Are Jewish settlements in the Palestinian Territories a violation of international law?
General Reference (not clearly pro or con)
The Harvard Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR), in a Jan. 2004 policy brief entitled "The Legal Status of Israeli Settlements Under IHL," contained the following:
"The Israeli government has been engaged for more than 35 years in the
relocation of Israeli nationals to the territories it occupied as a
result of the 1967 war through various programs facilitating,
supporting, encouraging and enabling the establishment of Israeli
settlements in the OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territories]. The legality
of these settlements has been challenged by the other parties to the
conflict...
Israel argues that the Geneva
Conventions are not applicable to the OPT, but that even if they were
applicable, the settlements would not violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
According to the Israeli interpretation, Article 49 does not prohibit
the voluntary transfer of the population from the occupying state to
the occupied territories.
The international community at large and
the Palestine Liberation Organization, on the other hand, hold that
Israeli settlements in the OPT do violate IHL [International
Humanitarian Law], and in particular Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, since Israel's policies of promoting and facilitating the
transfer of population have been instrumental in the creation and
expansion of Israeli settlements in the OPT. In addition, the Hague
Regulations and the Fourth Geneva Convention together prohibit any
transfer of the Occupying Power's population, even voluntary transfers,
that would alter the demographic composition of the occupied
territory..."
Avi Shlaim, PhD, Professor of International Relations at St. Antony's College, Oxford in a Feb. 22, 2002 Guardian editorial titled "A Betrayal of History," wrote:
"The building of settlements in the occupied territories has always
been illegal under international law and an obstacle to peace."
The United Nations resolved in the Mar. 1, 1980 Security Council Resolution 465:
"Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical
character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status
of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967,
including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and
that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population
and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation
of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian
Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to
achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."
The United Nations resolved in the Mar. 22, 1979 Security Council Resolution 446:
"Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing
settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied
since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction
to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle
East."
B'Tselem, the Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, in a document titled "International Law," from Land Expropriation and Settlements, stated (accessed 2005):
"The establishment of settlements on the West Bank violates
international humanitarian law, which establishes the principles
applying during war and occupation. Moreover, the settlements lead to
the infringement of international human rights law.
The
Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the occupying power to transfer
citizens from its own territory to the occupied territory (Article 49).
The Hague Regulations prohibit the occupying power to undertake
permanent changes in the occupied area, unless these are due to
military need in the narrow sense of the term, or unless they are
undertaken for the benefit of the local population."
Dore Gold, PhD, former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, in a Jan. 16, 2002 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs editorial titled "From 'Occupied Territories' to 'Disputed Territories,'" wrote:
"Israel possesses legal rights with respect to the West Bank and Gaza
Strip that appear to be ignored by those international observers who
repeat the term 'occupied territories' without any awareness of Israeli
territorial claims. Even if Israel only seeks 'secure boundaries' that
cover part of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, there is a world of
difference between a situation in which Israel approaches the
international community as a 'foreign occupier' with no territorial
rights, and one in which Israel has strong historical rights to the
land that were recognized by the main bodies serving as the source of
international legitimacy in the previous century."
Eugene W. Rostow, JD, former US Undersecretary of State for political affairs, in an Oct. 21, 1991 New Republic commentary titled "Resolved: Are the Settlements legal? Israeli West Bank Policies," wrote:
"The British Mandate recognized the right of the Jewish people to
'close settlement' in the whole of the Mandated territory. It was
provided that local conditions might require Great Britain to
'postpone' or 'withhold' Jewish settlement in what is now Jordan. This
was done in 1922. But the Jewish right of settlement in Palestine west
of the Jordan river, that is, in Israel, the West Bank, Jerusalem, and
the Gaza Strip, was made unassailable. That right has never been
terminated and cannot be terminated except by a recognized peace
between Israel and its neighbors."
The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), in a 2001 document titled "Israeli Settlements and International Law," takes the following position:
"The settlements themselves are not intended to displace Arab
inhabitants, nor do they do so in practice. Repeated charges regarding
the illegality of Israeli settlements must therefore be regarded as
politically motivated, without foundation in international law...
Politically, the West Bank and Gaza Strip is best regarded as territory
over which there are competing claims which should be resolved in peace
process negotiations."
