Connect with us

Middle East

Former UN Special Rapporteur for Palestine: ‘International law is not an a la carte menu’  

Published

on

Boğaziçi University’s Faculty of Law hosted its first International Law Conference (BILC) and brought together a large number of academics and experts including Michael Lynk, the United Nation’s former Special Rapporteur for Palestine from around the world to critically examine the current international legal order, particularly in the aftermath of Israel’s invasion of Gaza and the massacre of dozens of thousand of civilians.

During the conference, Michael Lynk gave a presentation onIsraeli Settlements under the Rome Statute of the ICC” in the session titled “Occupation, Racism and Resistance” moderated by Hilal Elver, University of California. Professor, Former UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food along with the speakers Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah who is the Emeritus Professor at National University of Singapore and Mohsen al-Attar, the Associate Dean and Professor at Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University. Lnyk, saying that he believes in justice points out that those of us who care for Palestine can become cynical with respect to the aspirations of international law.

Linyk, hoping the absolute permissibility of any and all of us to be skeptical about international law’s pretensions underlined that it’s absolutely wrong to be cynical about international law’s possibilities and completed his presentation with a quotation from Christoph Heusgen, the former German Ambassador to the UN which is “international law is not an a la carte menu” meaning it must apply to all.

We bring the notes from the former UN Special Rapporteur for Palestine…

There is still life for international law to shape the politics

“We must not be starry-eyed about, in any country, in any system, with respect to what law can wind up achieving. I think only error is achieved through hard work, through lobbying of legislatures, through social movements, through the fervent intellectual ideas coming up and challenging what is the dominant area of thought. And that in any domestic system, and particularly including in the international system, it always is an area of great tension between law in the service of power and law in the service of justice.”

“And those of us who believe in justice, who believe in international humanitarian and human rights and criminal law, will know it always will be a struggle to widen that space, to be able to allow justice with as much oxygen as it can get, to be able to breathe and push back against the forces of power. And this has actually been a good couple of weeks, particularly with the release of the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion two weeks ago, and obviously as we look back during the past seven months, with the release of the provisional decision by the International Court of Justice back in January, its provisional measures in March and May, and of course the announcement by the International Criminal Court’s prosecutor with respect to the application for arrest warrants as well. This ought to give us hope that there is life for international law to be able to shape the future politics.

The entire Israeli occupation is now determined by the International Court of Justice

“International law by itself would not bring the liberation of Palestine. But international law combined with a separate international resolve is what we wind up needing. And people respond, and this is, I think, what’s got to be optimistic, a brief warning when I wake up, particularly during the years that I serve as Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, is that international law has that possibility of being able to be pushed forward, that people respond to a framing that something is unjust, and respond even more fervently to a framing that something is illegal, as the entire Israeli occupation has now been determined by the International Court of Justice.”

The Israeli settlements tool for demographic growth in East Jerusalem and the West Bank

“I’m going to be looking this at one aspect of that, which is the Israeli settlements, and how international law has interplayed with this over the last 50 years, and what indeed can be done. So obviously, as we know, the Israeli settlements, which were begun in the first weeks after the June War in 1967, usually disguised as an initiative of military army bases, is the primary Israeli tool for demographic growth, territorial control, and a claim for sovereignty in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. It is, as many scholars have said over the years, to be the single most important and visible feature of Israeli apartheid, and that’s been confirmed with, I think, a close reading of the decision by the International Court of Justice two weeks ago.”

“There are now over 300 Jewish-only settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The 2023 population, I want you to compare it to the figures I have from 2000.”

“In 2023, in the West Bank alone, there are 517,000 Israeli settlers, and you can see the growth from under 200,000 in the year 2020. In East Jerusalem, where Israel had focused its settlement activities for the first 15 to 20 years of its occupation, today there are 235,000 Israeli settlers, and there were 172,000 in the year 2000. And you look at the Golan Heights, this is the population that almost doubled, from 16,000 in the year 2000 to 29,000 today.”

“And one of the startling figures, what we call the majority decision of the International Criminal Court, was that between November 2022 and October 2023, there were 24,000 settlements, 2,000 units that are currently in various stages of the planning system within Israel. And one of the big accomplishments by the current Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, who is also Minister of Settlements within the Defense Ministry, is to eliminate three of four stages of planning and approval, such that there will be only one level of approval in order for an application for settlement units to be able to be approved. 24,000 settlement units, the policy would yield at least 200,000 new settlers.”

“If you read through the International Court of Justice decision, you will see how heavily, in fact almost exclusively, the court has relied on documentation provided by the United Nations Independent Commission on Inquiry, on the Non-Legitimacy Clause 9, or on the regular reports given. And much of this regional slide given above is from reports coming from the International Court of Justice, certainly from the High Commission on Human Rights. But if you look through the decision I produced two and a half weeks ago, you’ll see the heavy reliance that the United Nations has relied upon with respect to human documentation, talking about a number of issues, heavily influenced, including not only on the settlements, but eventually on the issue of racial discrimination and segregation and apartheid.”

“For example, it talked about the transfer of civilian population, and it noted that there was a status of Israel’s policy of providing incentives for the relocation of Israeli individuals and businesses into the West Bank, as well as looking at the industrial and agricultural development of settlers. With respect to confiscation and repossession of land, it is pointed out the extraordinary, I suspect, experience of more and more confiscation of land in the highlands of the West Bank, and more recently in Jordan Valley. And in fact, there is a very recent report that came out in the last month from Peace Now, which offers some of the most qualitative and reliable sources of information and statistics.”

Illegal settlements exploit natural resources, including water and minerals

“Going on, some of the other elements have to do with the exploitation of natural resources, including water, including minerals, and as we know, which is embedded in international law with respect to the control over one’s resources and the ability of the countries, as part of the right of self-determination, to be able to exploit our natural resources, that all of this is done on the wayside, with respect to control of Israel’s development, that Israel’s water carrier is, selling West Bank water that it has taken from a northern mountain aquifers and selling it back in fleeting prices, going back to the fact of the Palestinians, and that this was one of the important points that was relied upon by the court to be able to show the essence of racial segregation and apartheid, that there are, two different systems of laws operating issues on the West Bank. One, fulsome democratic, liberal for Israeli settlers, and the other, restrictive, minimal, violating international law, based on military law, three-plus percent of Palestinians living there.”

“At the other point, one of the reasons it comes to this issue has to do with the rising violence against Palestinians over the same period of time in the occupied West Bank. The killing of Palestinians saw by far most of it coming from the Israeli defense forces. It’s now only around 550 deaths over the last 10 months. And this is the highest number of deaths of Palestinians in the West Bank and the East Jerusalem since the 7,000 individuals over 25 years ago. So all of this, when the International Court concluded that the settlement policy is illegal.”

Transfer of population to occupied areas is war crime

“We know from the 1949 Convention, this was asserted. The occupying power in the court transferred parts of almost a million occupations in the territory of the Netherlands. This was put in there because of the incentive that arose during wars prior to the end of the Second World War to allow countries to be able to expand their territories and its territorial belonging which was amassed by other countries and then populated under civilian occupation in order to make the return of land possible.”

“And there is a rationale by Jean Pictet, in 1968, that union conventions were designed to prevent a crisis of international and systematical war by certain powers, which transferred portions of their own population to occupied territories for political and racial reasons or, in other words, they came and colonized these territories. Such transfers worsened the economic situation of the native population and endangered their separate existence as a race.”

“It’s a violation, a plagued violation. I’ll say that even in the international border crisis decisions a few weeks ago was the question of the war crimes.”

“The last time that the Security Council passed a resolution critical to the general on any matter was in December of 2016, in the last three weeks of the Obama administration, when they passed a resolution 2334, and it became the form of action that the Israeli government’s attempt to reflect their violation of international law. It reiterates the demand in over 40 years that Israel de-engage with its own settlement activity.”

“It calls upon all states, as it did in 1980, to distinguish the relevant means in between territories of the state of Israel and their particular block types. Just let me give you a couple of statistics with respect to this. When the UN Resolution 465 was passed in March of 1980, and I’m using only West Bank settlement figures, they’re easier to view than any of that.”

The number of Israeli settlers jumped from 12,500 in 1980 to 370,000 in 2023 

“Does anybody know, as a rough guess, how many settlers were in the West Bank in 1980?

There were 12,500 settlers in the West Bank. By 1993, when the Oslo Accords were signed, there were 116,000 settlers in the West Bank. By about the year 2000, when the Camp David talks were conducted and then failed, there were 198,000 settlers in the West Bank. By 2014, when the last of the serious peace negotiations were conducted under John Kerry and then failed, there were 370,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank.”

“In 2003, as I said, there were no settlers in the West Bank. Back in 1936, David Ben-Gurion said, and remember, 1936 was at the height of the integration of European Jews fleeing the specter of European fascism with most of the doors to the West, Russia’s door, and then North American foes. And David Ben-Gurion said, what error could not do this in the past? And we realize that 60,000 European Jewish immigrants a year who leave in 2009 means no error saved.”

“Can we not see today, almost 90 years later, that having 3 quarters of a million Israeli settlers in each Jerusalem in the West Bank, with a growth of somewhere between 25,000 and 35,000 settlers in a year, net population, means no domestic and self-determination with this group. So let’s look at this last piece here. I’m going to read this just a few pages before we send everything else to the team.”

“There are three questions at the end of it. They want the Security Council one at the beginning of the evening. And I request that the Secretary General of the United Nations report to the Security Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of this resolution, most importantly of which is a demand that the doors immediately cease and completely cease all settlement activity. And that has been done every three months from the proper beginning.”

“There have been Security Council Generals, General Secretary, Secretary General, has delivered to the Security Council regarding Israel’s compliance with the 2354 regarding settlement activities. The March 2024 report, which is the 29th report, is the most recent one that I’ve applied to each of them online. It says the resolution calls on Israel to immediately and completely cease all settlement activity in the occupied lands, including Israel. And it would respect the new obligations. Nevertheless, settlement activities are continued and intensified. The other long warning I thought I wanted to give for each of these security reports, no such threats are created during the reported period as settlement activities continue.”

“So we have, if you like, this passive, and this specific, almost disembodied voice coming from the UN Secretary General, or which, of course, is in a digital pattern, tailored to the security council, this remains to obey resolution 2354.”

“And I won’t take you through it, but in the 1921 report, especially going forward to the UN Security Council, I applied this variant test that the periphery committee for the ICC had developed and found that Israel had violated all three aspects. And now, the definition of the authority willingness of those in official positions of power is now being enwired, who will say that the trade settlements are a form of war crime.”

“I think is a very roosting argument, such transfer is not a form of war crime that may engage individual criminal responsibility of those involved. And then, again, we’re being introduced several times to the International Court of Justice, where it’s said, and after going through an extensive review of the ICC, which is a settlement inquiry, with respect to digital settlement policy, it affirms, and in the light of the law, the ICC reaffirms that the trade settlements in the West Bank, in Jerusalem, and in the region associated with them have an established pattern of maintaining violation of international law.”

Accountability is a missing component with respect to international law

“On the question of accountability, accountability is a missing component with respect to international law. International law, without international resolve, generally emerges from below to be able to enforce the application of existing international law. And I’m very happy with respect to these.”

“These are three of the main components with respect to international law and accountability. First of all, with respect to international and international law, common argument, common law, all four of them says that the highest common comparison is with respect to security.”

“The International Committee of the Red Cross, the guardian of the Geneva Convention, has said, to ensure respect is not simply words on paper, this is a solemn, legal, binding, commitment and obligation. The states have to require the approval of international law means any serious breach of international law, and those states require international law to assist in the breach of international law.

And finally, I want you to keep Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations in mind that the members of the United Nations agree to accept and to carry out the decisions of the United Nations.”

Middle East

Iran resumes ballistic missile assembly using stockpiled parts

Published

on

Iran has resumed ballistic missile production in underground facilities, despite statements by Israeli and US authorities asserting that this capacity had been completely eliminated.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal citing US and Middle Eastern officials, the Tehran administration is utilizing pre-stockpiled components in the manufacturing process.

Officials report that despite strikes on missile sites and industrial installations at the beginning of the war, Iran continues the assembly of both solid- and liquid-fuelled missiles.

Intelligence data indicates activity at numerous underground centres, including the Khojir complex in the southeast of the country, along with efforts to establish additional underground assembly points to protect against new air strikes.

Current assembly operations are being maintained at lower volumes compared with pre-war levels, as US and Israeli operations destroyed several facilities and a naval blockade has impeded the import of components and solid-fuel ingredients.

Assessing the process, Tal Inbar, a senior analyst at the US-based Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, stressed that damaged infrastructure can be repaired during periods when facilities are not targeted, and parts procured from other countries can be stored there.

Inbar noted that it would be naive to believe Iran is not rebuilding its missile production capacity.

Arguing that the facilities were destroyed and Tehran has suffered severe losses, the official stated that Iran remains weaker than ever before, and US President Donald Trump will never permit the country to acquire nuclear weapons.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell stated that the US has destroyed up to 90% of Iran’s drone, ballistic missile, and naval industrial infrastructure, severely degrading Tehran’s ability to launch missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Another US government official pointed out that the Tehran administration may have revived production, albeit on a low scale, following preliminary talks conducted in mid-June with the Trump administration regarding the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war. The official noted that existing stockpiles are sufficient to assemble at least two hundred missiles.

A CNN report in late May indicated that the Tehran administration was attempting to reopen underground missile shelters, struck by the US and Israel with costly munitions, using bulldozers and dump trucks.

Excavation activities accelerated after the April ceasefire decision; out of 69 tunnel entrances struck across 18 distinct locations, 50 have been made accessible again.

Experts stressed that it is impossible to destroy missile power solely by bombing tunnel entrances, underlining the limitations of such bombardments.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed in April that they had effectively ended Iran’s missile programme. However, an NBC News report noted that Tehran utilized the ceasefire period to reconstitute its military strength.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Mohammed bin Salman urges Trump to strike Houthis after Mokha falls

Published

on

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has requested that US President Donald Trump launch air strikes against the Houthis in Yemen.

According to two US officials who spoke to Axios, Trump rejected the request, and US officials emphasised that the administration has no plans for direct intervention against the Houthis for now.

Oil prices surged on Thursday after the resistance led by Houthi militias (Ansarallah) seized the strategic coastal city of Mokha in Yemen.

This development brought the Yemeni resistance one step closer to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, which is vital for global trade and Saudi oil exports.

With Iran already disrupting traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, Houthi control over Bab el-Mandeb could provide Tehran with powerful new leverage over the US and its Gulf allies.

On Thursday, as Houthi forces advanced towards the coastal city of Mokha and Saudi-backed Yemeni forces retreated, bin Salman telephoned Trump to brief him on the deteriorating situation.

A few hours later, the prince called again to request that Trump carry out US air strikes against the Houthis.

Trump declined, but a US official stated that the administration would provide Saudi Arabia with intelligence and targeting data on the Houthis.

The official noted that approximately 200 US military personnel are currently stationed in Saudi Arabia, providing non-military support.

A senior Trump administration official indicated that Washington’s priority is keeping the Red Sea open, while leaving the broader fight to regional partners.

“We are in continuous dialogue with Saudi Arabia and the Government of the Republic of Yemen regarding regional stability,” the official said.

The official continued:

“The US remains focused on protecting our core national security interests, such as ensuring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, while empowering our regional partners to take the lead in managing and resolving regional security challenges.”

The US is concerned by the rapidly escalating conflict in Yemen and is seeking to avoid direct military intervention while increasing its support for Saudi Arabia.

According to two sources familiar with the matter, Admiral Brad Cooper, Commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), travelled to Saudi Arabia on Thursday for urgent coordination meetings.

The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Yemeni resistance forces reignited in July after Riyadh blocked an Iranian aircraft carrying senior Houthi officials from landing in Sanaa following their return from Ali Khamenei’s funeral.

Bin Salman requested Trump’s political support to strike Sanaa airport, but made clear that Saudi Arabia did not require US military assistance. Trump granted his support.

The Houthis subsequently retaliated by attacking Saudi tankers in the Red Sea. These strikes threatened a route crucial to the kingdom’s oil exports, and the group later expanded its attacks to Saudi energy facilities.

Saudi Arabia and its Yemeni allies responded with air strikes and ground operations against Houthi positions.

Saudi Arabia’s request for direct US military intervention marks a sharp reversal from July, when Riyadh informed Washington that it could manage the Houthis on its own.

As clashes intensified, the Saudis began seeking progressively greater support from the US.

Sources close to the discussions noted that in recent weeks, US military and civilian officials informed their Saudi counterparts that Trump’s directive is to keep American forces focused on Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, and to avoid opening a new front.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu ignored MBZ warning on Hamas 7 October plan, report says

Published

on

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly ignored a direct warning from UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in the run-up to 7 October 2023, according to an investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

The report states that the UAE leader, widely known as MBZ, was convinced in September 2023 that an explosion was imminent in the region, particularly given the escalating tensions in the West Bank.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who maintains close ties with bin Zayed, recounted: “In the months leading up to the war, he spoke with me about this issue frequently. He consistently conveyed the message that the situation needed to be de-escalated. He even dispatched a special envoy to Israel who met with the prime minister. The emir appeared to sense that the region was on the verge of erupting.”

MBZ also engaged in direct discussions with Netanyahu. These exchanges followed a standard operational protocol: a representative from the United Arab Emirates embassy would arrive at the prime minister’s office equipped with a specialised, secure telephone device to ensure confidentiality.

However, according to the newspaper, the call initiated by bin Zayed on this occasion was extraordinary in nature.

A week and a half before 7 October 2023, the UAE ruler placed a call to Netanyahu from the Presidential Palace in Abu Dhabi, and the two leaders spoke for 45 minutes.

During this conversation, bin Zayed warned that Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, was planning a major operation against Israel.

Bin Zayed voiced deep concern that such an event would not only lead to significant bloodshed, but would also destabilise the entire region and undermine the Abraham Accords.

Haaretz reported that three senior foreign sources possess direct knowledge of the call’s contents, marking the first public disclosure of the conversation’s existence.

A close Palestinian adviser to bin Zayed, who had emigrated from Gaza to Abu Dhabi years earlier and maintained extensive connections across the Gaza Strip, was also present during the exchange.

According to the adviser, the UAE ruler stressed to Netanyahu that Israel needed to prepare for this specific threat.

The adviser stated:

“The emir explained that, according to his assessment, Sinwar was preparing for a major event. He told Netanyahu that Israel had to be prepared. At the same time, he proposed working towards an economic solution for the Gaza Strip to prevent escalation, alongside calming the situation in the West Bank.”

Bin Zayed urged Netanyahu to take the matter seriously. Yet, to the emir’s surprise, the prime minister reacted with relative calm.

Netanyahu told bin Zayed that, in his own assessment, Hamas was planning to operate in the West Bank area. Reassuring the Emirati leader, Netanyahu insisted that Israel was prepared for any scenario.

The UAE leader later recounted his conversation with Netanyahu and his subsequent warning to CIA Director William J. Burns.

Bin Zayed shared with Burns the intuitive alarm he had sought to convey to Netanyahu—that “something over there is about to blow”—and noted the Israeli prime minister’s conviction that the unstable theatre was in fact the West Bank.

“The emir hoped that, despite Netanyahu’s reserved reaction, he would take the message seriously and take action,” the adviser said.

However, neither anticipated that the prime minister would hear the warning without briefing the heads of his defence and security establishments: neither the director of the Shin Bet, nor the director of the Mossad, nor the chief of staff of the Israel Defence Forces was informed of MBZ’s warning.

Haaretz noted that Gaza-related negotiations between Israel and Hamas had been proceeding smoothly in early 2023, providing the context in which the Emirati ruler’s concerns emerged.

The report received swift corroboration from the Israeli political opposition. Former prime minister and leader of the B’Yachad party, Naftali Bennett, stated that he knew the warning issued by UAE leader Mohamed bin Zayed to Netanyahu concerning Hamas’s plans prior to 7 October was genuine.

Speaking to 103FM, Bennett said: “I am telling you: I know this to be true.”

Bennett continued:

“Mohamed bin Zayed of the UAE warned Netanyahu that Sinwar was planning an operation. The head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate, Abbas Kamel, also notified Netanyahu a few days before the massacre that a major operation was being planned. I do not wish to discuss my sources with anyone. I am telling you: I know this fact to be true.”

Contending that Netanyahu had led Israel “blindly into this horrific disaster,” the opposition figure asserted: “He was so deeply captive to the conception that Hamas was an asset that, despite receiving explicit warnings, he did nothing.”

Bennett maintained that Netanyahu bears direct responsibility for 7 October, not merely by virtue of being prime minister, but because “he spent 15 years strengthening Hamas and doing nothing.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey