mentality played a central role in shaping the domestic, foreign and military policies of the newly founded Israel. Today, almost 80 years after the creation of the Israeli state, expansionism and aggressive military posturing continue to define the Israeli regional strategy. Despite official rhetoric about seeking peace and normalisation of relations in the region, the Israeli aspiration to achieve a Greater Israel – one that includes not only occupied Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, but also parts of modern-day Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan – persists. That has been apparent in public discourse and government actions. Settler activists have openly talked about an Israel stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates river. Government advisers have penned articles about 'reconquering Sinai', 'dismembering Egypt' and precipitating the 'dissolution of Jordan'. Prime ministers have stood in front of the United Nations General Assembly, holding maps of Greater Israel. The idea of Greater Israel has been widely accepted across the Zionist political spectrum, both on the right and on the left. The primary differences have been in how and when to advance this vision, and whether it requires the expulsion of Palestinians or their segregation. Expansionist policies have been applied under all Israeli governments – from those led by left-wing Mapai Labor to those led by right-wing Likud. Since the 1949 armistice, Israel has occupied the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Sinai (twice), southern Lebanon (twice) and now most recently, more parts of southern Syria. Meanwhile, its colonisation of the occupied Palestinian territories has proceeded at an accelerated pace. The number of Jewish colonial settlers in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, was approximately 250,000 in 1993; by October 7, 2023, this number had risen to 503,732 in the West Bank and 233,600 in East Jerusalem. Settlements in Gaza were dismantled in 2005, but plans are being made for recolonisation, as the current Israeli government eyes the full ethnic cleansing of the strip. Today, there is no major political force in Israel that looks beyond the direct application of naked military power to maintain and protect colonisation activities. This mindset is not limited to politicians but is also a widespread conviction among the Israeli public. A June 2024 survey found that 70 percent of Jewish Israelis think settlements either help national security or do not interfere with it; a March 2025 poll showed that 82 percent of Jewish Israelis support the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza. The settler-colonial mindset at the core of the Israeli state has precluded the emergence of a genuine drive for peace. As a result, successive Israeli governments have continued to pursue war, colonisation and expansion, even when seemingly embracing peace talks. In the 1990s, Israel had the opportunity to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict by withdrawing from the territories occupied in 1967 and accepting the creation of an independent Palestinian state. Instead, it used the negotiations as a smokescreen to advance settler-colonial policies. Even leaders like Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was hailed as a peacemaker and assassinated for it by a Jewish extremist, did not really envision Israelis and Palestinians living side by side. Under his government and during the peace negotiations, the expansion of Jewish settlements continued at a steady pace, while plans for a segregation wall on occupied Palestinian land were pushed forward. Meanwhile, Rabin and other Israeli leaders involved in the peace negotiations focused primarily on normalising Israel's existence as it was, without addressing the root causes of the conflict. They sought to pacify Palestinian resistance, rather than establish durable peace. The absence of a peace camp is not only at the leadership level but also at the societal one. While the Israeli society has active movements for social causes, settlers' coalitions, and now a movement pushing for continuing the prisoner exchanges with Hamas, it lacks a genuine grassroots peace movement that recognises Palestinian rights. This is in sharp contrast to other settler-colonial societies, in which there was a push from within to end colonialism. During the French colonisation of Algeria, for example, an anti-colonial movement within France openly supported the Algerian armed resistance. During the apartheid era in South Africa, white activists joined the anti-apartheid struggle and helped sway domestic attitudes. In Israel, Jewish supporters of Palestinian rights are so few that they are easily ostracised and marginalised, facing death threats and often feeling compelled to leave the country. The absence of a genuine peace camp reflects the inherent flaw of settler-colonial Israel. It has no coherent political strategy to address broader issues, such as coexistence in the region, which requires acknowledging the interests of others, especially the national rights of the Palestinian people. This makes the settler colony incapable of peace. Historically, settler-colonies have always had to rely on outside support to sustain themselves. Israel is no different. For decades, it has enjoyed far-reaching support from Western Europe and the United States, which have provided it with a significant strategic edge. But this Israeli reliance on Western backing also poses a long-term strategic threat. It makes the country dependent and unable to function like a normal sovereign nation. Other countries in the region will continue to exist even if they lose support from their Western allies, with only their regimes potentially changing. But that is not the case for Israel. This unlimited and extravagant support for Israel, aimed at maintaining its dominance as the primary regional power, is likely to backfire. The growing imbalance of power is generating pressure not only on antagonist countries like Iran, but on other regional players such as Turkiye, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. They increasingly feel that the Western push to defend Israeli interests is infringing on their own. This situation is likely to push them to increasingly seek alliances beyond the Western bloc to counterbalance this influence. China offers a viable alternative, as it is not a strategic ally of Israel. A gradual opening to China can shift the political dynamics of the region in the coming years, beyond the capacity of Israel and its allies to control them. That will certainly undermine the Israeli plans to establish regional hegemony. But Israel faces not only the risk that Western dominance could be challenged from the East, but also that Western societies could pressure their governments to stop backing it. The Israeli genocidal policies, especially since October 7, 2023, have spurred a profound shift in public opinion across the world, including in Europe and North America. Israel stands accused of genocide at the International Court of Justice, its prime minister has an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court and Israeli soldiers are facing charges in many countries around the world. As a result, the Israeli state has notably lost support among those on the left and centre of the political spectrum in the West. While it still manages to maintain backing in high-level European and American political and military circles, this support is becoming increasingly unreliable in the long term. This uncertainty is further aggravated by the rise of isolationism on the right in the US. If these trends continue, Israel may eventually run out of dependable supporters in the West and lose its financial and military advantage. The limits of the Israeli settler-colonial state strategy are increasingly becoming clear. The continued use of settler-colonial policies, characterised by excessive violence, along with the pursuit of regional hegemony, is pushing Israel into an untenable position. The Israeli leadership may be living in a fantasy world, thinking it can pull off a 'New World' model on Palestine and exterminate its population to fully colonise it; or to declare itself officially an apartheid state, seeking to make Palestinian subjugation legal. But in the historical and geopolitical context of the Middle East, neither of these fantasies is viable. Global pressure is coming to bear. The expulsion of the people of Gaza has been outright rejected. The Palestinian people, like any other nation that has survived brutal colonisation, will not leave their country and disappear, nor will they accept life under a colonial apartheid regime. Israeli leaders may do well to start imagining the very real possibility of sharing land and accepting equal rights, and start preparing the Israeli society for it. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Qatar Tribune
a day ago
- Qatar Tribune
Tens of thousands perform Eid Al Adha prayers at Al Aqsa Mosque
OCCUPIED JERUSALEM: Tens of thousands of worshippers performed Eid Al Adha prayers at Al Aqsa Mosque this morning. The chants of 'Allahu Akbar' (God is Great) were heard, heralding the first day of Eid, amidst large crowds of worshippers, despite restrictions imposed by the occupation and its settlers. Meanwhile, Israeli settlers engaged in provocative actions against worshippers leaving Al Aqsa Mosque, singing and chanting. They positioned themselves on Al-Mujahideen Street between Bab Al-Hitta and Bab Al-Asbat. The mosque's courtyards were filled with worshippers coming from Jerusalem and across the Palestinian territories, amid a distinct spiritual atmosphere, despite the restrictions and measures imposed by the Israeli authorities at the entrances to the Old City and the gates of the mosque. Coinciding with Eid Al Adha, the Israeli occupation authorities continue to impose tight security measures in Jerusalem and around Al Aqsa Mosque, preventing thousands from entering.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
The Take: How the myth of democracy fuels the US forever wars
From Vietnam to Iraq and Afghanistan, US wars left not freedom, but ruin. In a recent book, co-authors Noam Chomsky and Nathan Robinson expose how American elites sell violence as virtue, using the myth of democracy to justify endless war. In this episode: Episode credits: This episode was produced by Marcos Bartolome, Haleema Shah, and Sonia Bhagat, with Manny Panaretos, Mariana Navarrete, Remas Alhawari, Kisaa Zehra, and our guest host, Kevin Hirten. It was edited by Kylene Kiang. Our sound designer is Alex Roldan. Our video editors are Hisham Abu Salah and Mohannad Al-Melhem. Alexandra Locke is The Take's executive producer. Ney Alvarez is Al Jazeera's head of audio. Connect with us: @AJEPodcasts on Instagram, X, Facebook, Threads and YouTube
