What are the legal consequences of Israel's occupation? | Inside Story
Summary
TLDRThe UN General Assembly's resolution to seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on Israel's occupation of Palestine has sparked diverse reactions. Palestinians view it as a victory, while Israel condemns it as hypocritical. The resolution's potential impact on the ground and its implications for international law and peace talks are discussed, highlighting the challenges faced by both sides.
Takeaways
- 🌐 The U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution in 2022, calling on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to give an opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory, with 87 votes in favor, 26 against, and 53 abstentions.
- 🏛️ The ICJ's rulings are binding but not enforceable, and the court deals with disputes between states.
- 📢 Palestinian officials welcomed the U.N. decision, seeing it as evidence of global support for their rights and historical claims.
- 🔍 Hamas criticized the resolution, stating that past international decisions have not led to practical implementation on the ground, and accused the U.S. of supporting Israeli aggression.
- 🇮🇱 Israeli politicians, such as Knesset member Victor Liberman, condemned the U.N. decision as hypocritical and unjust, reflecting a broader denial of the occupation within Israel.
- 🤔 Israeli attorney Daniel Sidman argues that Israel is in denial about its occupation of Palestine, which is seen as a metastasizing issue that needs to be addressed.
- 🏙️ The resolution is seen as a test for the international system to clarify the facts on the ground and the legal obligations arising from Israel's occupation, potentially labeling it as a colonial enterprise.
- 🗳️ The vote breakdown indicates a potential shift in international sentiment, with some countries that have historically supported Israel abstaining or voting in favor of the resolution.
- 🔄 The new Israeli government under Benjamin Netanyahu, described as the most far-right in Israel's history, is expected to face challenges from this decision, potentially increasing instability.
- 🏛️ The ICJ's advisory opinion, once given, could lead to a push for countries to take action against Israel, such as sanctions or boycotts, if it is found to be in violation of international law.
- 🔎 The situation is compared to apartheid South Africa, where international resistance eventually gave way to support for dismantling the system, suggesting a potential future shift in attitudes towards Israel's occupation.
Q & A
What was the resolution passed by the U.N. General Assembly in 2022 regarding Israel's occupation of Palestine?
-The U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution in 2022 calling on the International Court of Justice to give an opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory.
What was the vote count for the U.N. resolution on Israel's occupation of Palestine?
-The resolution was supported by 87 votes, opposed by 26, with 53 abstentions.
How does the International Court of Justice (ICJ) function in relation to disputes between states?
-The ICJ deals with disputes between states and its rulings are binding, but the court itself has no power to enforce them.
What is the stance of Palestinian officials on the U.N.'s decision to seek an ICJ opinion on Israel's occupation?
-Palestinian officials have welcomed the U.N.'s decision, with a presidential spokesman stating that the vote is evidence of the world's support for the Palestinian people and their historical rights.
What is the view of the Hamas spokesman on the U.N. resolution and its potential impact on the ground?
-The Hamas spokesman noted that the resolution is one of many decisions by international institutions that have not led to practical implementation on the ground, and criticized the U.S. for supporting Israel's aggression against Palestinians.
What was the reaction of Israeli politician Victor Liberman to the U.N. resolution?
-Victor Liberman condemned the U.N. resolution as a despicable decision, calling it the epitome of hypocrisy and injustice, and expressed distrust in international institutions.
Why is Israel concerned about the U.N. General Assembly asking the ICJ for an advisory opinion on Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories?
-Israel is concerned because many in Israel are in denial about the occupation, and the resolution forces Israel to confront the reality of its occupation and its implications.
What does the resolution potentially signify for the Palestinians in terms of international legal accountability?
-The resolution signifies a consistent path of legal accountability for the Palestinians, using international legal tools to expose the political reality of Israel's occupation and its transformation into a colonial enterprise.
How did the breakdown of the voting in the U.N. reflect the international community's stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
-The breakdown of the voting showed a mix of support, opposition, and abstention, with some countries that Israel has been courting through the Abraham Accords voting for the resolution, indicating a potential shift in international sentiment.
What challenges does the resolution pose for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his new government?
-The resolution poses challenges for Netanyahu's far-right government by compelling Israel to face the reality of its occupation and potentially leading to increased international pressure and scrutiny.
What are the potential outcomes of the ICJ's advisory opinion on Israel's occupation, and how might they impact Israel and the Palestinians?
-The ICJ's advisory opinion could spell out the illegality of Israel's occupation and colonial practices, potentially leading to increased international pressure for sanctions, boycotts, and other actions against Israel, and further complicating the path to Palestinian self-determination.
Outlines
🏛️ UN Calls for ICJ Opinion on Israel's Occupation
The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution in 2022, urging the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to provide an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories. The vote was 87 in favor, 26 against, and 53 abstentions. The last ICJ opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was in 2004, which ruled Israel's separation wall illegal. The ICJ's rulings are binding but not enforceable. Palestinians view the UN decision as a victory, while Israel condemns it as hypocritical and unjust. Israeli Attorney Daniel Sidman suggests that Israel is in denial about its occupation, and the resolution is a call to face reality.
📚 Palestinians Pursue Legal Accountability
The resolution is seen as part of the Palestinians' consistent strategy to hold Israel accountable through international law. Despite resistance, Palestinians aim to expose the reality of Israel's occupation, which they argue has morphed into a colonial enterprise. The ICJ's forthcoming opinion will test the international system's stance on Israel's practices, potentially labeling them as apartheid or settler colonialism. The vote's breakdown, with many countries abstaining or supporting the resolution, indicates a potential shift in international sentiment towards the Palestinian cause. The challenge for Israel's new far-right government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, is to navigate this international scrutiny.
🌐 International System's Test and Netanyahu's Challenge
The ICJ's examination of Israel's occupation will be a test for the international system, forcing it to confront the reality on the ground and the legal implications of Israel's actions. Palestinians hope that the ICJ will recognize the illegality of Israel's settler colonial regime and compel countries to take action, such as sanctions or boycotts. The resolution poses a significant challenge for Netanyahu's government, which has adopted annexation as official policy and is seen as unwilling to end the occupation. Critics argue that supporting the resolution is beneficial for Israel, as it compels the nation to face the reality of its actions.
🔍 Political Leverage and the Future of Israeli Democracy
The resolution and the anticipated ICJ opinion could lead to increased international pressure on Israel, potentially affecting its relationship with the United States and other allies. The extent to which Israel has colonized the West Bank and implemented apartheid policies will be scrutinized. The political leverage of the United States, particularly under different administrations, may play a role in the outcome. The future of Israeli democracy is also at stake, with concerns that Netanyahu's government is undermining democratic norms in pursuit of its agenda. The situation is described as uncertain and potentially leading to increased instability.
🌍 Uncertainty and the Path Forward
The future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is uncertain, with the UN resolution and potential ICJ opinion adding complexity. The international community, including the United States, has expressed a desire for peace talks, but the breakdown of talks in 2014 and the current Israeli government's stance add to the challenges. The resolution and its implications could lead to increased instability and pressure on Israel. The hope is that the international community will condemn Israel's actions and that Israel itself will reconsider its policies. The path forward is described as difficult, with the potential for things to worsen before they improve.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡International Court of Justice (ICJ)
💡Occupation
💡United Nations General Assembly
💡Palestinian Territory
💡Legal Consequences
💡Settlements
💡Apartheid
💡Colonialism
💡International Law
💡Advisory Opinion
💡Benjamin Netanyahu
Highlights
The U.N General Assembly passed a resolution in 2022 calling on the International Court of Justice to give an opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory.
The resolution was supported by 87 votes, opposed by 26, with 53 abstentions.
The last time the ICJ gave an opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was in 2004, ruling Israel's separation wall illegal.
Palestinian officials welcomed the U.N's decision, seeing it as evidence of global support for their rights.
Hamas spokesman criticized the lack of practical implementation on the ground despite international decisions.
Israeli politician Victor Liberman called the U.N decision 'despicable' and indicative of hypocrisy and injustice.
Daniel Sidman, an Israeli attorney, suggests that Israel is in denial about its occupation of Palestinian territories.
Sidman argues that the occupation has surpassed legal parameters and morphed into a colonial enterprise.
The resolution is seen as a test for the international system to define the facts on the ground and the obligations arising from them.
The vote breakdown shows interesting dynamics, with some countries abstaining and others supporting the resolution despite Israel's efforts to secure support.
The new Netanyahu government's stance on occupation and settlements could pose challenges in light of the U.N resolution.
Sidman suggests that the resolution could compel Israel to face the reality of occupation and its implications.
The Palestinians understand that international law has been resisted in their case, but continue to pursue legal accountability.
The ICJ's advisory opinion is expected to spell out the facts of the occupation and the legal obligations, potentially leading to calls for sanctions or boycotts.
The case's outcome could be influenced by political leverage, particularly from the United States.
The future of Israeli-Palestinian relations is uncertain, with the potential for increased instability and pressure on Israel.
The international community's response to the ICJ's opinion could be a turning point in addressing the Israeli occupation and its effects on Palestinian rights.
Transcripts
what are the legal consequences of
Israel's occupation of Palestine the U.N
says the international court of justice
must decide Palestinians see that as a
victory while Israel calls it despicable
but will it change anything on the
ground this is Inside Story
[Music]
[Music]
hello welcome to the program I'm Hashem
the U.N general assembly and of the Year
2022 by passing a resolution calling on
the international court of justice to
give an opinion on the legal
consequences of Israel's occupation of
Palestinian territory
the U.N assembly voted
87-26 with 53 abstentions to support the
motion the last time the icj gave an
opinion on the conflict between the
Israelis and the Palestinians was in
2004 ruling Israel's separation war was
illegal the top U.N Court deals with
disputes between states and although its
rulings are binding the court itself has
no power to enforce them
Palestinian officials have welcomed the
un's decision the wafa news agency
reported presidential spokesman Nabil
abortina saying the vote is evidence of
the whole world's support for our people
and their inalienable historical rights
and the Hamas spokesman had this to say
about the resolution
this resolution is one of a long series
of decisions issued by all International
institutions regarding the Palestinian
issue none of which led to a practical
implementation on the ground
the important thing here is that as long
as the United States of America deals as
a partner with Israel in its aggression
against the Palestinian people and as
long as Washington provides full cover
for the occupation Within These
International institutions all these
resolutions will remain mere ink on
paper
meanwhile Israeli politician and knesset
member of Victor liberman expressed his
opinion on Twitter saying a Despicable
decision that must be roundly condemned
was passed at the U.N this is further
proof that the state of Israel at the
moment of truth will not be able to
trust the international institutions
this decision is the epitome of
hypocrisy and Injustice
let's bring in our guests in West
Jerusalem Daniel Sidman an Israeli
attorney specializing in the geopolitics
of Jerusalem he's also a communist for
foreignatters.com a consultancy welcome
to the program
Daniel the United Nations General
Assembly asked the international court
of justice for an advisory opinion
on
Israel's occupation of Palestinian
territories why is Israel concerned
Israel is concerned because official
Israel and much of the Israeli populace
is in a deep state of occupation denial
occupation what occupation
we are ruling over another people the
Palestinians against their will it is a
metastasizing occupation and we ignored
the fact that it even exists
our un
um Ambassador erdan and her prime
minister said how dare you accuse us of
being an occupying power well
the Israeli Supreme Court the Israeli
Army also say we're occupying and
um
most of official Israel
rejects the fact of occupation which is
exactly why we need resolutions such as
this
Israel will end occupation or occupation
will be the end of us and the message
sent by this U.N resolution is get real
stop ignoring reality
no it says that this is widely seen as
more than just a diplomatic victory for
the Palestinians after many many years
of uh major setbacks particularly for
the Palestinian Authority
look I think there are two things that
are happening with this resolution on
the one hand the Palestinians are going
on a very consistent uh path of legal
accountability using all the tools
available in the International System
despite International resistance to uh
kind of expose uh what the political
reality is which is that the Israeli
occupation has long surpassed the
um the legal parameters defined in
international law for occupation and it
has morphed into a colonial Enterprise
that has no intention of leaving and
that has legal ramifications
um on the International Community
um that is you know kicking and
screaming and and really trying its best
to dissuade Palestinians from going down
that route on the other hand
um the uh this resolution and what will
be
in front of the icj is a reality that
will test this International System
that for once will have to kind of spell
out what what the facts on the ground
are what the illegal obligations arising
from those facts are and kind of leave
the actors that have been hypocritical
and employed double standards for so
long with very few options but to face
the reality so far we've seen them
resisting legal qualifications of the
Israeli practices as apartheid we've
seen them rejecting uh also other legal
Scholars who say that what we have
um is not occupation it is settler
colonialism and now uh the highest legal
body in in international law will have
it say and the Palestinians will be able
to kind of lay it out there for the
world and say well you know show me what
you've got now are you are you uh really
going to play by the rules or are you
going to spell it out and say that
Palestinians are excluded from those
rules it's it's a it's quite a crossroad
I believe Bill for quite some time the
Palestinians understood that the uh the
the Dynamics of decision-making at
organizations such as the security
Council are quite different from the
United Nations General uh assembly and
this is why sometimes they took most of
the uh battles to the general assembly
now when you look at the vote itself 87
votes in favor 24 against 53
abstaining could
if we are to read into this could this
be an indication that there is a
momentum building towards more of a pro
Palestinian sentiment here
well I think I think there is a momentum
building
however I think we need to apply a bit
of caution on this uh this this decision
will take some time to play out and as
we know these things move slowly the
breakdown of the voting I think was
interesting uh you look at the countries
that abstained Sweden was one of the
abstainers of France Netherlands
abstained uh and also look at the
countries that uh Israel has been
assiduously wooing uh with the Abrahams
Accord
they all voted for the resolution that's
the bahrainis the Sudan uh UAE and of
course you had the Egyptians and the
jordanians voting and support
um and the Saudis so you could say well
of course that's to be expected on the
other hand uh Israel has invested a huge
amount of effort in securing support
from these authoritarian regimes the
people in the streets they still support
Palestinians and the Palestinian cause
so this is going to cause I think some
some issues some tension on that front
of course the fact that the Americans
I'm a Canadian I'm ashamed that the
Canadian
voted against uh to be honest with you
uh these these follow fairly predictable
patterns and and there are no surprises
there I do think that the Fury with
which the uh Israelis have responded is
a measure that this time that perhaps
this this vote has had more bite than
then then they wanted to see and they'd
worked hard actually over the past year
or so to try and get more and more
countries on their side and I think the
number of abstentions also speaks as
well to difficulties ahead particularly
given the extreme right-wing uh nature
of this new Netanyahu government
Daniel this decision what kind of uh
challenges does he pose for a prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu who took
office Thursday as the head of the most
far-right government in the history of
Israel
by all indications
in the canal is going to make the work
of those who supported this resolution
much easier
and make the
um a job of those who oppose this
resolution much more difficult
occupation nothing else denies the
existence of occupation at precisely the
time when occupation is metastasizing
he's doubling down on it there's an
indication that this government is
unaware of the manifestations of
occupation and is unwilling to move in
order to end it
ironically those who are supporting the
resolution calling for in in the court
to examine this are doing a great
service to the state of Israel by
compelling us to Face Reality those who
oppose this resolution are akin to a
wealthy Uncle who are subsidizing our
crack addiction to occupation and
settlements instead of say taking that
same money and sending us off to rehab
we need we Israel read to confront the
reality of occupation and its
implications for us and the Palestinians
nor what can the
Palestinians hope to achieve in the
future knowing that if the icj is going
to be asked to provide an advisory
opinion on the legal consequences of
Israel's occupation settlement and
annexation knowing that this government
in particular has ministers who have
widely
been promoting the expansion of the
settlements
what what happens next
well this government is is has adopted
annexation as official policy not just
the expansion of settlements uh look
this is a long path and there is no easy
path to Palestinian Freedom Palestinians
understand that very well they
understand that countries even Those Who
present themselves as champions of
international law have long resisted to
employ that international law to
realize Palestinian self-determination
which is their obligation under
international law having said that
employing these tools is also
indispensable because at the end of the
day you cannot tell peoples of the South
if you will that there is an
international rule-based system that
they must adhere to it but they will be
held accountable to its rules while
Palestinians are excluded from this
system their exclusive included from the
recourse for remedy including the icj
and while countries Dodge their
obligations
in line with international law once the
icj renders its opinion and it is
expected to spell out what the facts are
which is that we have a settler Colonial
regime that is illegal under
international law and countries are
obliged to take action by way of
sanctions by way of boycott by way of of
severing at normal ties with a country
that is for all intentions purposes a
pariah State
um and and that will have its own
momentum and Israel and its benefactors
Israel and the occupation
whitewashers will have very little cover
if you will for their ongoing denial of
Palestinian rights and for their ongoing
complicity really in Israel really
crimes including annexation and
persecution and apartheid Bill if you
look at the case this case in particular
as with all cases presented to the
international
court of justice it can be resolved
either by a settlement between the two
parties or one of the parties dropping
the case or ultimately a verdict by the
icg how do you see the path you said
earlier is going to be a complicated
path do you do you think that there's
going to be a level of political
leverage here or political influence by
the United States of America in
particular to try to ensure that we're
not going to see anything
that is going to condemn Israel
well I think nurse put her finger on it
that is that this case will cause uh a
great deal of of
public measurement of the extent to
which
Israel has colonized the West Bank the
extent to which it has invoked an
apartheid policy
and and I think too the extent to which
it is prepared to go Netanyahu is
prepared to go to sacrifice Israeli
democracy in pursuit of of this extreme
agenda uh
I don't see either side backing down I I
think that there will be uh political
leverage uh we don't know yet uh whether
the Democrats will win next time around
uh it's very hard to say certainly if
the Republican come back I would expect
that their support for netanyahua will
be very very strong and of course to
support the Netanyahu already has with
the Biden Administration is very very
strong but but I do think that it
becomes increasingly threadbare uh this
claim that Israel is the only democracy
in the region a democracy that
appears prepared to Institute an
override Clause so that Decisions by the
Supreme Court will be overturned by a
vote in the knesset this is a democracy
that has brought in racists and
criminals and homophobes of the worst
order in order to keep
Mr Netanyahu out of prison so I think
that it's going to become increasingly
difficult for Israel's friends and there
are many still
to sustain support for such a a a a a
damaged and damaging uh regime this
regime that Netanyahu has put in place
and I think it will unfortunately be a
very hard year for the Palestinians I
think it's going to be a hard year for
Israel as well though and I think it's a
case of things are going to have to get
worse before they get better but I think
that Israel is more vulnerable now than
it was before this vote was taken
Daniel
Israel's historical allies have been
staying for quite some time that
at least in the past there was this
opportunity to have liberals reformers
within governing coalitions that would
give us a sense of diversity within the
Israeli political landscape now it's
a group of ultra-orthodox political
parties coming together under
Benjamin Netanyahu so what's next for
for him what are we expecting him to to
do in the in the near future given this
decision by the United Nations General
Assembly
I believe that we are not are not only
in uh
in the situation of the unknown where
the situation of the unknowable
uh there will be those who are tempted
to say oh you will work with Netanyahu
um and judge him on what he does we have
shared values and shared interests give
me a break
no good is going to come from this
government this government does not
share values and does not share
interests with the liberal democracies
and with those who are concerned with
Palestinian rights
um this is
um it's tempting to say well let's give
it time it may not be as bad as it looks
that's true it won't be as bad as it
looks it will probably be worse we just
do not know how we are deep in the
period of the unknowable and we have to
gird our loins and prepare ourselves for
a new normal uh moving the diamond
even before this government
occupation was becoming apologetic and
aggressive and at times fatal lethal uh
we will see more of that and we have to
see how does that work how can this
government be contained engaged and how
can we bring before the Israeli public
The Perils of Perpetual occupation not
only to Palestinians but to ourselves to
our children to our grandchildren
not uh over the last few years I mean
Palestinians have been saying that they
basically have been betrayed by the Arab
neighbors that they have been betrayed
by the International Community and most
particularly by the United States of
America if you look at this particular
case there's a chance it's going to go
to a verdict but then as you know the
isg has no powers of enforcements which
means that the Palestinians will have to
whatever happens to go to the security
Council but that's where
you have another problem which is
basically the Palestinians consider the
security Council to be a major stumbling
block an or an entity which has never
been sympathetic towards the
Palestinians
yeah you're right uh but I don't think
that uh you know uh going to the
Security Council is the only option and
I you know I want to remind uh the
viewers of uh apartheid South Africa
um and I'm not throwing a direct Fair
load but what I want to uh remind
everybody of is that um all these
countries uh that now sing the praise of
Nelson the late Nelson Mandela and talk
about championing uh the uh uh taking
down of uh the system of apartheid
actually resisted fiercely
uh to to support uh uh the dismantling
of apartheid and they were the last to
join
that bandwagon of of the righteous if
you will
um and Nelson Mandela was considered a
terrorist by the United States and by
Great Britain and by all these that
major International Western democracies
until that was not politically feasible
anymore I don't think we should expect
anything different when it comes to
Israel having said that
um the way this legal This legal battle
is going
um you know inch by inch it is
incremental and it's painstaking and
it's gut-wrenching and it will cost even
more Palestinian Blood and Tears but
that is where all these countries are
being pushed to that's the corner where
there'll be where they can't deny facts
anymore so Security Council or not once
the verdict is out there will be a
different kind of momentum in the
parliaments of Western democracies that
respect themselves that have have to
face the facts and try to find a way to
be consistent with their actions in at
similar situations with their own laws
which they're now violating in order to
stand with Israel and give it political
cover and make it uh um you know a
country above the law that is really
exceptionalism will be hard to maintain
okay once a legal definition of Israeli
colonialism is handed down uh Bill let's
let's look at the bigger picture the the
International Community of the Americans
said that they were looking forward to
see peace talks Brazil between the
Palestinians and the Israelis those
talks broke down in 2014 you have now
Israel with its most far-right
government
how do you see the future
more uncertainty more fears of
instability
well I think the future is is uncertain
as Daniel said we are entering to the
realm of the unknown and the unknowable
uh I I do think there is going to be
much more instability I do think that
the pressure
will increase as a result of this vote I
think that increasingly Israel uh will
find itself condemned I hope because if
liberal democracy is anything and it has
any value then it will step forward
finally and condemn what Israel is as a
state is doing I think it's a very it's
a very difficult Road and we've already
heard from King Abdullah and Jordan he
said there are red lines uh you know if
if there's an attempt to change the
status of the only sites in Jerusalem
that's a red line for him
there are many people in the region
amongst the
authoritarians who are very close to the
uh Israelis and Coast who do not want to
see instability I think that would be a
pressure point as well I hope that these
various forces will combine to uh cause
Israel to think again and this is what
this decision is saying think again you
are an occupying Force you are
destroying not only Palestinian lives
you're destroying what is left of
Israeli democracy and truly people in
Israel will will pick up that challenge
and speak of as well I hope they will
thank you unfortunately we'll have to
leave it there
Daniel said man below I really
appreciate you inside looking forward to
talking to you in the near future thank
you
and thank you two for watching you can
see the program again anytime by
visiting our website Al jazeera.com for
further discussion go to our Facebook
page that's facebook.com forward slash
AJ inside so you can also join the
conversation on Twitter our hand is at
AJ Inside Story for me and the entire
team here in Doha bye for now
[Music]
thank you
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
How can the ICJ's orders against Israel on Gaza be enforced? | Inside Story
Bangladesh Statement in ICJ hearing on Palestine 20 Feb 2024
UN court rules Israel must prevent genocidal acts in Gaza | BBC News
الشكوى في محكمة العدل الدولية ضد إسرائيل
2.1 An Introduction to the International Court of Justice
How Far Away Is a Ceasefire? An Update on Gaza and the Rafah Invasion | Ian Bremmer
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)