Coca Cola to open Gaza factory ‘within weeks’

[Little Tich]

Source: Times of Israel, January 28, 2016

$20 million manufacturing plant will provide more than 1,000 jobs to unemployment-ridden Strip

Coca Cola is to open a factory in the Gaza Strip within weeks, which will eventually provide more than 1,000 jobs in what is one of the world’s worst-hit unemployment hot spots.

Palestinian investors have plowed some $20 million to underpin the drinks giant’s first foray into the Strip, the NRG website reported Thursday.

They include the billionaire Munib Masri, known as the richest Palestinian, and Palestinian-American businessman Zahi Khouri, head of the Palestinian National Beverage Company (PNBC), Coca Cola’s Palestinian subsidiary, which already operates factories in Ramallah, Tulkarem and Jericho in the West Bank.

“Coca Cola is one of the first of the biggest global companies to invest in Palestine, and this investment opened the doors to others,” Khouri told foreign media. “The same will happen in the Gaza Strip.”

Read more: http://www.timesofisrael.com/coca-cola-to-open-gaza-factory-within-weeks/

[azurnoir]

1. so will Coke® now be dubbed Hamas cola?

[parkia00]

2. When the lawn gets mowed again...

bet you this would be a target.

[King_David]

3. If it lasts that long , being an American company in Gaza and all.

[branford]

4. If the factory is used in whole or in part to manufacture or store

arms or military equipment, or houses command and control infrastructure or troops, it will indeed be a legitimate military target in the event of renewed hostilities.

The fact that the factory belongs to Coke does not immunize it, and unlike many other enterprises in Gaza, the company should ensure the only thing the factory does is produce and distribute soft drinks and similar products.

[Little Tich]

5. That's the same excuse the IDF used when it damaged / destroyed 96 000 homes in Gaza.

It's not reasonable that Coca Cola would agree to storing Hamas equipment on their property, but it's reasonable to believe that the IDF will target the plant anyway.

Source for estimate of destroyed homes in Gaza: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4605408,00.html

[branford]

6. I simply acknowledged the basic rules of selecting targets in warfare

consistent with relevant international law.

Moreover, the number of homes allegedly destroyed is not an indicator of much of anything. First, it is widely acknowledged that Hamas uses civilians structures, including their own homes, to store arms and equipment and engage in warfare. These structures then become legitimate military targets. Additionally, Gaza is densely populated. There will be collateral damage when striking military targets.

Here's a suggestion to Hamas and their supporters - don't fire rockets indiscriminately into Israel, itself a war crime, and don't complain when Israel targets your military and related infrastructure.

On a related note, have you read all recent news about the collapsed Hamas tunnel and their bragging about all their new tunnel construction into Israel. Don't forget this the next time you and others complain about why Israel (and primarily Egypt) purportedly aren't permitting more concrete and construction supplies into Gaza to rebuild all the homes allegedly destroyed.

Lastly, I doubt Coca Cola, a generally reputable international company based in the USA, would knowingly and willingly allow its facilities to be used by Hamas. However, their intentions are largely irrelevant. Coke must actively ensure the factory is not used as a shield for weapons and military storage or command and control. Just like the United Nations facilities that were caught with rockets and targeted, complaints that "we didn't know" carry little weight.

If your concern is for the civilians of Gaza, direct your complaints to Hamas. There are no settlements in Gaza (and they even have a border with their Arab brethren in Egypt), Hamas runs the Strip with an iron fist (when are the next elections scheduled?), they know the recognized rules of warfare, and yet still use civilians and their infrastructure as shields and fire rockets at civilian areas Israel.

[Little Tich]

7. I personally believe that Israel committed war crimes in Gaza.

It's basically because I can't imagine a mechanism that would cause so much destruction on civilian infrastructure and so many dead civilians in their homes that wouldn't consist of targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure. However, this is for the ICC to investigate, and if they would say that no war crimes were committed in Gaza, then no war crimes were committed...

[branford]

8. Do you believe that Hamas is also guilty of a myriad of war crimes and should be investigated?

They are the elected government of Gaza, and even the United Nations and many Arab government are unable to justify firing rockets indiscriminately into Israel.

Also, what do you personally think should happen when a civilian building such as a home or factory is used to store weapons, engage in command and control, or actively assist a war effort?

Gaza is a prime example of the effects of fighting in dense and poor urban environments where the legal and practical dividing line between "military" and "civilian" is often non-existent. As would any government, the Israelis are always going to err on the side of protecting their own population before all else.

[Little Tich]

9. Frankly, most victims of Hamas are fellow Palestinians, not Israelis.

During Operation Protective Edge, Palestinian rockets caused a total of 8 deaths, which is much less than the number of Palestinian civilian deaths caused by Israel, which were around 1500 people.

In perspective, it's very possible that any war crimes committed were mostly against Palestinians, and that Israel was responsible for most of them. We can only speculate until the ICC investigates, but I think Israel has a lot to answer for.

[branford]

10. You totally avoided my questions.

The number of casualties suffered is also entirely irrelevant as a legal matter. In any event, Israel suffered fewer casualties because they prioritize defense of their citizens and are technologically superior.

You comments amounts to little more than claiming its unfair when a weaker party to a military conflict loses badly.

[Little Tich]

14. Palestinian rockets or Israeli bombs aren't war crimes until they actually kill people, as far as I

know. The severity of the war crime is measured by the number of civilians killed.

[branford]

15. You are positively, absolutely, unequivocally wrong as a legal matter.

No one need die for either the Israelis or Palestinians to be guilty of war crimes, nor does the number of people killed determine if something is a war crime or necessarily its severity, particularly if the relevant issue is whether such people are legally still civilians or entitled to such protection at all.

Apart from you're clear misunderstanding of the international conventions governing warfare, you're basically excusing Hamas behavior because they don't exert sufficient efforts to protect their people and they've chosen to repeatedly engage in warfare with a party much stronger than them.

[Little Tich]

16. We do seem to differ somewhat on which party is the most culpable in the last Gaza conflict.

I'm not sure I can convince you that I'm right with a few posts in this thread. But please stay around, the I/P dungeon wouldn't be as interesting if there was nobody to disagree with...

[branford]

17. Even assuming you're correct, and Israel is "more culpable"

(which I definitely dispute), it would not absolve the Palestinians of anything, legally or otherwise.

It really appears you're suggesting that the Palestinians can use civilians and their infrastructure for military purposes, fire rockets indiscriminately into Israeli population centers, and even commit acts of undisputed terrorism against Israeli civilians, so long as their casualty counts are much higher than the Israelis. Not only is the implication totally incorrect as a matter of law under the Geneva Conventions and other relevant rules of warfare, but it's truly shocking as a moral position. In fact, and most ironically, justifying or excusing such Palestinian conduct does nothing but support and encourage the most extreme elements in Israeli politics who believe their armed forces are too lenient with the Palestinians and it threatens Israeli deterrence.

[azurnoir]

11. Hamas was not elected to be the government of Gaza perhaps you need to take a look at history before

you post such drivel, they took the majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislature, they became the leaders of Gaza by force, now I do understand the reliance of memory hole propaganda and how making out that the people of Gaza chose to led by Hamas can be worked to make the awful toll exacted on an innocent civilian population by Israel by Hamas themselves and more recently Egypt more palatable to the public, but I a'm sure you were not being intentionally dishonest, you were just unaware of true facts .

[branford]

12. In the entire discussion, you major issue is quibbling over Hamas' democratic mandate in Gaza?

In any event, it matters not at all if Hamas was or was not democratically elected in Gaza. It has no legal impact on their obligations concerning the use of civilian infrastructure in warfare or whether or not Israel may target otherwise civilian facilities used for military purposes.

[azurnoir]

13. My issue is misrepresentation such as your title line exhibits

and as to civilian infrastructure ever hear of the Dahiya Doctrine, Israel's justification for destroying civilian infrastructure or anything else that can be used by enemy combatants.