US warns Hague tribunal to avoid calling for Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from occupied territories

The United States has been left alone. No, it also includes the South Pacific archipelago Fiji. The International Court of Justice in The Hague should not do this, as the State Department official stated, richard wizeckOrder the immediate, unconditional and complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from the occupied territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip because “this would undermine negotiations to achieve a just and lasting peace.”

The long-awaited speech of the US representative at the hearing in The Hague on the legal consequences of the policies implemented by Israel in the so-called occupied territories – in which 52 countries, including Spain, participate – was received with disappointment and disapproval. Countries like Egypt condemned the written allegations even before they presented their arguments.

The United States’ main argument is that what is being discussed before the court is partisan because it is about the legal consequences for one side of what it calls the conflict. And, therefore, he insisted, an approach would upset “the balance of UN Security Council policy”. Also, after pointing to the role of the United States in the current negotiations and the five visits of his boss, the Secretary of State anthony blinken

For Israel and other Middle Eastern countries over the past three months, a non-binding advisory “opinion” – which the court has been asked by the UN General Assembly in December 2022 – to rule on the illegal nature of the occupation “can be called off Is” “Conversation.

Vizek Explained: “It is not true that the court has no role. “But the court should not understand that with the question before it it has to deal with the entire Palestinian question.” According to him, the opinion requested by the UN General Assembly presents a “challenge” in which “how to prevent its promulgation without creating any problems, rather than promoting the framework already established by Security Council and General Assembly resolutions” Ho” is included. Breaking the balance and making conversation more difficult. And the same will happen if an order for Israel’s unconditional withdrawal is approved that does not take into account its real security needs.”

The intervention, therefore, went beyond the framework of the legal consequences of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories. Nor does the United States consider whether the occupation should be determined lawfully or unlawfully. Vizek: “International law does not say that an occupation is illegal in itself nor because of its duration. Even what is being quoted here about the transfer of a portion of the (Palestinian) population will not change the legal status of the occupation, it will not change as a result of that fact.

Vizek began his presentation by recalling the Hamas action of October 7, 2023, which killed 1,139 people, including civilians and soldiers along with 250 hostages, and rebuked countries that do not pay attention to what happened. “Unfortunately, those security requirements have been ignored by many participants,” he said.

Third American Veto

The intervention came on Wednesday, after the previous day, when the United States once again used its veto for the third time in the UN Security Council on a ceasefire resolution in Gaza. The rationale for rejecting the ceasefire, as explained by Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Ambassador to the United Nations, is “because it would be necessary to ensure a temporary ceasefire and the exchange of Israeli hostages in prisons for Palestinian prisoners in ongoing peace talks. “can affect.” From Israel. The position of Egypt, which participates in the negotiations with the United States and the United Arab Emirates, has been clearly against the idea raised by the North American representative. Foreign Ministry legal adviser Jasmine Moses, speaking on behalf of the Israeli government, said, “Quite the contrary: a ruling in favor of Israel’s violations of human rights and international law would facilitate negotiations.” Cairo. The lawyer said: “20 years ago 400,000 Israeli settlers were brought to the West Bank and East Jerusalem; Now we’re at 750,000,” he said.

Russia and France, respectively, have already supported the court’s declaration of the illegality of the occupied territories and its declaration in 2004 regarding Israel’s construction of the wall that Palestinians have the right to self-determination in their own state. Israel does not participate in these hearings, but has submitted a document in which it describes the questions raised by the UN General Assembly about the legal consequences of the occupation in Palestine as “biased” and “prejudicial”. Spain will present its findings on Monday, February 26, with Fiji, the archipelago that matches the US position, on the same day.