Tag Archives: Palestine

Zero-sum logic – the existence of a people depends on the nonexistence of the other

A Palestinian scholar from Gaza, Jehad Abu Saleem, shared the following analysis in February 2018:

The collapse of life in Gaza has entered a critical stage. The eleven years of siege, isolation, and destructive wars of aggression are bearing their bitter fruits. What else but collapse will result from more than a decade of intense choking of a population of two million people. The collapse of Gaza manifests itself on every aspect of life there: rising suicide rates, crime, and new levels of poverty and impoverishment at unprecedented scales.

The siege on Gaza has become a forgotten part of the Palestinian experience under occupation. The siege was normalized despite several attempts to put an end to it. At this point, the fact that Gaza is under siege is a given. Gaza and siege became synonyms. The fact that the siege still persists despite all the attempts to end it should make us rethink the way we talk about Gaza, its history, and its place within the larger context of the Israeli occupation and control of Palestinian lives.

three evils

Much has been written and said about the siege from a humanitarian lens/framework. While a humanitarian framework can be useful when responding to urgent situations, sometimes it distracts us from the larger historical, political, and moral questions that need to be asked when we are faced by large-scale man-made crises like the one in Gaza.

The siege on Gaza is not an isolated event in the history of Palestine. It happened as part of the unfolding of a larger and much more complicated history and series of events. The siege on Gaza and its perpetuation to the current level is the logical conclusion of a situation that is inseparable from the logic that defines the relationship between Zionist Jews and Palestinian Arabs in historic Palestine. It’s a zero-sum logic, a mutually exclusive reality in which the existence of a people depends on the nonexistence of the other.


The question haunting people in Gaza now is what will become of them in light of any future escalation. No one knows what will this look like, but what we know for sure by now, and it’s a terrifying thing: we know that we are now in a region where people’s wishes for dignity and liberation no longer mean anything. The triumph of counter-revolution backed by regional and international players has normalized acts of mass murder and depopulation of millions of people for the sake of crushing demands for liberation. We know that Palestinians are vulnerable in light of the current alignment of powers in the Middle East. All this nonsense about a so-called “resistance” camp rushing to the rescue of Palestinians is pure nonsense in light of the current geopolitical context. Gaza might end up paying the price of the normalization of what we saw in Syria, Yemen, the Sinai, and Iraq under the pretext of “war on terror.”



Filed under Gaza, Occupation, People, Politics, Uncategorized

BDS Movement shines

The global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (BDS), initiated by Palestinian civil society in 2005, is receiving a lot of attention these days.

The stated goals of BDS are: the end of Israel’s occupation and settler colonization of Palestinian land and the Golan Heights, full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel, and promotion of the right of return of Palestinian refugees.

Netanyahu and Israel’s government want to kill the BDS Movement

On January 7, 2018 Israel published its list of NGOs that support BDS — with the intention of preventing leaders of those organizations from entering Israeli territory — and thus Palestinian territory.  A U.S. Quaker group that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1947 is on the list. Even Jews who support BDS are targets for Israel’s ire.

Israel, the homeland for the Jews, only wants Zionists apparently, not just any Jew.

A joint team from the Strategic Affairs and Interior ministries has already determined the parameters that will serve as a basis for barring activists from coming into the country. Those who hold senior or important positions in blacklisted organizations will be denied entry, as well as key activists, even if they hold no official position.

Mayors and establishment figures who actively and continually promote boycotts will also be prevented from entering, as will activists who arrive to Israel on behalf of or as part of a delegation initiated by one of blacklisted groups.  See the full article here.

The “Anti-BDS Law”, passed by the Knesset in March 2017, has already been used against Americans (including American Jews) traveling to Israel and against elected representatives of the French republic (MPs, MEPs, and mayors of major French cities) who wished to visit Israel and occupied Palestine, with a particular aim to meet their Palestinian counterparts. In response, the Israeli government invented a new offence: that of applying for permission to visit! (Check out this article in the Middle East Eye).

The list of organizations now banned by Israel includes:

AFPS (The Association France Palestine Solidarité)
BDS France
BDS Italy
ECCP (The European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine
FOA (Friends of Al-Aqsa)
IPSC (Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign)
Norge (The Palestine Committee of Norway)
PGS (Palestine Solidarity Association in Sweden)
Palestinagrupperna i Sverige
PSC (Palestine Solidarity Campaign)
War on Want
BDS Kampagne
AFSC (American Friends Service Committee)
AMP (American Muslims for Palestine)
Code Pink
JVP (Jewish Voice for Peace)
NSJP (National Students for Justice in Palestine)
USCPR (US Campaign for Palestinian Rights)
BDS Chile
BDS South Africa
BNC (BDS National Committee)

I was questioned for five hours by three different Israeli security officials in March 2016 when I was crossing into the West Bank from Jordan. And what did they want to know? Their chief concern was whether or not I supported BDS. One security official found photos I had posted on Facebook from my visit to Paris a few months earlier, including pictures of a BDS rally. She accused me of being the organizer of this BDS rally. I told her I support BDS because it’s a peaceful, nonviolent form of protest against the occupation but I was not the organizer of this BDS rally in Paris. She responded: “You’re a liar!”

King Hussein bridge

I’m allowed into the West Bank after 5 hours of questioning 

I was eventually allowed to enter, thanks (I believe) to the support I received from my Jewish Israeli friend who invited me to visit her kibbutz. The Israeli security officials had called her twice that afternoon — her responses must have been my ticket in.

But what is the government of Israel afraid of when it appears to be waging a global war against the BDS movement? Most undergraduate Psych majors would interpret Israel’s public relations campaign against BDS as a sign of Israel’s fear of the movement’s growing success.

If the BDS movement achieves its goal, Israel as a Jewish-majority homeland for the Jews will cease to exist, and the occupation will also end. It worked in South Africa; it realistically has every chance of working in Israel-Palestine.  THAT’S what Israel is afraid of — the end of the status quo.

Now it’s incumbent on BDS activists to share a narrative of what life in Israel-Palestine will look like for both Israelis and Palestinians after the occupation ends. Even though Israel is by far stronger than Palestine today, it is far weaker in spirit and imagination.  And fear among Israelis obscures their vision of a world beyond occupation.  Palestinians and international supporters of BDS must provide this alternative vision to replace their fear.

Norwegian lawmaker wants to bestow the Nobel Peace Prize on BDS

A few days ago, a Norwegian lawmaker nominated the BDS Movement for the Nobel Peace Prize.  He said:

“This nomination reflects the growing international solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for justice, dignity and freedom from the Israeli occupation.”

“If the international community commits to supporting BDS to end the occupation of Palestinian territory and the oppression of the Palestinian people, new hope will be lit for a just peace for Palestinians, Israelis and all people across the Middle East.”

“My hope is that this nomination can be one humble but necessary step towards bringing forth a more dignified and beautiful future for all peoples of the region.”



Filed under Israel, nonviolent resistance, Peaceful, Uncategorized

District Court slaps anti-boycott state law

A big day for Americans who believe in peaceful, non-violent protest such as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

A teacher from Kansas is standing up for her right to boycott Israeli products, and taking the State of Kansas to federal court.

The following excerpts are from the district court’s opinion.


In June 2017, Kansas enacted House Bill 2409 (“the Kansas Law”). This law requires all state contractors to certify that they are not engaged in a boycott of Israel. Kan. Stat. Ann. § 75-3740f(a).

The Kansas Law defines a “boycott” as:  [E]ngaging in a refusal to deal, terminating business activities or performing other actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with persons or entities doing business in Israel or in territories controlled by Israel, if those actions are taken either: (1) In compliance with or adherence to calls for a boycott of Israel other than those boycotts to which 50 U.S.C. § 4607(c)1  applies; or (2) in a manner that discriminates on the basis of nationality, national origin or religion, and that is not based on a valid business reason . . . .


In May 2017, plaintiff Esther Koontz began boycotting Israeli businesses. She first became motivated to boycott Israel in 2016 when she saw a presentation about conditions in Israel and Palestine. And on July 6, 2017, Mennonite Church USA passed a resolution calling on Mennonites to take steps to redress the injustice and violence that both Palestinians and Israelis have experienced. Ms. Koontz is a member of a Mennonite Church organization. Specifically, this organization’s resolution called on Mennonites to boycott products associated with Israel’s occupation of Palestine. As a consequence, plaintiff decided she would not buy any products or services from Israeli companies or from any company who operates in Israeli occupied Palestine.

Esther Koontz Kansas teacherEsther Koontz, Kansas teacher, credit to ACLU

Ms. Koontz was qualified to train math teachers and accepted for employment, but when she refused to sign the state’s certification that she would not boycott Israel, Kansas wouldn’t hire her.

Twenty-two states—Maryland, Texas, Florida, Arizona, Illinois, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, New Jersey, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Alabama, Colorado, Indiana, California, Michigan, Texas, Nevada, Kansas, and North Carolina—have so far passed some form of legislation against boycotts of Israel.  Wisconsin makes it twenty-three.

The Intercept noted that the attempts to punish and repress speech and activism aimed at ending the Israeli occupation are so widespread that the Center for Constitutional Rights has dubbed this movement “the Palestine Exception” to free speech rights in the U.S.  Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md) wanted to send violators of his anti-boycott legislation to prison.

Ms. Koontz — with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union — decided to sue Kansas claiming its anti-boycott law violates the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.  Along with her complaint, she asked the Federal District Court to enjoin the State of Kansas from enforcing its anti-boycott law while the case is pending.

The attorneys for Kansas argued her request for an injunction shouldn’t be granted because Ms. Koontz had never requested a waiver from the anti-boycott law. If she had, the state says it would have granted her a waiver.

The Court ruled January 30, 2018 that a person doesn’t have to apply for a waiver in this type of case because of the chilling effect the Kansas law has on our First Amendment liberties.  And Judge Crabtree decided that Ms. Koontz is likely to win her case!

The conduct the Kansas Law aims to regulate is inherently expressive. It is easy enough to associate plaintiff’s conduct with the message that the boycotters believe Israel should improve its treatment of Palestinians. And boycotts—like parades—have an expressive quality. Forcing plaintiff to disown her boycott is akin to forcing plaintiff to accommodate Kansas’s message of support for Israel.

I wonder if any of the other anti-boycott state laws have been challenged in court. Maybe this challenge from Kansas will send a sobering message to states that may be considering adopting such laws.  “Think twice before you get on AIPAC’s and Israel’s bandwagon. Don’t tread on Americans’ First Amendment rights!” 

Read the court’s opinion in full. This is a case to watch closely. Thank you Ms. Koontz!


Filed under People, Politics, Uncategorized, US Policy

Jewish Federation’s astonishing admission to New Orleans City Council

In an odd twist of events, on January 11, 2018, the New Orleans City Council approved a non-binding resolution to review the city’s investments and contracts to ensure that they are consistent with human rights; and two weeks later the city council unanimously withdrew the resolution. The stated reason was to correct a procedural flaw in its passage.

There’s more to this story than meets the public’s eye. But first, read the resolution, reprinted in full below.


NO. R-18-5

CITY HALL: January 11, 2018


WHEREAS, the City of New Orleans (hereinafter the “City”) was declared to be a Welcoming City on October 1, 2015, to create a more inclusive, receptive city environment for all local populations; and

WHEREAS, the City commits itself to protect, respect, and fulfill the full range of inherent human rights for all, as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and numerous other international human rights instruments; and

WHEREAS, the City enshrined these values in Ord. No. 19278 M.C.S.; 25700 M.C.S.; Code of Ord. Sec. 86-4. (Safeguard all individuals within the city from discrimination because of race, creed, national origin or ancestry, color, religion, gender or sex, sexual orientation, gender identification, marital status, age, physical condition or disability in connection with employment, housing, public accommodations, financial practices, and credit transactions; to protect their interest in personal dignity and freedom from humiliation; to make available to the city their full productive capacities in employment; to secure the city against domestic strife and unrest which would menace its democratic institutions; to presevre the public safety, health, and general welfare; and to further the interest, rights, and privileges within the city); and

WHEREAS, the City has pledged to meet its commitments to rewarding workplace diversity, promoting local industry, protecting the environment, and promoting equity through compliance with civil rights; and

WHEREAS, consistent with its responsibilities to its residents, the City of New Orleans, has social and ethical obligations to take steps to avoid contracting with or investing in corporations whose practices consistently violate human rights, civil rights or labor rights, or corporations whose practices egregiously contradict efforts to create a prosperous, educated, healthy and equitable society; NOW, THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED, That the City Council encourages the creation of a process to review direct investments and contracts for inclusion on, or removal from, the City’s list of corporate securities and contractual partners, according to the values of the City as referenced in this Resolution.


YEAS: Brossett, Gray, Guidry, Ramsey, Williams – 5


ABSENT: Cantrell, Head – 2


Not a word about Israel, Palestine, BDS, or human rights violations in the occupied Palestinian territories. Not a peep about which investments or contracts the city should review. But as soon as the ink was dry, the Jewish Federation of New Orleans was down at City Hall lobbying councilors to rethink their support for this pro-Palestinian resolution because they found the resolution’s “anti-Israel sentiment was offensive.” And the elected officials fell right into line.


New Orleans Mayor-Elect LaToya Cantrell ((Photo by Brett Duke, NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune) )

Mayor-Elect Cantrell explained her reason for rescinding the resolution.

Compounding the procedural deficiencies in the adoption of this resolution, [suspension of the rules is allowed via Rule 17] its passage has shrouded the city in an undesired and damaging falsehood. Statements from outsiders now claim that New Orleans is now one of the largest cities in the United States supportive of BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions), a movement aimed at delegitimizing the State of Israel. This is totally inaccurate, untruthful and does not reflect the values of New Orleans. We are a city that is welcoming, and open to all. Well intentioned actions can be taken out of context by others for their own political benefit, with negative connotations that overshadow any original motives; I believe that is what happened with this resolution.

As mayor-elect, I am committed to leading a city that champions civil and human rights, democratic engagement, and transparency. While I will continue to examine issues of civil rights and fair contracting, I want to unequivocally reiterate that I am neither supportive of the BDS movement nor in any way hostile to the Jewish community or the State of Israel.

Clearly, the Mayor-elect did not hear from the UN Special Rapporteur S. Michael Lynk (Canada), who recently called on the international community to recognize Israel’s prolonged occupation of Palestine as unlawful under international human rights law and to use the tools in its toolbox to bring an end to the occupation. (Photo on Left)

The Mayor-elect didn’t hear from Amira Hass, the Israeli journalist who has written extensively about the occupation and its impact on both Palestinians and Israelis, and most recently about Israel’s decision to blacklist people and organizations that support BDS. See her Jan. 8 column.  (Photo top right).

I suspect the Mayor-elect might not know Gideon Levy, another Israeli journalist, who has written for many years about Israel, Palestine, the occupation and BDS (photo middle right), nor Rabbi Arik Ascherman (photo bottom right) who lives in Israel and after 21 years leading Rabbis For Human Rights, recently founded “Torat Tzedek Torah of Justice,” dedicated to the human rights of Israeli single parent moms and Palestinians alike, because the Torah teaches Jews that every human being is created in God’s Image.

That a non-binding resolution — calling for the city to review its investments and contracts to ensure they’re consistent with the city’s support for human rights — might impact the State of Israel’s occupation of Palestine, is a damning confirmation by the Jewish Federation of New Orleans that at least some American Jews know that Israel’s dehumanizing treatment of Palestinians is contrary to international human rights law.


I hope New Orleans Mayor-elect and the full City Council will reflect on this unintended admission by the Jewish Federation, and take it upon themselves to learn more about the non-violent BDS movement whose goal is not to “delegitimize Israel” (as the Mayor-elect seems to believe) but to focus the world’s attention on the human rights of Palestinians who have lived under Israel’s occupation for half a century. The City of New Orleans needs to get on the right side of history.

Loss of Land







Filed under Israel, Occupation, Peaceful, People, Politics

One Country – A Bold Proposal To End The Israeli-Palestinian Impasse

By Ali Abunimah (2006)

One Country

“Crazy!” my Jewish friends and family might say, but this small book (a quick read in two nights) spells out a very strong argument for ending the status quo in Israel-Palestine which few think is good for anyone.

This might have been “bold” in 2006 but the one-state idea has received much more attention in recent years.

The status quo isn’t working for anyone.

Israeli Jews live in constant fear of the “other” and discomfort that the realities of the occupation don’t match up with their religious ideals of justice, fairness and טוֹב.

Palestinians live under the daily grind and humiliation of the occupation, the unrelenting violence and death, the brutal treatment at the hands of the “other”.

The exalted two-state plan has been the ostensible goal of the international community and U.S. Administrations for decades. Presumably, Donald Trump’s “deal of the century” envisions two states. But that idea is dead and it’s time for a formal burial.

For most observers familiar with the “facts on the ground” and the rapid settlement expansion on Palestinian territory in recent years, the notion of two states existing side-by-side evaporated 10-15 years ago.  But then what?

Ali Abunimah (a Palestinian-American) proposes urgent action on two fronts: dialogue and resistance. “One is in the realm of dialogue, imagination, and construction of an inclusive vision,” Abunimah says.  “At the same time, there is a pressing need for resistance to the outcome Israel is trying to impose on the Palestinians, one that can only lead to greater bloodshed and suffering on all sides. These appear to be contradictory mandates, but they mist go hand in hand.”


Ali Abunimah – author

Chapter One, An Impossible Partition, is a good history lesson for anyone who needs a refresher.  I would add, ten years after the book was written, that Special Rapporteur S. Michael Lynk has recently called for the international community to recognize the prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territories as unlawful under international law, a fairly new development which adds more fuel to Abunimah’s call for dialogue about alternatives.

Chapter Two, “The State of Israel is Coming to an End” focuses on the demographic realities which pose an insurmountable hurdle for Israel to remain as a democratic Jewish state.

In 2004, Professor Arnon Soffer, chair of geostrategic studies at the University of Haifa, predicted that by 2020 there would be 6.3 million Jews and 8.8 million Palestinians due to the high Palestinian birth rate. Sergio Della Pergola, a demographer at the Hebrew University, noted that even using the lowest possible credible estimates for the Palestinian population in the occupied territories, the trends are “incontestable” : Within a few years Palestinians will form a clear majority.

Israeli planners and government officials have been engaged in all sorts of contortions to redraw the lines of Jerusalem proper to grab as much land with as few Arabs as possible to address this demographic challenge.    EastJerusalemMap

Chapter Three, It Could Happen Here is a chilling warning. Many might turn away and prefer not to look, just as many Germans did in the 1930s. Israeli Professor Zeev Sternhell, a world specialist on fascism, who headed the Dept. of Political Science at Hebrew University, puts it best in his op-ed in Haaretz on January 19, 2018. “In Israel, Growing Fascism and a Racism Akin to Early Nazism“.  In the very same issue, Jeff Halper, an Israeli-American Jew, shares his opinion.  “The ‘Two-state Solution’ Only Ever Meant a Big Israel Ruling Over a Palestinian Bantustan. Let It Go.”

Chapter Four, A United, Democratic State in Palestine-Israel sketches out with broad strokes what a One State might look like, reminding the reader that this isn’t the first time in world history where different ethnic and religious communities came together as one. In fact, the idea isn’t even a new one for the Zionists and Palestinians. And Belgium offers some lessons.

Chapter Five, Learning from South Africa provides some comparisons between Israel-Palestine and apartheid South Africa. Israelis today will bristle at the mention of the two in the same breadth, but there’s no denying the similarities.  Although South Africa still has a long way to go, they have already come far in dismantling the apartheid regime that priviledged the white Afrikaners and treated the black Africans as subhuman.  What did it take for the Afrikaners to give up power? What will it take to get the Zionists to give up their power? Abunimah says the whites were able to dismount without being devoured because the ANC was ready with a vision that allowed them to do so. The Palestinians must begin providing a vision of one country with equal rights for all — Jews and Palestinians.

Living in what amounts to a self-contained moral universe in which the victors are the permanent victims and the “others” are invisible except as a threat allows Israel — as with apartheid South Africa — to justify to itself almost any measure.

Chapter Six, Israelis and Palestinians Thinking the Unthinkable 

Meron Benvenisti, an Israeli geographer and former deputy mayor of Jerusalem, predicted more than twenty years ago that eventually Israel would be faced with the choice between extremist solutions to maintain its exclusivist “Jewish character” or binationalism.

Palestinians do not have the political or material strength to stop the settlements and walls that have rendered a two-state solution unworkable. But Israel’s might is useless in a struggle that is not about winning territory but securing democratic rights for all.

The PLO and its older leadership never appreciated the need to build international support; they were/are more concerned about statecraft and setting up embassies in foreign countries, and gaining recognition in the halls of power. But the younger Palestinians, both in Palestine and the diaspora, aren’t waiting. They are eagerly building the international connections and solidarity with people around the globe. That might explain why the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is spreading so rapidly, and why Israel is responding so harshly to BDS supporters.

Ali Abunimah’s book might have been ahead of its time, but it’s very important reading right now, today. I highly recommend it.





1 Comment

Filed under Book Review, People, Uncategorized

Operation Cast Lead Nine Years Later

Today, December 27, 2017, is the ninth anniversary of Israel’s attack on Gaza. Operation Cast Lead was the first of three wars that Israel has initiated by choice. The two million Palestinian civilians in Gaza have no choice. Now Israeli officials are talking about a fourth “operation”.  Maybe the clinical terms help mask the inhumanity of this country and this illegal occupation, but the international community has awoken to Israel’s war crimes.  All eyes are on Gaza.

Some of my earlier blog posts about Operation Cast Lead.

The first moments of Operation Cast Lead (video).

Timing of Operation Cast Lead.

December 27, 2008 — A date to remember.

Getting the word out.

Killing the al-Samouni family – January 4, 2009.

White phosphorus rains on Gaza.

Israeli soldiers speak out (video).

America’s role in Operation Cast Lead.

This time we went too far.

9/11 and 12/27 – We will never forget.

Writing is resistance.





Filed under Gaza, Hamas, IDF, Israel, Israel Defense Forces, Uncategorized, Video

Israel has crossed the red line – no longer the lawful occupant of the Palestinian Territories

When is enough, enough under international law?


Special Rapporteur S. Michael Lynk

That’s the question that the UN rapporteur for human rights in the occupied territories, S. Michael Lynk, asked and answered in his report to the U.N. General Assembly in October 2017.

Lynk is a Canadian professor of law and human rights expert. His words should carry some umpf! in the international community, if not with Israeli officials who have persistently refused to accept more than 40 UN resolutions over the past half century pertaining to the occupied territories.

To summarize this 22 page report, which should be required reading for everyone interested in the future of Israel and Palestine, Professor Lynk is opening a new (legal) chapter in Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.

He is making the case for recognizing Israel as an illegal occupier, and calling on the international community to use all of the tools in its toolbox to end this illegal occupation.

Israel denies that it’s occupying Palestine, despite the contrary opinion of the rest of the world. (Israeli deputy foreign minister denies Palestinians live under occupation: ‘This is Judea and Samaria’)

Loss of Land

“The Israeli occupation has become a legal and humanitarian oxymoron: an occupation without end,” Professor Lynk writes. It is the longest-running military occupation in the modern world.

The inability to end the Israeli occupation has been an abject failure of international diplomacy, a darkening stain on the efficacy of international law and the source of multiple broken promises to the Palestinian people. Nor does the prolongation of this occupation serve the people of Israel, for it corrodes their society and their public institutions by entangling them in their government’s drive to foreclose a viable and just solution to the half-century of occupation and the century-long conflict, and makes them the benefactors — unwittingly or not — of a profoundly unequal and unjust relationship.

How should we characterize this occupation in 2017? Professor Lynk proposes that Israel is no longer the lawful occupant of the Palestinian territory, but has now crossed a red line and has become the unlawful occupier. His argument goes like this:

  1. “Two decades into the 21st century, the norm that guides our global community is that people are citizens, not subjects, of the state that rules them. … Colonialism, occupation and other forms of alien rule are very much the exception to this norm.”
  2. The right of self-determination, and economic, social and cultural rights — are to be interpreted broadly, while the exceptions to these fundamental rights — such as military necessity, significant threats to national security or public emergencies — are to be interpreted narrowly.
  3. Three core purposes of modern international humanitarian law related to foreign military occupation are: (a) closely regulate the occupation to ensure that the territory achieves, or is restored to, a state of sovereignty, (b) prevent the territory from becoming a fruit of conquest, and (c) safeguard the protected people under occupation.
  4. The International Court of Justice has affirmed that international human rights law continues to apply in times of conflict and throughout an occupation.
  5. The right to self-determination is a right that applies to everyone living under occupation, and the court has specifically recognized the right of the Palestinians to self-determination.
  6. Israel has occupied the Palestinian territory – the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza – since June 1967, and therefore the Fourth Geneva Convention applies in full. 
  7. Palestinians are “protected persons” under international humanitarian law and are entitled to the protections of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The international community has widely rejected Israel’s assertions that the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply.

So what should the international community do?

Professor Lynk proposes that the U.N. General Assembly seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the question of the legality of the occupation.


International Court of Justice

Courts and lawyers favor tradition and precedent (stare decisis), and Professor Lynk finds ample precedent in the ICJ’s 1971 Namibia opinion, where the court decided that South Africa’s continued presence in the territory of Namibia was illegal.  (On a side note, I’ve just completed a couple of online courses in International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, and really appreciate how Professor Lynk’s report connects all of the dots that I’ve just learned.)

Application of the Legality Test to Israel’s Occupation

The ICJ should consider four elements, Professor Lynk writes, to determine if Israel is now an illegal occupying force.

  1. The prohibition against annexation: Israeli officials have made their intentions crystal clear. There are now 210,000 Israeli settlers living in occupied East Jerusalem, and another 400,000 settlers live in approximately 225 settlements in the occupied West Bank. Israel has been establishing its “facts on the ground” for a de facto annexation of the occupied lands that belong to the Palestinian people under international law. “The settlers live under Israeli law in Israeli-only settlements, drive on an Israeli-only road system, and benefit greatly from the enormous sums of public money spent by Israel on entrenching and expanding the settlements. … What country would invest so heavily over so many years to establish many immutable facts on the ground in an occupied territory if it did not intend to remain permanently?”
  2. Occupations must be temporary, and not indefinite or permanent. “Modern occupations that have broadly adhered to the strict principles concerning temporariness, non-annexation, trusteeship and good faith have not exceed 10 years, including the American occupation of Japan, the Allied occupation of western Germany and the American-led coalition’s occupation of Iraq.” Israel’s occupation is 50 years old. “The only credible explanation for Israel’s continuation of the occupation and its thickening of the settlement regime is to enshrine its sovereign claim over part or all of the Palestinian territory, a colonial ambition par excellence.”
  3. The Best Interest/Trust Principle. “Under international law, Israel is required to administer the occupied Palestinian territory in the best interests of the Palestinian people, but the social and economic impact of the occupation on the Palestinians in the occupied territory, which had always been disadvantageous, has become increasingly dire in recent years.” Professor Lynk’s report spells out in no uncertain terms how Israel has taken advantage of the natural resources, and ruled the Palestinian Territory as an internal colony, to create a “strangled economy, mounting impoverishmet, daily impositions and indignities, and receding hope for a reversal of fortune in the foreseeable future.”
  4. Good Faith. Professor Lynk says that Israel has not been acting in good faith because it hasn’t complied with the 3 elements above, and it hasn’t complied with specific directions issued by the United Nations pertaining to the occupation. The enumeration of Israel’s noncompliance with international law is damning and shocking when it’s all spelled out in one place. Israel (and it’s best friend the United States Congress) might argue that the United Nations is bias against Israel, but what Israel really means is that the community of nations has not accepted Israel’s blatant attempt to unilaterally rewrite international law to suit its own self-interest.

Israeli checkpoint for Palestinians posted by Husam Jubran on Facebook Nov. 2, 2017

Professor Lynk’s concluding observation is an alarm bell that every lawyer should take seriously, regardless of personal opinions about Israel / Palestine and the occupation.

International law is the promise that states make to one another, and to their people, that rights will be respected, protections will be honoured, agreements and obligations will be satisfied, and peace and justice will be pursued. It is a tribute to the international community that it has sustained this vision of international law throughout its supervision of Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory.

But it is no tribute that — as the occupation deepened, as the occupier’s intentions became crystal clear, and as its defiance grew — the international community recoiled from answering Israel’s splintering of the Palestinian territory and disfiguring of the laws of occupation with the robust tools that international law and diplomacy provide. International law, along with the peoples of Palestine and Israel, have all suffered in the process.

The challenge now facing the international community … is to devise and employ the appropriate diplomatic and legal steps that, measure by measure, would completely and fully end the occupation.




Filed under Occupation, People, United Nations, Video