Isaeli settlements in the west bank are NOT "illegal under international law"

|
1/22/2010 8:02:00 AM
Hey guys. Just wanting to get a little conversation started.
We've been over all this before, so I'm sure we all agree.
It's sometimes argued that Israeli settlements 'contravene international law'.
This is shorthand for 2 things:
1) UNSC resolution 242 states that "Israel must withdraw from 'territories' captured in the recent hostility" (emphasis mine)
and
2) The 4th Geneva Convention prohibits an 'occupying power' from transferring it's population into the occupied territories in an effort to change the demographic make up of the territories.
So, real quick, because I know we all pretty much agree, Israeli settlement activity, while perhaps contrary to peace, doesn't contravene either of the above documents.
1) UNSCR 242 doesn't specify which territories Israel must withdraw from (it intentionally doesn't say "the territories" or "all the territories" as was originally tabled, but is left as "territories" as to leave some room to negotiate the final border.
2) Israel isn't an 'occupying power' as defined by the Geneva Conventions, because the previous universally recognized sovereign of the territory (the Ottoman Empire) no longer exists.
I'm sure everyone agrees, so not much to talk about really, I just thought I'd throw that out there.
cya!
|

|
2/5/2010 5:33:00 PM
|

|
2/5/2010 5:35:00 PM
lol ----- wrong valuum, see^, the site's thriving
|

|
8/18/2010 9:12:00 AM
Yes you are right OP. As well, their are some of the territories that had been Israel's before she was attacked in 1948, so she took them back in 1967.
The issue is that the Paliistinean leaders just don't want peace.
|

|
8/21/2010 10:55:00 PM
zzz
|