Israel seems to be failing to make the (false) case that it is not trying to harm civilians in Gaza. People aren’t buying it this time. True, the politicians haven’t changed. But the public response has been sharp. There are still plenty of people to whom Palestinian life has no value, and they fully support what is Israel is doing, but that now seems to be the dividing line. I explore today at LobeLog.
Posts Tagged ‘international law’
Posted in Gaza, Hasbara, tagged Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, atomic bomb, Benjamin Netanyahu, Dalia Scheindlin, Gaza, Gaza massacre, Gaza Strip, Hamas, Harry Truman, international law, Israel, Japan, John Kerry, nagasaki, Operation Cast Lead, Operation Solid Cliff, Shujaiya, Shujaiyah on July 21, 2014 | Leave a Comment »
Posted in Gaza, tagged ceasefire, Egypt, Gaza, Gaza Siege, international law, Israel, Muslim Brotherhood, Operation Protective Edge, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Three kidnapped Israelis, Turkey, United States, West Bank on July 18, 2014 | 1 Comment »
A slightly edited version of this article first appeared at LobeLog. It’s the best resource on the web for analysis of US foreign policy. Please check it out.
The two ceasefire proposals aimed at ending the accelerated violence in Gaza and Israel offer one of the best illustrations of the
Israel-Palestine conflict one could ask for. The circumstances and the content of each proposal demonstrate very well why outside pressure is necessary to end this vexing, seemingly endless struggle and just how differently Israelis and Palestinians view both current events and the conflict as a whole.
Let’s look at the two proposals. Egypt, acting as the United States normally does, worked out the details of their ceasefire idea with Israel primarily. The deal reflects the Israeli and Egyptian agenda: it mostly follows the formula of “quiet for quiet,” essentially bringing back the status quo ante of early June. It offers Hamas a vague promise of future negotiations to address the siege of the Strip. But this is hardly something Hamas will put stock in. The 2012 ceasefire agreement, which was negotiated by then-Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi, a man much friendlier to Hamas than the current Egyptian leadership, also made such a promise and it never came to anything. Finally, Egypt says it is willing to open the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt more widely but only if Hamas allows PA security to police it instead of their own people. (more…)
Posted in Peace Plans, tagged Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak, Emile Nakhleh, Geneva Conventions, international law, Iraq, Israel, J Street, John Kerry, One-State Solution, Palestine, Two-state solution, Ukraine, Wye River Agreement, Yugoslavia on May 22, 2014 | Leave a Comment »
Posted in International Law, Syria, tagged AIPAC, Assad, Barack Obama, China, Cold War, European Union, International Court of Justice, International Criminal Court, international law, Israel, Israeli Settlements, Obama, OPT, Russia, Sergei Lavrov, Syria, Syrian civil war, Syrian opposition, Syrian rebels, UN, UN Security Council, United States, US Policy on Israeli Settlements, USSR, West Bank on August 26, 2013 | Leave a Comment »
Posted in Settlements, United States, tagged AP, Barack Obama, Benjamin Netanyahu, Bill Clinton, Carter administration, Gaza, Geneva Conventions, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Green Line, international law, Israeli Settlements, Jen Psaki, Jerusalem, Jimmy Carter, John Kerry, Matt Lee, Matthew Lee, Netanyahu, Ronald Reagan, State Department, US Policy on Israeli Settlements, West Bank, White House on August 18, 2013 | 4 Comments »
This article originally appeared at LobeLog. There is an indispensable wealth of material there on recent events in Israel/Palestine, Iran, Egypt and others. I urge you to check it out.
Some days, it must be really difficult to be the State Department’s spokesperson. It doesn’t seem like a bad job to have at all, but on certain questions it’s impossible to not look like an idiot. A lot of those questions are connected to de facto policies which differ from de jure ones.
And there is no better example of that than US policy on Israeli settlements.
Back in the early years after the 1967 war, the United States made it clear that the settlements were illegal according to international law. As recently as 1978, the State Department legal adviser confirmed that all Israeli settlements beyond the Green Line are illegal, and through the Carter administration, this was explicit US policy. That policy has never been explicitly revoked, but beginning with the Reagan administration, de facto policy has been ambiguous. Reagan began the trend when he stated that while the settlements were ill-advised, provocative and that further settlement was not necessary for Israel’s security “I disagreed when, the previous Administration refereed to them as illegal, they’re not illegal. Not under the U.N. resolution that leaves the West Bank open to all people—Arab and Israeli alike, Christian alike.”
The problematic nature of Reagan’s statement — implying that “Arab” equals “Muslim” and “Israeli” equals “Jew”, and more importantly, citing the “U.N. Resolution”, which is not the basis for the illegality of the settlements (the Fourth Geneva Convention is) — notwithstanding, this was the beginning of the US’ refusal to label settlements illegal, terming them instead, at most, “illegitimate.” (more…)