The UN International Court of Justice of the United Nations ruled in the Hague (Netherlands) that Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territories is illegal and called for its immediate cessation, as well as stopping settlement construction, issuing an unprecedented and strong condemnation of Israel’s rule in the lands it seized 57 years ago. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu harshly condemned this conclusion, issued by a panel of 15 judges of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), saying that these territories are allegedly part of the historical homeland of the Jewish people.
What exactly did the ICJ rule?
Experts note that the ICJ’s harsh condemnation can and should influence international opinion and catalyse steps towards the unilateral recognition of the Palestinian state. The judges pointed to a wide range of discriminatory policies, including the construction and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, exploiting the natural resources of the Palestinian territories, the annexation and establishment of permanent control over land and discriminatory policies against the Palestinians themselves. According to international judges, this is all a gross violation of international law and the world community is tasked with urging Israel to comply with basic laws. The court clearly stated that Israel has no right to sovereignty in the Palestinian territories, violates international laws prohibiting the acquisition of territory by force and encroaches on the right of Palestinians to self-determination.
The document states that other countries were obliged not to ‘provide aid or assistance in maintaining’ Israeli presence in the territories. It was in this context that the ICJ clearly pointed out the illegal activities of the West and, above all, the Joe Biden administration, in stuffing Israel with the most modern weapons, pouring in huge sums of money, providing political cover for the criminal activities of Prime Minister Netanyahu. The Court stated that Israel should immediately cease settlement construction and that existing settlements should be demolished, according to a summary of the more than 80-page advisory opinion read out by ICJ President Nawaf Salam.
The court’s opinion, requested by the UN General Assembly at the behest of the Palestinians, was issued against the backdrop of Israel’s devastating military attack on Gaza, which was provoked by the Israeli bloodbath against the Palestinians since October 7. The court stated that the UN General Assembly and the Security Council, where the United States, a staunch Israeli ally and patron, has veto power, should consider the ‘exact conditions’ for ending Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories.
Israel’s criminal activities
Israel, which usually believes that the United Nations dances to its tune and is used to ignoring international and other tribunals and using the support of the West, did not send a team of lawyers to the hearings this time. Instead, it submitted written comments stating that the issues put before the court were allegedly biased and did not take into account Israel’s security interests. Israeli officials said the court’s intervention could undermine the peace process, which has been stalled for more than a decade. “The Jewish people are not a conqueror in their own land; not in our eternal capital Jerusalem and not in the land of our ancestors in Judea and Samaria”, Netanyahu said in a statement released by his office, using Biblical terms to refer to the West Bank. “No false decision in the Hague will distort this historical truth, and, similarly, the legality of Israeli settlements in all territories of our homeland cannot be challenged”.
Speaking outside the court, Riad al-Maliki, an adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, called the conclusion “a watershed moment for Palestine, justice and international law”. He said other countries must now “comply with the clear obligations” set forth by the court. Hamas welcomed the court’s decision and said in a statement that “serious steps on the ground” must be taken in response.
Israel captured the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip during the 1967 Six-Day War. The Palestinians seek to establish an independent state in all three areas. Israel considers the West Bank a disputed territory, the future of which must be decided in negotiations, and it has resettled a significant part of its population there to strengthen its power. It annexed East Jerusalem after withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, but maintained a blockade of the territory after Hamas came to power in 2007, turning the sector into a huge concentration camp. The international community as a whole rightfully considers these three areas to be occupied territories by Israel.
The court’s decision touches upon the essence of the ambiguity of Israel’s administration of these territories. Israel claims that it has not annexed the West Bank (although settler groups insist otherwise), but it calls it part of its homeland and sees it as an extension of the nation. Along with settlements, it has appropriated large areas of land as ‘state territory’. At the same time, the Netanyahu Government has repeatedly out right rejected the creation of any Palestinian State. Abbas’ Palestinian administration was limited to controlling the divided enclaves scattered across the West Bank.
The Palestinians and 49 other countries and three international organisations presented arguments at the hearing. During it, al-Maliki accused Israel of apartheid and called on the ICJ to declare Israel’s occupation of the lands on which the Palestinians live and claim is illegal and must end immediately and unconditionally in order to preserve at least some hope for a two-state future. Erwin van Veen, a senior researcher at the Clingendael think tank in the Hague, quite rightly and clearly stated that the ruling that Israel’s policy is a violation of international law “will lead to further international isolation of Israel, at least from a legal point of view”. He said such a decision would eliminate “any legal, political or philosophical basis for the Israeli expansion project”. It could also increase the number of countries recognising a Palestinian state, including in the Western world, following the recent examples of Spain, Norway and Ireland.
The ICJ is on Palestine’s side
This is not the first time that the ICJ and International Criminal Court have asked for a legal opinion on Israeli policy. Two decades ago, it was established that the so-called separation barrier, which was created by the Israeli military in the West Bank, ‘contradicts international law’. Israel boycotted the proceedings, saying they were politically motivated. Israel always audaciously claims that the barrier is supposedly a security measure for Israelis.
The ICJ has recognised that Israel’s settlement construction in the West Bank violates international laws, according to which states are prohibited from resettling their populations in the territories they occupy. Israel has built more than 100 settlements, according to the anti-settlement monitoring group Peace Now. Over the past five years, the number of settlers in the West Bank has grown by over 15% to more than 500,000 Israelis. The residents of these settlements are Israeli citizens who are subject to domestic law and are served by government ministries, services, banks and other businesses, which effectively integrates them into Israel.
Israel also annexed East Jerusalem and now considers the entire city its capital. Another 200,000 Israelis live in settlements built in East Jerusalem, which Israel considers to be the outskirts of its capital. Palestinian residents of the city face systematic discrimination, which makes it difficult for them to build new homes or expand existing ones.
The international community considers all settlements to be obstacles to peace, since they are built on lands on which the Palestinians want to establish their own state. Netanyahu’s uncompromising, far-right government is dominated by ardent settler representatives and their political supporters. Netanyahu has given his finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, a former settler leader, unprecedented powers over settlement policy. Smotrich used his position to fully consolidate Israel’s control over the West Bank, pushing ahead with plans to build new homes in settlements and legalise outposts.
With the exception of a small handful of Western countries, the majority of the world community welcomed this decision of the International Court of Justice. In this regard, the statement of Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stands out: “I urge the international community and UN to implement the ruling, ensuring Palestinian self-determination through a two-state solution in line with relevant UN resolutions”, he said. “Proud that Pakistan contributed to the case, demonstrating our unwavering commitment to the Palestinian cause”.
Viktor Mikhin, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”