US Urges UN Court Not to Order Israel Out of Palestinian Lands
UNITED NATIONS, 26 Feb 2024
Richard Carter, AFP | Digital Journal – TRANSCEND Media Service
Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki has urged the judges to call for an immediate and unconditional end to the occupation.
Copyright AFP Narinder NANU
21 Feb 2024 – The United States told the UN’s top court today that Israel should not be legally forced to withdraw from occupied Palestinian territory without security guarantees.
The International Court of Justice is holding a week of hearings after a request from the United Nations, with an unprecedented 52 countries giving their views on Israel’s occupation.
Most speakers have demanded that Israel end its occupation, which came after a six-day Arab-Israeli war in 1967, but Washington came to its ally’s defence at the court.
“The court should not find that Israel is legally obligated to immediately and unconditionally withdraw from occupied territory,” said Richard Visek, legal advisor at the US State Department.
“Any movement towards Israel withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza requires consideration of Israel’s very real security needs,” he argued.
“We were all reminded of those security needs on October 7,” he said, referring to the Hamas attacks that sparked the current conflict.
The UN has asked the ICJ to hand down an “advisory opinion” on the “legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”.
The court will probably deliver its opinion before the end of the year, but it is not binding on anyone.
Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki told reporters after the US statement: “I expected much more. I didn’t hear anything new.”
Washington has been insisting that the Israel-Palestinian conflict be addressed in “other fora and not here”, Al-Maliki said.
“Well, we tried other fora for the last 75 years and we confronted the US veto and the US hegemony over decision-making processes within the UN system,” he said.
“And that’s why we came to the ICJ.”
– ‘No peace’ –
Israel is not taking part in the oral hearings, but submitted a written contribution in which it described the questions the court had been asked as “prejudicial” and “tendentious”.
The October 7 attacks and the ongoing violence in the Gaza Strip “reinforce the United States’ resolve to urgently achieve a final peace”, Visek said.
Also speaking Wednesday, the representative from Egypt, which has played a key role in talks between Israel and the Palestinians, said the occupation was “a continued violation of international law”.
“The consequences of Israel’s prolonged occupation are clear and there can be no peace, no stability, no prosperity without upholding the rule of law,” foreign ministry legal advisor Jasmine Moussa said.
The hearings began Monday with three hours of testimony from Palestinian officials, who accused the Israeli occupiers of running a system of “colonialism and apartheid”.
Al-Maliki had urged the judges to call for an end to the occupation “immediately, totally and unconditionally”.
South Africa’s ambassador to the Netherlands told the court that Israel’s policies were “more extreme” than the apartheid black South Africans suffered before 1994.
The case is separate from a high-profile case brought by Pretoria against Israel for alleged genocide during its current offensive in Gaza.
In that case, the ICJ ruled that Israel should do everything in its power to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza and allow in humanitarian aid.
Go to Original – digitaljournal.com
Tags: Colonialism, Crimes against Humanity, Gaza, Genocide, Genocide Convention, International Court of Justice ICJ, Israel, Israeli occupation, Massacre, Palestine, USA, United Nations, War crimes, West Bank
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Join the discussion!
We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.