Illegal Military Occupation

This Law has opened in a separate window so that you can study it simultaneously with other documents.
To search for a word, use the "find" function in the Edit Menu at the top of your browser.
To close or minimalize this page, click in the appropriate box in the upper right corner.

Israeli Violations of International Law - (6) The current Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal. Military actions and occupations are considered legal only if they are based on self-defense (as Israel claims), but it is now clear that Israel's occupation is illegal because Israeli implementation of it clearly is about (1) acquisition of land by force, (2) economic exploitation of the occupied communities (both violations of international law), (3) through unwarranted self-serving alterations of local law (also a violation of international law), and (4) in violation of human rights through the practice of collective punishment and (5) the creation of "de facto" annexation also benefitting Israel and at the expense of the local population .

ISRAELI VIOLATION: HISTORY & THEORY

Israel claims that its occupation of adjacent Palestinian lands is only temporary, and only for the sake of securing peace and security for itself in the face of the overt hostility that surrounds it. This claim is legal and represents the right of all nations and peoples to defend themselves.

The problem is that Israel's actions and laws and internal political messaging to its own people suggest completely different intentions behind its occupation - intentions which would actually make their occupation of Palestinian lands illegal. And most would agree that government/military action taken, formal laws passed, and internal political messaging describe more accurately the actual intentions of a government versus what it says in international diplomatic circles and to the international press.

Israel's illegal actions in the occupied Palestinian territories are multiple beginning with (1) the outright annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, (2) the widespread placement of substantial illegal Israeli civilian settlements throughout the occupied territories (3) connected by Israeli-use only roads, and (4) the construction of a wall/fence throughout the West Bank virtually destroying the communities it cuts through or surrounds, both of which create a condition of de facto annexation which significantly interferes with the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination and their human rights, (5) the significant transformation of the local legal system in the territories giving the Israeli settlements special privileges and legally and financially linking them to Israel, and then establishing a separate governing system for the Palestinian population centers which both oppresses them and exploits them thus also violating their human rights and inalienable right of self-determination.

All of the above are in flagrant violation of international law, and does not at all reflect mere self-defense. It is a matter of proportionality (an important legal principle) - that the above is far more than what would be expected as a reasonable, proportional response to the threat that Israel faces from the Palestinian rebellion. In fact, the above is so oppresive and destructive to Palestinian society, that the rebellion would appear to be the reasonable response, although deadly violence against civilians is never acceptable. It is also important to note that all of the above is backed-up by a substantial body of Israeli government law both within Israel as well as within the occupied territories (in the form of Israeli military orders).

And all of this is backed up by political speeches at all levels of government since before the establishment of the State of Israel about how the Jewish people have a biblical right to possess all of "Eretz Israel".

Thus, a military occupation established around goals of annexation of the occupied lands and exploitation of the people who live there, rationalized by religious dogma, and codified in the occupier's own laws, is clearly an illegal occupation.

Please see the section in this website on Israeli Military Orders for more details.

ISRAELI VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Major Legal Principle Violated -
- Military Action and Occupation are Only Legal when They are Purely Defensive.
- 2. Occupation Must Never Lead To Sovereignty over Occupied or Conquered Lands of the Enemy People or Nation.
- 4. The Occupant is Required to not Significantly Change Local Laws Unless Required For Its Own Security Or To Benefit The Local Population.
- 7. The Occupant is Required to Respect the Human Rights of the Native People except where it Significantly Jeopardizes its own Safety.
As Per International Law -
- UN Charter (1945), article 51
- Declaration On Principles Of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations And Co-Operation Among States In Accordance With The Charter Of The United Nations (1970), Principle 1 (full text) (specific article - see below)
- see HERE for Laws pertaining to the illegality of acquisition of land by force, and occupiers not gaining soveriegnty over the lands they occupy;
- see HERE for Laws pertaining to how de facto annexation illegally violates human rights and the right of self-determination;
- see HERE for Laws pertaining to not altering local laws
- see HERE for Laws pertaining to respecting human rights.
International Response -
- United Nations -
- International Miscellaneous response -
- Academic Analysis -

RELEVANT QUOTES FROM TEXT

UN Charter (1945), article 51:

Article 2. The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Article 51. Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Declaration On Principles Of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations And Co-Operation Among States In Accordance With The Charter Of The United Nations (1970), Principle 1:

PRINCIPLE I: The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations

Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a ,threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

A war of aggression constitutes a crime against the peace, for which there is responsibility under international law.

In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression.

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.

States have a duty to refrain from acts of reprisal involving the use of force.

Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands, including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

The territory of a State shall not be the object of military occupation resulting from the use of force in contravention of the provisions of the Charter. The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force. No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal...

REFERENCES

Any comments, suggestions, or questons are most welcomed. Please contact us at [email protected]