Rules-based International Order

Baroness Hussein-Ece Excerpts

Thursday 16th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hussein-Ece (LD)]

My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend Lady Northover on securing this debate and on her excellent and wide-ranging introduction.

After the terrible attacks on 11 September 2001, which killed 2,977 people, President George W Bush said:

“Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”.


The world was supposedly divided into good and evil. It is argued that, with 9/11, we saw the prelude to widespread conflict. Hundreds of thousands of civilians died, many were displaced, and we saw a refugee crisis as a result. It is argued that the global war on terror has served to blur the lines of war and human rights. We have seen this in the abandonment of Afghanistan.

The international humanitarian law principles of distinction and proportionality were a touchstone. We believed in and provided important protections for civilians, as well as medical and humanitarian staff. These are the bedrock principles on which the United Nations was founded, as has been mentioned. Proportionality prohibits attacks that would cause excessive civilian damage, for example.

On the current conflict in Gaza, we have heard recently with some relief that there is to be a ceasefire. We can only hope and pray that it will lead to a lasting peace and an end to the killing and destruction. We have witnessed graphically a 21st-century manifestation of the erosion of international law, in which few to none of the restraints set out by the post-World War II system have been respected. The United Nations and the ICC have been under attack.

The law of occupation, based on the Fourth Geneva Convention, is relevant here. Israel is recognised as an occupying force in the West Bank. It is also effectively occupying Gaza, its borders, airspace and coastal waters. Occupational law prohibits the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure, collective punishment and other measures that harm the civilian population. The Israel-Palestine conflict is exposing the inherent contradictions in the West’s stance as guarantor of the international order. It is something that we all believed was a given. Since Hamas’s attack back in October 2023, in which 1,200 Israelis were killed and 240 taken hostage, Israel’s air and ground campaign has killed over 46,000 Palestinians. As my noble friend Lord Thomas outlined, that is being seen now as a gross understatement; far more people have been killed or are buried and missing under the rubble.

It is hugely depressing that millions of people in this country and around the world now believe that there is an inherent racism at the heart of British foreign policy in respect of Gaza. I do not say that lightly. People who are non-Europeans, from the Middle East and eastern Mediterranean—people who look like my family and with heritage such as mine—are deemed not worthy of similar protections. That is being said much more consistently, and I can say that it is felt very keenly. When Putin bombs hospitals and attacks civilians, there is rightly instant condemnation. Thousands of Palestinians have been blown up and killed, and almost all hospitals have been destroyed, with barely a murmur from the United Kingdom Government. Why is that? Why are Palestinians not deserving of the same protections given to the millions of Ukrainians who were able to flee, with hundreds of thousands being rightly welcomed with open arms here in the UK?

The majority of Governments and people in the region, and globally, do not support Israel’s actions. Opinion is increasingly citing the clear contradictions between policy in Ukraine and Palestine as double standards. Younger generations in particular are increasingly frustrated, expressing their strong opposition to and outrage at what they believe to be the collapse of the rules-based international law, especially when they see viral videos of death and destruction across the internet—including, sadly and depressingly, those of Israeli soldiers openly singing and dancing in Gaza, many wearing dead or displaced Palestinian women’s underwear. This is a reality.

This situation will almost certainly breed even more despair and animosity—and more radicalisation. If you have lost your entire family, your home, your school and your neighbourhood, you may feel that you have very little left to lose. Depriving Gazans of electricity, water, food and medical aid, as well as targeting residential areas, hospitals, mosques, churches, schools and refugee camps, is clearly incompatible with the Geneva conventions. These attacks are seen as nothing short of a war crime, and history must eventually hold those responsible to account. Our rules-based system is increasingly weakened.

Andrew Miller was the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs under the Biden Administration. He resigned last year and has since gone public in expressing his concerns about the role of the US in the war. He said:

“I’m unaware of any red lines being imposed beyond the normal language about complying with international law, international humanitarian law, the law of armed conflict”.


International institutions such as the UN appear increasingly weakened and in need of reform, as has been mentioned by others. This apparent double standard undermines the rules-based global order and plays into the hands of the extremists and authoritarian leaders, who we have heard so much about. The noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, has just articulated that. They will exploit these inconsistencies.

Many believe that untold damage has been done to the standing of the United Kingdom. Many are now saying, with increasingly loud voices, globally, that they do not want to be lectured by western countries about international law and human rights. An honest and constructive approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is vital. Why has this country, with its long history in the region, in effect absolved itself of any responsibility other than to support and facilitate these ongoing breaches of human rights?

Over many decades, the UK has led the way in effective diplomacy and soft power, underpinned by a strong sense of regional responsibility. The catastrophic war in Gaza is a test of our commitment to a rules-based international order. Now more than ever, we must rely on the moral compass of international law to guide our actions. To quote Martin Luther King:

“It is not possible to be in favor of justice for some people and not be in favor of justice for all people”.