Over on Twitter, user @Optimist_Gaza issued a challenge to his followers: list five examples of supposed international laws that Israel’s critics have invented to apply to the country. This challenge highlights a common misconception about Israel and its actions in the international community – that it is constantly being held to unfair and made-up standards.
Let’s take a closer look at this claim and examine whether there is any truth to it.
First and foremost, it is important to understand what international law is. International law is a set of rules and principles that govern the relations between states and other international actors. These rules are based on treaties, customary practices, and general principles of law. They are developed and enforced by international organizations such as the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
With this definition in mind, it becomes clear that international law is not something that can be invented or made up by anyone. It is a well-established and respected body of law that applies to all states, including Israel.
So why do some accuse Israel’s critics of inventing laws to apply to the country? One reason is that Israel’s actions have often been met with criticism and condemnation from the international community. This has led some to believe that the country is being unfairly targeted and held to higher standards than other states.
However, this is not the case. Israel, like any other state, is bound by international law and must adhere to its principles and obligations. When Israel’s actions are deemed to be in violation of international law, it is not because a new law has been invented, but rather because Israel has failed to comply with existing laws and norms.
Let’s now address the five examples of supposed international laws that Israel’s critics have allegedly invented.
1. The right of return for Palestinian refugees
One of the most contentious issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Israel’s critics argue that these refugees have a right to return to their homes and properties that were lost during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. They claim that this right is enshrined in international law.
While there is no specific international law that grants individuals the right to return to their former homes, there are principles of international law that protect the rights of refugees. These include the right to seek asylum and the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits states from returning refugees to a country where their life or freedom would be at risk.
In the case of Palestinian refugees, their right of return is based on UN General Assembly Resolution 194, which calls for their return and compensation for those who choose not to return. This resolution is not legally binding, but it does reflect the international community’s stance on the issue.
2. The illegality of Israeli settlements in the West Bank
Another example often cited by Israel’s critics is the supposed invention of the illegality of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. They argue that this is not a recognized principle of international law and is being used to unfairly condemn Israel’s actions.
However, the illegality of settlements in occupied territory is well-established in international law. The Fourth Geneva Convention, which governs the treatment of civilians in times of war, prohibits an occupying power from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory. This has been reaffirmed by multiple UN resolutions and the International Court of Justice.
3. The right to self-determination for Palestinians
Israel’s critics also claim that the right to self-determination for Palestinians is a made-up concept that is being used to delegitimize Israel’s existence. They argue that there is no such right for Palestinians and that it is a recent invention.
However, the right to self-determination is a fundamental principle of international law and is recognized in the UN Charter. It grants all peoples the right to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. This includes the Palestinian people, who have been living under occupation for decades.
4. The applicability of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to Israel
The ICC is an international tribunal that has the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Israel’s critics argue that the ICC’s jurisdiction does not extend to Israel and that it is being used as a political tool to target the country.
However, the ICC’s jurisdiction is based on the principle of complementarity, which allows the court to intervene when a state is unable or unwilling to prosecute individuals for international crimes. Israel is not a party to the