Diana Buttu, a lawyer and former adviser to the negotiating team of the Palestine Liberation Organization, is a DAWN fellow.
I felt mixed emotions watching Judge Nawaf Salam, the president of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, read out the court's advisory opinion on Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory last week. On the one hand, like countless Palestinians, I finally felt seen, because a majority of the court's 15 judges recognized what we Palestinians always have understood: that Israel's occupation is neither temporary nor benign, but rather a cruel, permanent and, of course, illegal catastrophe. At the same time, however, I felt anger toward those who for decades have gaslit Palestinians mercilessly—amplifying Israel's ceaseless deceptions about its occupation, dismissing and diminishing us, and failing to act to halt the suffering Israel inflicts, while, without batting an eye, demanding Palestinians not only accept but embrace Israel's superiority and our inferiority.
Why did it need to go this far? Why was an ICJ opinion even necessary?
Beyond my personal feelings, the ICJ unequivocally opined on the core issues of Israel's 57-year-old occupation. The U.N.'s highest court ruled that the occupation is clearly is illegal; that all of Israel's settlements are illegal and must be dismantled and settlers removed; that Gaza, of course, remains occupied under international law despite Israel's evacuation of settlements in 2005; and that Israel's claims of "self-defense" are empty while it is perpetrating a brutal military occupation.
A majority of the court's 15 judges recognized what we Palestinians always have understood: that Israel's occupation is neither temporary nor benign, but rather a cruel, permanent and illegal catastrophe.
- Diana Buttu
All of the court's meticulously reasoned conclusions are important, particularly given that Israel has toiled for decades trying to perpetuate legal myths about its occupation, all while seizing more and more Palestinian land. A key myth that Israel—and its Western backers—peddled for decades is that there is a "land dispute" between Israel and Palestinians with "competing claims" from both sides over the territory Israel occupied militarily following the war in 1967. This mythology spawned the political position, led by the United States, that negotiations are the only path forward. Indeed, legal submissions to the ICJ on Israel's behalf by the U.S., Canada and other countries make clear that, even now, they continue to demand that Palestinians and Israelis simply "negotiate" an end to Israel's illegal occupation and continuous, accelerating theft of Palestinian territory. Embedded in these craven positions is that there is no power inequality between Israelis and Palestinians, nor any legal bases requiring Israel to end its occupation fully and promptly.
In other words, the obvious context of military occupation—of occupier and occupied—and everything it entails under international law has been willfully ignored in favor of a lopsided and ultimately meaningless "peace process." It is power over law.
At the same time, for more than three decades, these same Western countries periodically have issued mealy-mouthed statements declaring Israeli settlements "unhelpful" and urging "both sides" not to undertake actions that would undermine the vanishing "two-state solution." And yet, while issuing these empty declarations, themselves unhelpful, these states—the U.S. most of all—have continued to treat Israel as a "normal" country, and not as the rogue state that its prolonged and illegal occupation reveals. Rather than sanction Israel as it methodically destroys Palestinian land and lives in plain sight, the U.S. and others have defended it and showered it with countless rewards, including endless weapons transfers and free trade agreements.
The ICJ opinion shows that the signing of the Oslo Accords more than 30 years ago did not produce Israel's intended effect, which was to extinguish Palestinian rights. Oslo's deception was to entrench Israel's occupation and confine Palestinians to Bantustans, under the illusion of a peace process. But those negotiations did not, and do not, supersede Palestinian rights. As the court has outlined, a clear legal framework exists that Israel must abide by—and which also must be upheld and enforced by the international community.
This, of course, flies directly in the face of the abject lack of accountability Israel has grown accustomed to over the decades. Israel has never paid a price—financially, politically or otherwise—for its long and illegal military occupation. During years of farcical negotiations, Palestinians were told that we must make "concessions" and forfeit our land to accommodate the presence of illegal Israeli settlements and settlers. Objection to the permanent presence of Israeli settlers was characterized as "unhelpful" recalcitrance, for which Palestinians were sternly chastised. Meanwhile, Palestinian resistance to Israel's military occupation is routinely denounced by the world, while Israel conveniently hides behind bogus claims of self-defense, parroted by its loyal Western backers, all while moving openly to annex our stolen land.
The ICJ decision is an even harsher indictment of the Western powers that have allowed a brutal, illegal occupation and land heist to take place, while fatuously claiming to seek "peace."
- Diana Buttu
This ICJ decision demonstrates precisely what Palestinians have said for decades. Despite Israeli slogans like a "generous offer," Palestinian territory is not, and never will be, legitimately Israel's in the first place, and so it is not up to Israel to decide its fate. The court also reveals—unequivocally, authoritatively and no matter how belatedly—that Israel turned the law (and logic) on its head by demanding peace and Palestinian acquiescence while brazenly stealing our land.
For its part, Israel undoubtedly will ignore the ICJ ruling. Indeed, a broad constellation of Israeli leaders and politicians already have confirmed as much. They do not plan to dismantle the settlements or evacuate the more than 700,000 settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem; in the West Bank now, Israeli settlers make up nearly one quarter of the population. (There were about 250,000 settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem when the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, if there was any doubt about Oslo's impact on Israel's settlement enterprise.)
Israeli leaders have also made clear they do no plan to return stolen land to Palestinians or allow nearly 450,000 Palestinians displaced by Israel in 1967 and its aftermath to return to their homes. Israel will not reverse its home demolitions, forcible displacement, or theft of water and other resource on Palestinian territory. The state will never crack down on Israeli settlers who, in cahoots with every successive Israeli government since 1967, have inflicted constant terror on Palestinians without any consequence.
None of this will happen—unless the world finally imposes tangible costs and consequences on Israel. The occupation will only end when Israel decides to end it, whether for costly internal or external reasons. It won't come as a result of an Israeli "awakening" or hand-wringing statements toothlessly declaring Israeli actions "unhelpful."
The ICJ decision is on its face a scathing condemnation of Israel and its policies. But beneath the surface, it is an even harsher indictment of the Western powers that for nearly 60 years have allowed a brutal, illegal occupation and land heist to take place, while fatuously claiming to seek "peace." This ruling in The Hague should serve to liberate countries, perhaps in Europe most of all, from any misguided notion they may have harbored that Israel's position, supported by the U.S., can be justified or that it holds any plausible legal or moral validity.
