To be a violation of the Geneva Convention, one must “annex” the territory of another country.
The West Bank and the Gaza strip were not the territory of another country. They were part of the former Ottoman Empire (which doesn’t exist, except perhaps Turkey) and either no country’s land or Israel’s land, depending on what chain of title one follows.
I would contrast this with the Sinai, which was part of Egypt. And is again part of Egypt after being given back.
You rely on the UN resolution to give rise to the claim that the West Bank and Gaza are part of another country, and thus annexation being a violation of the Geneva Convention.
The State of Israel makes a case for the Convention not applying
the court concludes any terroirty occupied in an armed conflict i.e the land is occupied by Israel.
‘Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,’ 9 July 2004.'Secondly, with regard to the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Court takes note that differing views have been expressed by the participants in these proceedings. Israel, contrary to the great majority of the participants, disputes the applicability de jure of the Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Court recalls that the Fourth Geneva Convention was ratified by Israel on 6 July 1951 and that Israel is a party to that Convention; that Jordan has also been a party thereto since 29 May 1951; and that neither of the two States has made any reservation that would be pertinent to the present proceedings. The Court observes that the Israeli authorities have indicated on a number of occasions that in fact they generally apply the humanitarian provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention within the occupied territories. However, according to Israel’s position, that Convention is not applicable de jure within those territories because, under Article 2, paragraph 2, it applies only in the case of occupation of territories falling under the sovereignty of a High Contracting Party involved in an armed conflict.
Israel explains that the territories occupied by Israel subsequent to the 1967 conflict had not previously fallen under Jordanian sovereignty. The Court notes that, according to the first paragraph of Article 2 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, when two conditions are fulfilled, namely that there exists an armed conflict (whether or not a state of war has been recognized), and that the conflict has arisen between two contracting parties, then the Convention applies, in particular, in any territory occupied in the course of the conflict by one of the contracting parties. The object of the second paragraph of Article 2, which refers to “occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party”, is not to restrict the scope of application of the Convention, as defined by the first paragraph, by excluding therefrom territories not falling under the sovereignty of one of the contracting parties, but simply to making it clear that, even if occupation effected during the conflict met no armed resistance, the Convention is still applicable.
The World Court opinion was an “advisory opinion” without all litigants being fully represented and without any binding effect.
As an aside, even the UN resolution at order doesn’t apply to the Arabs in Judea and Samaria. The parties involved were Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Israel. With the exception of Syria (who still complains about the Golan, or, rather complained now that it has fallen apart and its citizens rely on Israel for shelter provided by Israeli arms), the matter is resolved among the parties. To put that in contract terms, the Arabs in Judea and Samaria can no more seek to enforce that UN resolution as I can seek to enforce your mortgage. I’m not your bank.
People like to cite from the Preamble, which is loser, but it is non-binding and has no operative effect.
In sum: even if one counts the UN and the World Court as relevant, the things they cite are not.
That is not the opinion of the international court, or of the EU, or of every US administration since 1967.
The Israeli govt itself initially recognized that it was in violation of IV GC:
“Soon after the 1967 war, Israel issued a military order stating that the Geneva Conventions applied to the recently occupied territories, but this order was rescinded a few months later.”
The majority of the ICC ruled that resolutions are legally binding in Namibia . It is also a no binding advisory opinion but it does show the court intention. I had forgotten a lot of this to be honest . I understand most commentators including De Wet disagree.
“In the Report on the Legal Status of Building in Judea and Samaria, usually referred to as Levy Report, published in July 2012, a three-member committee headed by former Israeli Supreme Court justice Edmund Levy which was appointed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu comes to the conclusion that Israel’s presence in the West Bank is not an occupation in the legal sense,[87] and that the Israeli settlements in those territories do not contravene international law”
"In the cases before the Israeli High Court of Justice the government has agreed that the military commander’s authority is anchored in the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, and that the humanitarian rules of the Fourth Geneva Convention apply. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs says that the Supreme Court of Israel has ruled that the Fourth Geneva Convention and certain parts of Additional Protocol I reflect customary international law that is applicable in the occupied territories. Gershom Gorenberg has written that the Israeli government knew at the outset that it was violating the Geneva Convention by creating civilian settlements in the territories under IDF administration. He explained that as the legal counsel of the Foreign Ministry, Theodor Meron was the Israeli government’s expert on international law. On September 16, 1967 Meron wrote a top secret memo to Mr. Adi Yafeh, Political Secretary of the Prime Minister regarding “Settlement in the Administered Territories” which said “My conclusion is that civilian settlement in the Administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention.” Moshe Dayan authored a secret memo in 1968 proposing massive settlement in the territories which said “Settling Israelis in administered territory, as is known, contravenes international conventions, but there is nothing essentially new about that.”
Clearly, it was obvious early on to the Israelis that what they were doing was in violation of international norms, including GC IV.
As for the quote you cite:
“[…] a three-member committee headed by former Israeli Supreme Court justice Edmund Levy which was appointed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu comes to the conclusion that Israel’s presence in the West Bank is not an occupation in the legal sense, and that the Israeli settlements in those territories do not contravene international law” [emphasis mine]
It is not surprising that a committee appointed by Netanyahu has reached this conclusion, and does little (IMO) to offset conclusions to the contrary reached by more objective observers.
On a side note, I cannot recommend highly enough Gorenberg’s book “The Unmaking of Israel” in which he clearly explains the corrosive effect of settlement development on the Israeli society.
Where is Geneva when the people of Israel are subjected day after day, month after month, year after year to the random attacks on Israel, not because they are Israel, not because they are there but because they are Jews.? Where is NATO when Jews are murdered in cold blood from terrorist attacks leveled by the Palestinians? Where is international law to protect the rockets, bombs, kidnappings, suicide attacks constantly that Israel has to live with day after day? Why? Simply because they are Jews.
Israel, and a small pocket of Americans are the only ones who see this issue clearly. Israel isn’t being attacked for any other reason bot because they are Jewish. I won’t stand by and let this happen without calling a spade a spade.
The only thing preventing peace between Israel and it’s neighbors is antisemitism. Israel gets it, most Jews get it and I get it. I would cut my foreskin tomorrow, in solidarity, if it would make a difference. Most of the world hates Jews and that’s bullshit I will stare down anytime any place.
The UN, NATO, Geneva are a bunch of raving antisemites, nothing more.
Thousands of pages of “resolutions”…and no one…I mean NO one points out this most basic of facts, because it is easier to always place the blame on the Jews.
Not disputing there is some anit-semitism but there are many more Palestinan deaths .
Israelis and Palestinians Killed
in the Current Violence
At least 1,211 Israelis and 9,454 Palestinians
have been killed since September 29, 2000.
Hover over each bar for exact numbers. Save chart as image.
American news reports repeatedly describe Israeli military attacks against the Palestinian population as “retaliation.” However, when one looks into the chronology of death in this conflict, the reality turns out to be quite different.
Source: B’Tselem, The Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. (Visit their statistics page, last updated November 30, 2016.) We refer to IMEMC and other Palestinian news outlets for deaths that have not yet been recorded by B’Tselem.
To see names, photos and more information for the Israeli and Palestinian victims of this conflict, please visit our new website Israel-Palestine Timeline.
See also the UN OCHA report that records the 2,220 victims (67% of them civilians) of Israel’s summer 2014 massacre in Gaza. 71 Israelis were killed during the same period (9% of them civilians).
The numbers in this chart include civilians and combatants killed by members of the opposing nationality (and therefore, do not include Palestinians killed by an explosive device that they set or was on their person, Israelis killed in ‘friendly fire’ incidents, etc.). The numbers also do not include the sizable number of Palestinians who died as a result of inability to reach medical care due to Israeli road closures, curfews, the Israeli closure of border crossing from Gaza, etc.
The figure for Palestinian deaths is extremely conservative, since it is difficult for B’Tselem to report on deaths in the Palestinian territories. The Palestine Red Crescent Society, internationally respected for its statistical rigor, reports significantly higher numbers of Palestinian deaths. We do not doubt the reliability of their data, and only use B’Tselem’s more conservative numbers because they collect data on both populations.
In the past we used the statistics provided by Israel’s military for the number of Israelis killed, but they have not updated their statistics page since early in 2006. In addition, there is reason to believe that their numbers may have been somewhat inflated.
Breakdown of Deaths
Israelis
Palestinians
Children Killed
(More on the impact on children.)
129
Remember These Children
1,523
Remember These Children
Civilians* Killed
731
B’Tselem
3,535 - 4,226
B’Tselem
People killed in the course of a targeted killing
1
408 or more
B’Tselem
People who were the object of a targeted killing
1
238
B’Tselem
People killed on own land
596 (53.8%)
B’Tselem
6,756 (98.9%)
B’Tselem
People killed on others’ land
508 (46.2%)
B’Tselem
73 (1.1%)
B’Tselem
The Palestinian people do not have a military, so the usual classification of civilian is not being used. Instead B’Tselem provides data on the number of Palestinians who did not participate in hostilities, a significantly more stringent qualification than the one used to identify Israeli civilians. We do not know how many of the Israelis listed as civilians participated in the hostilities. Many settlers who illegally have taken over parts of the West Bank (and used to live in parts of the Gaza Strip) are heavily armed and there have been numerous reports of their brutal attacks on their Palestinian neighbors.
Causes of Deaths of Israeli Soldiers
2005
Committed Suicide
30
Illness
14
Accidents
26
Terror Incidents
6
Source: Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv, Oct. 10, 2005, p. 6.
Note: The paper also reported that since 1992, 459 Israeli soldiers have committed suicide.
I think this thread has come to its end now, it went from a moderately constructive discussion to the whole world is against the joos and everyone hates the joos which basically leaves no more discussion to be had.
Calm down and look at the realities of the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Put you moral outrage aside and try to look at it objectively. David Ben Gurion famously said that if he was Palestinian he’d be doing the same thing the Palestinians were doing. A history of Jewish terrorism during the Mandate years (King David Hotel bombing, Stern gang, Irgun…) shows that, if the situation was reversed, the Israelis would at least to a degree follow the Palestine modus operandi.
The 1948 war was a “us-vs-them” moment in which the future of the Palestine was to be settled. If the Jews lost, they’d be driven out into the sea, much like Greeks in Asia Minor two and half decades earlier. The Arab countries lost to a numerically inferior, under equipped but better led and much more motivated foe, despite having for example the (then) formidable Glubb’s Arab Legion. One side wins, the other loses - and hence the 700k Palestine refugees and the subsequent perception of the loss as The Catastrophe by the Palestinian Arabs.
Nothing special here actually, ethnic religious groups have clashed before (and after) in such high stakes conflicts where one side emerged victorious and the other side was utterly defeated with accompanying expulsion of the loser’s population - Balkan wars, the French retreat from Algeria, Greco-Turkish war…just a few similar conflicts a few decades earlier or later…
The difference, expect the obvious implications of a territory considered sacred by the Abrahamic religions, is that the Palestinians made many wrong choices afterwards, naturally including resorting to terrorism -among others, believing idle boasts by Arab leaders that the “Jews could be driven into the sea” and that they could extract their revenge on Israel. This in turn led to geopolitical miscalculations, several more defeats in conventional wars and here comes the cul-de-sac in which the Palestinians find themselves now.
As I said before, no matter how you look at it, Palestinians are fucked. Currently, those in “Palestinian territories” are living in squalid, mutually separated enclaves in the West Bank and the world biggest ghetto in Gaza. Their “territory” is teeming with people, the economy (or what exists of it) is in shambles, the Palestinian authority is spectacularly corrupt… There are no job prospects, no freedom of movement and there’s an ever present creeping land appropriation by Israeli settlers and the military. So in a nutshell, they’re fucked. And Jordan and Egypt are anxious to keep them away from their respective national territories as well (see Egypt-Gaza border).
What do they have to gain by accepting a peace deal? “You know…you get more of the same… these overflowing ghettos without a functioning economy…but now they’re called a Palestine state”. For generations pf Palestinians raised on stories about “martyrs” that defined their identity that’s not exactly an enticing prospect.
Who is “…We…” ?? Do the Palestinians not live in a tough neighbourhood? Am I missing something here?
Like I said, when someone comes out with [quote=“pat, post:150, topic:226353”]
The UN, NATO, Geneva are a bunch of raving antisemites, nothing more.
[/quote]
and intelligent people like yourself agree then unfortunately there is no discussion to be had.
I wanted to make something clear from a personal standpoint.
Because I am “Pro-Israel” does not, by default, make me “Anti-Palestinian”. (I would venture to say that Pat, JB and others feel the same way).
In many ways (In my opinion) the Palestinian’s are pawn’s in a terrible geopolitical game…and Israel is a convenient fall-guy.
With all of the gaudy riches on the Middle-East (like covered and air-conditioned ski-runs in the Middle of the Desert; and extravagant Royal Spending in almost every Capital in the World); I think that if people really cared;and they had a true desire to work with Israel and not against her; much of the Palestinians suffering could be assuaged.