|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2010-05-13
© 2010 Peter Belmont
| |
I never used to believe that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands was illegal, as a whole. Until now.
Now I have read enough in one excellent (and very long) study to conclude that there is reason to believe the occupation is (by now, and considering what has been done) illegal as a whole.
|
|
I never used to believe that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands was illegal, as a whole. Until now.
I have heretofore believed that the settlements and the settlers and the wall and various other things are illegal, not the occupation as a whole.
Now I have read enough in one excellent (and very long) study to conclude that there is reason to believe the occupation is (by now, and considering what has been done) illegal as a whole.
The study, in PDF, a long file. It is titled:
Occupation, Colonialism, Apartheid?
A re-assessment of Israel’s practices in the occupied Palestinian territories under international law
A study coordinated by the Middle East Project of the Democracy and Governance Programme, Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa
It concludes that the settlements, the dual law, the so-called (or purported) “annexation” of occupied territory near the walled city of Jerusalem, the long-term denial of rights to the Palestinians, etc., etc., show that the occupation is a form of “colonialism” and of “apartheid”, both illegal.A. Summary Findings
Both colonialism and apartheid are prohibited by international law. This Report has found strong evidence to indicate that Israel has violated, and continues to violate, both prohibitions in the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel’s denial of the Palestinian right to self-determination is comprehensive. It has shown an intention to violate the territorial integrity of the occupied Palestinian territories through its claim to annex East Jerusalem and through its settlement policy. Both are illegal in themselves, demonstrating an intention to acquire territory through the use of force. In addition, the settlement policy violates Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Israel has overreached the authority that it possesses under the law of occupation to govern the territories. It has exceeded its lawful authority to legislate for the OPT and has prevented the protected population from exercising political authority. It has deliberately adopted measures that have obliterated the separation between its economy and infrastructure and that of the occupied Palestinian territories: this separation is required by international law in order to prevent the unlawful annexation of occupied territory. Israel has also violated the Palestinians’ right to permanent sovereignty over natural resources through its discriminatory appropriation of land and water resources. In short, Israel has adopted and implemented colonial practices that have denied the population of the occupied Palestinian territories the opportunity freely to determine its political status and freely pursue its economic, social and cultural development.
Israel has also introduced a system of apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territories. As the precedent of Namibia demonstrates, a State may breach the prohibition of apartheid in territory that lies beyond its borders but which is under its jurisdiction. International law defines apartheid not as isolated acts of unlawful racial discrimination but rather as a system of acts designed to establish and maintain the domination of one racial group over another. In the OPT, Jewish and Palestinian identities function as racial identities in the sense provided by ICERD, the Apartheid Convention, and the jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia. Israel’s domestic laws and institutions are channelled into the OPT to convey special rights and privileges to Jewish settlers while denying fundamental rights and freedoms to Palestinians. Domination by the Jewish group is associated principally with transferring control over land in the OPT to exclusively Jewish use, dividing the population of the territory into Jewish and Palestinian enclaves, and restricting movement on discriminatory grounds and disadvantaging Palestinians in all areas of economic, social and political life. This discriminatory treatment cannot be justified or excused on grounds of citizenship.
Consequently, this study finds that the State of Israel exercises control in the OPT with the purpose of maintaining a system of domination by Jews over Palestinians and that this system constitutes a breach of the prohibition of apartheid. This study’s findings of colonialism and apartheid do not supersede, negate or affect other grounds for assessing Israel’s occupation as unlawful. The precedent of Namibia confirms that a State may breach the prohibition on apartheid in territory that it controls beyond its own borders. Mindful of the right of the Namibian people to self-determination;1418 of the fact that South Africa’s presence in Namibia had outlived its legitimate Mandate;1419 of South Africa’s policy of colonial exploitation” in Namibia;1420 and of “the evil and abhorrent policies of apartheid and the measures being taken by the Government of South Africa to enforce and extend those policies beyond its borders”;1421 the UN General Assembly, Security Council and the International Court of Justice all found that South Africa’s continued occupation of Namibia was illegal and that South Africa was “under obligation to withdraw its administration from Namibia immediately and thus put an end to its occupation of the Territory.”1422 This study’s conclusion that Israel is breaching the international legal prohibition on apartheid, when considered in light of its prolonged occupation and colonial practices in the OPT in violation of the Palestinian right to self-determination, suggests that similar legal consequences may result. It must be nevertheless be stressed that the occupied Palestinian territories remain occupied and Israel’s duty to conform to the body of international law that regulates occupation is undiminished, along with its duty to remedy the illegal situation it has created through its colonial and apartheid practices. Israel’s observance of the law of occupation is primarily an issue of concern for it and the occupied population. Israel’s duty to fulfil its obligations under international humanitarian law is held in parallel with its duty to comply with the international legal norms that prohibit colonialism and apartheid. Further, States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention, in accordance with Article 1, are under the obligation to ensure that Israel complies with its requirements. 1423 Accordingly, not only is Israel bound to desist from its unlawful practices under the internationally accepted rules on State responsibility, but members of the international community are equally bound to take appropriate action to ensure that Israel complies with its duties as a member of the United Nations and as a party to the Fourth Geneva Convention. at p. 277 (footnotes omitted).
|
