Frequently asked questions on the ICRC’s work in Israel and the occupied territories

In Israel and the occupied territories – which includes the occupied Palestinian territory of Gaza, and the West Bank, and the occupied Golan Heights – the ICRC is dedicated to making a meaningful difference in people's lives through a range of activities and programs. We visit detainees, reunite families, support livelihood projects, and work to improve access to essential services such as water and electricity. Above all, we advocate for the rights and dignity of those affected by conflict.

Present in Israel and the occupied territories since 1967, we work closely with the Palestine Red Crescent Society and Israeli Magen David Adom. The ICRC has offices in Tel Aviv, the West Bank and Gaza.

Please visit our page to learn more about our work in Israel and the occupied territories.

In Gaza, ICRC staff have been working relentlessly since the escalation of the armed conflict to provide much needed relief. This includes a team of medical, surgical experts currently supporting hospitals and delivering life-saving trauma surgery, and weapon contamination experts ensuring the safety of the civilian population and of our staff. ICRC teams have also distributed essential household items to thousands of internally displaced people, supported the water and sanitation systems, and helped deliver food and nutrition items to vulnerable populations.

In our unique capacity as a neutral intermediary, we facilitated the release of 109 hostages. Our teams in Israel have also been assisting with forensic equipment and mental health support as part of long-standing partnerships with Israeli institutions. We have also offered additional support and expertise that would benefit the authorities, within ICRC's mandate.

We continue to call for the immediate and unconditional release of all the hostages. For those remaining in captivity, our call is very clear: they must be treated humanely, we need to have access to them to assess their needs, and they must be allowed to re-establish contact with their families.

For more information: 

Israel and the Occupied Territories: Key Facts and Figures (7 October 2023 – 30 November 2024)

Facts & Figures: Red Cross Field Hospital in Rafah, Gaza Strip.

Frequently asked questions on ICRC and the hostages held in Gaza

Our work is guided solely by humanitarian needs. In the occupied Palestinian territory, these needs are greater due to different factors including higher unemployment rates, dependency on aid, and limited local capacity to respond. In contrast, Israel has stronger resources and infrastructure to address its humanitarian challenges.

The ICRC complements—not replaces—local efforts. For example, in southern Israel, emergency response mechanisms are robust, but we remain ready to assist where gaps arise and we regularly visit communities affected by violence and assess their needs.

No. The ICRC is a neutral, impartial, and independent organization. Aid is provided solely based on humanitarian needs, without regard to religion, politics, ethnicity or nationality. 

If the ICRC were to take sides, it would lose the trust of all parties involved. Without this trust, we would not be able to continue carrying out lifesaving operations or respond effectively to the needs of affected communities, detainees, families of missing persons, and the sick. 

While our commitment to neutrality and impartiality is not always understood –  especially in emotionally charged situations – these principles are essential. They enable us to operate in even the most challenging contexts and ensure that our humanitarian mission reaches those who need it most. 

The ICRC operates under the principles of neutrality and impartiality, ensuring that we do not take sides in a conflict. This allows us to engage with all actors, regardless of their status or designation. We do not endorse the actions of any groups or individuals we engage with, our sole focus is on alleviating human suffering. 

To provide aid and protect civilians, the ICRC needs to negotiate access in conflict zones. By speaking with all parties to a conflict, including one’s enemies, we strive to secure humanitarian access, remind them of their obligations under international humanitarian law (IHL) and reduce suffering.

Engaging with parties to a conflict, whether governments or non-state armed groups, is a complex and necessary endeavor. While it might be perceived as controversial to some, it is essential for the ICRC to fulfill its humanitarian mission in complicated and dangerous conflict environments. 

We unequivocally reject antisemitism in all its forms. Hatred, discrimination, and violence directed toward Jewish individuals or communities are intolerable and must be confronted wherever they arise. The dignity, safety, and humanity of every person must be respected and protected, and we remain steadfast in our commitment to fostering understanding and inclusion. Antisemitism has no place in our societies, and we stand in solidarity with all those working to eradicate it.

ICRC employees are bound by a strict Code of Conduct that sets a clear expectation to respect the dignity of all human beings. This obligation provides the foundation for a strict prohibition of all types of discriminatory conduct such as antisemitism. All employees receive mandatory trainings on the ICRC Code of Conduct. Violations of its provisions can lead to formal disciplinary investigations resulting in sanctions including dismissal.

During World War II, the ICRC was active in providing aid to prisoners of war (POWs), facilitating communication between POWs and their families, and monitoring conditions in internment camps. However, the mandate at the time did not explicitly extend to civilians unless governments allowed it.

The ICRC failed to speak out and more importantly act on behalf of the millions of people who suffered and perished in the death camps, especially the Jewish people targeted, persecuted, and murdered under the Nazi regime. The ICRC has publicly expressed its profound regret and has described this as “the greatest failure in its history”. It fully acknowledges its shortcomings and lack of courage in confronting the horrors of Nazi persecution and genocide. 

Honoring the memory of Holocaust victims and survivors demands more than words; it requires relentless action to build a world where the dignity and humanity of every individual are not only recognized but fiercely defended—without exception, without hesitation, and without compromise.

Several steps were taken after World War II, to better protect civilians and prevent atrocities like the Holocaust. These efforts were driven by the lessons learned from the war and the Holocaust’s immense human suffering. First and foremost was the expansion of international humanitarian law (IHL) with the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 that specifically addressed the protection of civilians in times of conflict, in full recognition of the vulnerabilities they face. 

The ICRC intensified its efforts in advocating for accountability by engaging and educating governments, armed forces, and the public about IHL and emphasizing the importance for parties to a conflict to adhere to it to prevent genocide and other atrocities. 

By strengthening its field operations and expanding its global presence, the ICRC has strived to respond more effectively to emerging conflicts and developed mechanisms to provide humanitarian aid, protect civilian populations, engage with armed actors and document compliance with IHL.

While these measures cannot make up for failures of the past, we are unwavering in our commitment to ensuring that the failures of World War II serve as a solemn, enduring lesson. In strict adherence to our principles of neutrality, impartiality, independence, and humanity we uphold our policies and actions to the highest standards to ensure aid and protection is provided without regard to race, religion, gender, or political affiliation.

To gain a deeper understanding, we encourage you to explore our documentation on the Holocaust and the ICRC’s role during this tragic chapter in history. All ICRC archives during World War II have been opened to the public and are accessible to researchers.

Occupation is a matter of fact: a territory is considered occupied when it is placed under the authority of a hostile army. Whether the territory concerned is under the control of a sovereign on the eve of the commencement of an occupation is immaterial, and controversy in respect of Palestine's statehood has no bearing on this legal determination.

Since the 1967 international armed conflict between Israel and its neighboring States that triggered the application of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Palestinian territory has been under the authority of the Israeli army. Thus, the ICRC considers the territories controlled by Israel as being under Israeli belligerent occupation, affirming the de jure applicability of the law of occupation (Hague Regulations of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949). The application of the law of occupation is without prejudice to any underlying dispute concerning the sovereignty over the territory.

The ICRC considers Gaza to remain occupied Palestinian territory on the basis that Israel still exercises key elements of authority over the strip, including over its borders (airspace, sea, and land – at the exception of the border with Egypt). Even if Israel no longer maintains a permanent presence inside the Gaza Strip, it continues to be bound by certain obligations under the law of occupation that are commensurate with the degree to which it exercises control over it.

Hostages are people who, irrespective of their status, have been captured by a person or organization and who may be killed or injured if people do not do what that person or organization demands. Carrying out, or threatening to carry out, an act of hostage-taking during armed conflicts is prohibited under IHL.

The laws of war prohibit direct attacks against hospitals and medical staff. They are specially protected under IHL.

That said, a hospital may become a legitimate military target if it contributes to specific military operations of the enemy and if its destruction offers a definite military advantage for the attacking side.

If there is any doubt, they cannot be attacked. Hospitals only lose their protection in certain circumstances - for example, if a hospital is being used as a base from which to launch an attack, as a weapons depot, or to hide healthy soldiers/fighters. 

Before a party to a conflict can respond to such acts by attacking, it has to give a warning, with a time limit, and the other party has to have ignored that warning.

The IHL principles and rules that govern the conduct of hostilities aim to protect the civilian population from the effects of hostilities. It does so by striking a balance between military necessity and humanity, imposing prohibitions and restrictions on the weapons, means and methods of warfare that parties to the conflict may use.

The three fundamental principles of distinction, proportionality, and precautions are customary in nature and must be complied with in all circumstances by all parties - States and non-state armed groups alike - in all armed conflicts - both international and non-international armed conflicts.

According to the cardinal principle of distinction, parties to an armed conflict must at all times distinguish between civilians and combatants, and between civilian objects and military objectives.

IHL specifically prohibits attacks directed against civilians and against civilian objects, as well as indiscriminate attacks, namely those that strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction, including area bombardment. Equally prohibited are acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population, and the use of starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare.

The principles of proportionality and precautions complement the principle of distinction by affording protection to civilians and civilian objects against the danger of being incidentally harmed by attacks against military objectives. While causing such harm is often unavoidable during armed conflict, IHL places a limit on the extent of incidental harm that is permissible by spelling out how military necessity and considerations of humanity must be balanced in such situations.

The rule of proportionality prohibits attacks that may be expected to cause excessive incidental civilian harm in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Under the principle of precautions, in the conduct of military operations constant care must be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects. Given the significant risk of harm to civilians whenever executing an attack, IHL imposes detailed obligations to those planning, deciding on or carrying out attacks. In particular, all feasible precautions must be taken to

- Verify that targets are military objectives;
- Avoid, and in any event to minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;
- Assess whether the attack may be expected to violate the rule of proportionality;
- Cancel or suspend an attack if it becomes apparent that it would violate the principles of distinction or the rule of proportionality;
- Give effective advance warning of attacks which may affect the civilian population.

IHL also requires parties to the conflict to protect civilians and civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks.

In cities, military and civilian people and objects are often intermingled. For parties involved in hostilities in urban or other populated areas, this intermingling presents important challenges, both militarily and in terms of avoiding civilian harm. Because urban warfare endangers civilians in ways particular to it, the protection afforded by the principles and rules of IHL is critical.

Critical civilian infrastructure that enables the provision of essential services to civilians are in principle civilian objects, and as such as protected by all the IHL rules protecting the civilian population and civilian objects from the effects of hostilities. Importantly, this includes prohibitions against direct, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, and the rules on precautions in attack and against the effects of attack.

The services essential for the civilian population and other protected persons during armed conflict are interconnected and interdependent, which means the disruption of one can have domino or reverberating effects on others and result in multiple services being disrupted or even collapsing. For instance, electricity supply is needed to ensure the delivery of water and sanitation, solid waste disposal and the cold chain. Hospitals and food production and distribution capacities are then dependent on a reliable supply of safe water, sanitation, and electricity.

Attacks expected to damage critical infrastructure will likely affect a large part of the civilian population beyond the weapon's impact area and for a period well beyond the immediate aftermath of the attack. Such harm is relevant for both proportionality and precautions in attack insofar as it has a causal link to the attack and is reasonably foreseeable at the time of the attack.

IHL also affords special, heightened protection to certain types of critical infrastructure, notably hospitals and other medical facilities and transports, objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and works and installations containing dangerous forces, to cultural property, and to the natural environment. Every specific protection regime is different, but it often entails protection against operations other than attacks, and some degree of protection even in the case where such objects would otherwise constitute military objectives.

Sieges often have grave consequences for large numbers of civilians. To protect civilians, there are important rules in IHL. Crucially, civilians must be allowed to evacuate from a besieged area. Neither the besieging force nor the force under siege may force them to remain against their will.

Sieges may only be directed exclusively against an enemy's armed forces, and it is absolutely prohibited to shoot or attack civilians fleeing a besieged area. In addition, parties must comply with all the rules governing the conduct of hostilities. Constant care must be taken to spare civilians when putting a city under siege and attacking military objectives in the besieged area.

All feasible precautions must be taken to avoid or minimize incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, and damage to civilian objects. IHL also prohibits starving the civilian population as a method of warfare. At the same time, although temporary evacuations may be necessary, and even legally required, sieges must not be used to compel civilians to permanently leave an area.

Read more on the protection of the civilian population during sieges.

IHL imposes numerous prohibitions and restrictions on the development and use of specific weapons, under both treaty and customary law (see rules 70 to 86 of the ICRC customary IHL study). The use of all weapons, including those whose use is specifically restricted, must in any case comply with all the principles and rules governing the conduct of hostilities, including the prohibitions against direct, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, and the rules on precautions in attack (see above How does IHL protect civilians and civilian objects against the danger of hostilities?).

While there is no general prohibition under IHL against using heavy explosive weapons in populated areas, their use in such areas is very likely to have indiscriminate effects, and depending on the circumstances IHL rules may well prohibit such use. This underpins the long-standing call by the ICRC and the broader International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement to all States and non-state armed groups parties to armed conflicts to avoid the use of heavy explosive weapons in populated areas. These weapons should not be used in populated areas unless sufficient mitigation measures can be taken to limit their wide area effects and the consequent risk of civilian harm.

The Political Declaration on Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Humanitarian Consequences arising from the use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas was adopted by more than 80 States in 2022. It is the first instrument of its kind committing States, among others, to review their military policy and practice in order to restrict, or refrain from, the use of explosive weapons in populated areas, where such use may cause civilian harm. When properly implemented, it can contribute significantly to alleviating civilian suffering and strengthening respect for IHL.

With a view to reducing human suffering, the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) prohibits State Parties from authorizing the export, transit and other transfers of conventional arms, ammunition and related parts and components covered under the Treaty in the knowledge that they would be used to commit war crimes or other international crimes (Art 6). The ATT also prohibits States Parties from exporting weapons where there is an overriding risk that the supplied weapons could be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of IHL (Art 7). Regional instruments impose similar restrictions.

All States, even those not party to the ATT, have an obligation to refrain from transferring weapons to a party to an armed conflict if there is a substantial or clear risk of encouraging, aiding or assisting in the commission of IHL violations. In addition, arms transferring States must do everything reasonably in their power to prevent and stop IHL violations committed by their arms trading partners (Art 1 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions). States that supply weapons to a party to an ongoing armed conflict can be considered particularly influential in ensuring respect for IHL, owing to their ability to provide or withhold the means by which IHL violations may be committed. Refusing to transfer arms, or limiting or conditioning transfers, are practical means in the power of arms transferring States to prevent IHL violations.

Read more about arms transfers to parties to armed conflict.

Torture and other forms of ill-treatment are absolutely prohibited everywhere and at all times. Both IHL and international human rights law (IHRL) complement each other in creating a comprehensive body of rules for the prevention and punishment of acts of torture and other forms of ill-treatment.

States have agreed that there can be no excuse for torture. The suffering caused by such practices may have profoundly disturbing effects on victims that can last for years.

A recurring concern in conflict is acute food insecurity. IHL has important rules that can prevent a situation from developing into an extreme food crisis. For instance, parties to the conflict have the obligation to meet the basic needs of the population under their control.

In addition, IHL specifically prohibits the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare – a violation of which may amount to a war crime. Moreover, objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation works, are specially protected.

They may not be the object of an attack, destruction, removal, or otherwise be rendered useless. Similarly, respect for other IHL rules can play an important role in preventing food insecurity, such as protection of the environment, limitations on sieges, and access to humanitarian relief.

In addition to the protection for civilians under the rules on the conduct of hostilities, IHL affords special respect and protection to children during armed conflicts. This includes access to food, water, healthcare, education, protection from family separation, and special safeguards during evacuations.

Children are seriously affected by fighting during war in cities, with severe impacts on their health, development, and well-being. For example, due to children's unique anatomy and physiology, explosive devices designed to wound adult combatants can inflict severe and often lethal injuries on children. Children also risk losing contact or being separated from their families if they are hospitalized, or during evacuations, displacement, and when sheltering from attacks.

Urban warfare also denies or disrupts children's education, especially when schools are used for military purposes, attacked, incidentally damaged, or when schools are used as shelters. IHL contains provisions to ensure that students, teachers, and educational facilities are protected during armed conflicts so that education can continue.

Under international humanitarian law, journalists engaged in professional missions in areas of armed conflict must be respected and protected. This rule extends to all media professionals, including correspondents, reporters, and photographers on professional assignments in conflict-affected areas.

As civilians, they are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities. In addition, the Parties are encouraged to take steps to ensure the journalists’ safety and protect them from intimidation, abductions, and arbitrary detention. 

During international armed conflicts, two categories of media professionals work in conflict areas: (1) war correspondents authorized to accompany armed forces without being members thereof and (2) “freelance” journalists. Upon capture, the former are entitled to prisoner-of-war status, while the latter enjoy protection as civilians.

To the extent feasible, the ICRC seeks to provide a wide array of services to media professionals and their families, including seeking confirmation of reported arrests of journalists, visiting persons arrested, providing information on journalists’ fate and whereabouts to relatives and employers, maintaining family contacts, tracing missing journalists, and carrying out medical evacuations of wounded journalists. The ICRC also offers training in international humanitarian law and provides support to National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, offering first-aid courses for journalists.

For more information on the protection of journalists and how ICRC can help, please see The protection of journalists - FAQ.