Does international law require Israel to vacate the disputed territories

[Boston1]

I understand, but its not the topic at hand.

If you read the OP the revsionists are constantly singing about how Israel is illegally occupying palestinian land.

The thread is concerning the revisionists ability to substantiate the claim and show exactly what international laws apply.

If you want discuss some other issue, you are welcome to start a thread concerning it.

I'm a little new here but I have learned how to start a thread. If you need any help again.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I understand, but its not the topic at hand.

If you read the OP the revsionists are constantly singing about how Israel is illegally occupying palestinian land.

The thread is concerning the revisionists ability to substantiate the claim and show exactly what international laws apply.

If you want discuss some other issue, you are welcome to start a thread concerning it.

I'm a little new here but I have learned how to start a thread. If you need any help again.

If you think answering my question in a different thread would be more in line with your OP, be my guest.

 

[Hollie]

Does international law require Israel to vacate the disputed territories?

Not that I could find.

 

[Boston1]

Is it Israel's land or not? If not it is occupied.

started you a new thread and you might be surprised at what you find.

 

[fanger]

The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal under international law,[1][2][3][4][5] howeverIsrael maintains that they are consistent with international law[6] because it does not agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the territories occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War.[7] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, theInternational Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.[8][9]

Numerous UN resolutions have stated that the building and existence of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are a violation of international law, including UN Security Council resolutions in 1979 and 1980.[10][11][12] UN Security Council Resolution 446 refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention as the applicable international legal instrument, and calls upon Israel to desist from transferring its own population into the territories or changing their demographic makeup. The reconvened Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions has declared the settlements illegal[13] as has the primary judicial organ of the UN, the International Court of Justice[14] and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

The position of successive Israeli governments is that all authorized settlements are entirely legal and consistent with international law,[15] despite Israel's armistice agreements having all being with High Contracting Parties.[16] In practice, Israel does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies de jure, but has stated that on humanitarian issues it will govern itself de facto by its provisions, without specifying which these are.[17][18] The majority of legal scholars hold the settlements to violate international law, while others have offered dissenting views supporting the Israeli position.[2]
International law and Israeli settlements - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[fanger]

At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict lies the question of land and who rules it. The collision of Jewish nationalist colonisation and Palestian nationalism, both laying claim to the same territory, forms the basis of this long conflict, deepened by the tragedies of the Holocaust and of the dispossession and occupation of Palestine. The United Nations partition of the land in 1947, an effort to resolve the two claims simultaneously, did not result in a lasting settlement.

Since the war of 1967, Palestinians have come to accept the reality of Israel within the 1948 boundaries. The land dispute has increasingly focused on Israel's occupation of the remaining territories -- the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from these territories. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, but continues to build many Jewish settlements in the other territories, actions deemed illegal by virtually all other states. The Oslo Accords (1993) and the Road Map (2003) have failed to reach a land agreement between the parties or to bring Israeli withdrawal.
Since 2002, the Israeli government has been building a "security fence" that winds deep into Palestinian territory, claiming the barrier would keep Palestinian suicide bombers from striking Israeli citizens. But this separation wall is a major de facto annexation of Palestinian territories. By building the wall and increasing settlement expansion, Israel retains control over important Palestinian economic areas, agricultural grounds and natural resources like water. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel's West Bank barrier violates international law, but the unequal struggle over the land of Palestine continues.
Land and Settlement Issues

 

[montelatici]

At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict lies the question of land and who rules it. The collision of Jewish nationalist colonisation and Palestian nationalism, both laying claim to the same territory, forms the basis of this long conflict, deepened by the tragedies of the Holocaust and of the dispossession and occupation of Palestine. The United Nations partition of the land in 1947, an effort to resolve the two claims simultaneously, did not result in a lasting settlement.

Since the war of 1967, Palestinians have come to accept the reality of Israel within the 1948 boundaries. The land dispute has increasingly focused on Israel's occupation of the remaining territories -- the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from these territories. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, but continues to build many Jewish settlements in the other territories, actions deemed illegal by virtually all other states. The Oslo Accords (1993) and the Road Map (2003) have failed to reach a land agreement between the parties or to bring Israeli withdrawal.
Since 2002, the Israeli government has been building a "security fence" that winds deep into Palestinian territory, claiming the barrier would keep Palestinian suicide bombers from striking Israeli citizens. But this separation wall is a major de facto annexation of Palestinian territories. By building the wall and increasing settlement expansion, Israel retains control over important Palestinian economic areas, agricultural grounds and natural resources like water. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel's West Bank barrier violates international law, but the unequal struggle over the land of Palestine continues.
Land and Settlement Issues

If Israel believes that the Occupied Territories are part of their country, shouldn't the people they rule over in those that part of the country be enfranchised, whatever religion they follow?

 

[Hollie]

At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict lies the question of land and who rules it. The collision of Jewish nationalist colonisation and Palestian nationalism, both laying claim to the same territory, forms the basis of this long conflict, deepened by the tragedies of the Holocaust and of the dispossession and occupation of Palestine. The United Nations partition of the land in 1947, an effort to resolve the two claims simultaneously, did not result in a lasting settlement.

Since the war of 1967, Palestinians have come to accept the reality of Israel within the 1948 boundaries. The land dispute has increasingly focused on Israel's occupation of the remaining territories -- the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from these territories. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, but continues to build many Jewish settlements in the other territories, actions deemed illegal by virtually all other states. The Oslo Accords (1993) and the Road Map (2003) have failed to reach a land agreement between the parties or to bring Israeli withdrawal.
Since 2002, the Israeli government has been building a "security fence" that winds deep into Palestinian territory, claiming the barrier would keep Palestinian suicide bombers from striking Israeli citizens. But this separation wall is a major de facto annexation of Palestinian territories. By building the wall and increasing settlement expansion, Israel retains control over important Palestinian economic areas, agricultural grounds and natural resources like water. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel's West Bank barrier violates international law, but the unequal struggle over the land of Palestine continues.
Land and Settlement Issues

If Israel believes that the Occupied Territories are part of their country, shouldn't the people they rule over in those that part of the country be enfranchised, whatever religion they follow?

How does anyone enfranchise a virulently hostile group that lives and breathes the core elements of a fascistic Charter that calls for the death of Israelis?

 

[Boston1]

At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict lies the question of land and who rules it. The collision of Jewish nationalist colonisation and Palestian nationalism, both laying claim to the same territory, forms the basis of this long conflict, deepened by the tragedies of the Holocaust and of the dispossession and occupation of Palestine. The United Nations partition of the land in 1947, an effort to resolve the two claims simultaneously, did not result in a lasting settlement.

Since the war of 1967, Palestinians have come to accept the reality of Israel within the 1948 boundaries. The land dispute has increasingly focused on Israel's occupation of the remaining territories -- the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from these territories. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, but continues to build many Jewish settlements in the other territories, actions deemed illegal by virtually all other states. The Oslo Accords (1993) and the Road Map (2003) have failed to reach a land agreement between the parties or to bring Israeli withdrawal.
Since 2002, the Israeli government has been building a "security fence" that winds deep into Palestinian territory, claiming the barrier would keep Palestinian suicide bombers from striking Israeli citizens. But this separation wall is a major de facto annexation of Palestinian territories. By building the wall and increasing settlement expansion, Israel retains control over important Palestinian economic areas, agricultural grounds and natural resources like water. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel's West Bank barrier violates international law, but the unequal struggle over the land of Palestine continues.
Land and Settlement Issues

If Israel believes that the Occupied Territories are part of their country, shouldn't the people they rule over in those that part of the country be enfranchised, whatever religion they follow?

How does anyone enfranchise a virulently hostile group that lives ands breathes the core elements of a fascistic Charter that calls for the death of Israelis?

They don't, The Geneva convention states that prisoners of war can be held up to a year after the end of hostilities. and that combatants can be segregated by walls and enclosures on undesignated land. If further states that noncombatants suspected of subversive acts threatening the safety of the state can also be segregated.

The UN failed to follow its own guidelines and ever segregate the palestinian combatants and their descendants from non combatants or their descendants. Leaving it up to the "host nation" which is Israel, to do the job. But the real crime comes when the UN offers aid to both palestinian combatants and non combatants alike. Which is a violation of the UN charter but to be expected when nearly 100% of the UNWRA employees are palestinians themselves.

What it boils down to is that unless it can be shown that at least one year has gone bye since the last act of palestinian violence then we are still in a condition of war and much of international law is superseded by martial law.

Which is something I'd have preferred to point out at the end of this little exorcise but no worries. Their argument doesn't work either way, and its always interesting to ask the revisionists to point out exactly where in international law they believe it requires the Israelis to abandon the disputed territories

See
Geneva Convention (IV) - International Committee of the ...

I'd also note

Quote

• 
  Art. 14. In time of peace, the High Contracting Parties and, after the outbreak of hostilities, the Parties thereto, may establish in their own territory and, if the need arises, in occupied areas, hospital and safety zones and localities so organized as to protect from the effects of war, wounded, sick and aged persons, children under fifteen, expectant mothers and mothers of children under seven.
  
  Upon the outbreak and during the course of hostilities, the Parties concerned may conclude agreements on mutual recognition of the zones and localities they have created. They may for this purpose implement the provisions of the Draft Agreement annexed to the present Convention, with such amendments as they may consider necessary.

End Quote

Which allows for a nation to negotiate for land it acquired in war. ;--)

 

[fanger]

Israel has not declared war on Palestine, besides you cannot acquire land by War
Non combatants cannot be held

 

[Boston1]

At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict lies the question of land and who rules it. The collision of Jewish nationalist colonisation and Palestian nationalism, both laying claim to the same territory, forms the basis of this long conflict, deepened by the tragedies of the Holocaust and of the dispossession and occupation of Palestine. The United Nations partition of the land in 1947, an effort to resolve the two claims simultaneously, did not result in a lasting settlement.

Since the war of 1967, Palestinians have come to accept the reality of Israel within the 1948 boundaries. The land dispute has increasingly focused on Israel's occupation of the remaining territories -- the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. UN Resolutions 242 and 338 stipulate that Israel must withdraw completely from these territories. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, but continues to build many Jewish settlements in the other territories, actions deemed illegal by virtually all other states. The Oslo Accords (1993) and the Road Map (2003) have failed to reach a land agreement between the parties or to bring Israeli withdrawal.
Since 2002, the Israeli government has been building a "security fence" that winds deep into Palestinian territory, claiming the barrier would keep Palestinian suicide bombers from striking Israeli citizens. But this separation wall is a major de facto annexation of Palestinian territories. By building the wall and increasing settlement expansion, Israel retains control over important Palestinian economic areas, agricultural grounds and natural resources like water. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel's West Bank barrier violates international law, but the unequal struggle over the land of Palestine continues.
Land and Settlement Issues

If Israel believes that the Occupied Territories are part of their country, shouldn't the people they rule over in those that part of the country be enfranchised, whatever religion they follow?

Not during a condition of war. Under martial law populations may be segregated if suspected of subversive acts against the state regardless of their combatant status

see
Geneva Convention (IV) - International Committee of the ...

But the topic is if Israel is required within international law to vacate the disputed territories.

And once again you have failed to provide a single reference in support of your view

 

[Boston1]

Israel has not declared war on Palestine, besides you cannot acquire land by War
Non combatants cannot be held

Actually it was the Arab league that declared war on Israel ;--) A war which is ongoing.

But once again the revisionists have failed to provide a single element of international law that supports their view.

 

[fanger]

I provided several, your choice not to see is no fault of mine

 

[Boston1]

The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal under international law,[1][2][3][4][5] howeverIsrael maintains that they are consistent with international law[6] because it does not agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the territories occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War.[7] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, theInternational Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.[8][9]

Numerous UN resolutions have stated that the building and existence of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are a violation of international law, including UN Security Council resolutions in 1979 and 1980.[10][11][12] UN Security Council Resolution 446 refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention as the applicable international legal instrument, and calls upon Israel to desist from transferring its own population into the territories or changing their demographic makeup. The reconvened Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions has declared the settlements illegal[13] as has the primary judicial organ of the UN, the International Court of Justice[14] and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

The position of successive Israeli governments is that all authorized settlements are entirely legal and consistent with international law,[15] despite Israel's armistice agreements having all being with High Contracting Parties.[16] In practice, Israel does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies de jure, but has stated that on humanitarian issues it will govern itself de facto by its provisions, without specifying which these are.[17][18] The majority of legal scholars hold the settlements to violate international law, while others have offered dissenting views supporting the Israeli position.[2]
International law and Israeli settlements - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whoops here we go

First Wiki isn't international law, so the reference is wholly inadequate to be considered definitive. Its also one of the primary revisionist tools for expressing their views. Since its not peer reviewed.

Regardless it is on topic and at least some of these points should be interesting to investigate

Give me a few moments to go over the article presented

OK I went over every reference in that first paragraph and not a single one leads to an actual international law that requires Israel to vacate the disputed territories. Oh there's a lot of claims about how there is a violation of international law but not one single proof offered.

Which is exactly why I asked the question.

While the claim is everywhere, there is not a shred of proof offered to back it up.

Cheers

 

[fanger]

Israel has not declared war on Palestine, besides you cannot acquire land by War
Non combatants cannot be held

Actually it was the Arab league that declared war on Israel ;--) A war which is ongoing.

But once again the revisionists have failed to provide a single element of international law that supports their view.

So are you saying israel is at war with the Arab league, I mean apart from in your head?

 

[Boston1]

I provided several, your choice not to see is no fault of mine

My Mistake. I was working through the responses backwards ;--)

 

[fanger]

Where does it say in international Law that Israel has a right to exist?

 

[Boston1]

Israel has not declared war on Palestine, besides you cannot acquire land by War
Non combatants cannot be held

Actually it was the Arab league that declared war on Israel ;--) A war which is ongoing.

But once again the revisionists have failed to provide a single element of international law that supports their view.

So are you saying israel is at war with the Arab league, I mean apart from in your head?

Whole new subject. If you want to start a thread on that go for it. But yes, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon and I think Iraq

See
2.2 The Arab League as a whole
Although again with a grain of salt since it is wiki

 

[Boston1]

Where does it say in international Law that Israel has a right to exist?

Again you are avoiding the topic. If you want to start new threads based off these distractions you would like to interject thats fine. However this thread is specifically referring to the revisionist claim that Israel is illegally occupying the disputed territories and is required under international law to vacate.

PS
See post 54

not one single actual international law has yet to be offered which supports the revisionist view ;--)

 

[fanger]

What is the Source of international law?