Top UN court says Israel’s presence in occupied Palestinian territories is illegal and should end

Update Magistrates are seen at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as part of South Africa's request on a Gaza ceasefire in The Hague, on May 24, 2024. (AFP)
Magistrates are seen at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as part of South Africa's request on a Gaza ceasefire in The Hague, on May 24, 2024. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 20 July 2024
Follow

Top UN court says Israel’s presence in occupied Palestinian territories is illegal and should end

Top UN court says Israel’s presence in occupied Palestinian territories is illegal and should end
  • Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in 1967 war
  • Netanyahu denounced the nonbinding ICJ opinion, saying the territories are part of the Jewish people’s historic “homeland”

THE HAGUE, Netherlands: The top UN court said Friday that Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territories is “unlawful” and called on it to end and for settlement construction to stop immediately, issuing an unprecedented, sweeping condemnation of Israel’s rule over the lands it captured 57 years ago.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly denounced the nonbinding opinion issued by the 15-judge panel of the International Court of Justice, saying the territories are part of the Jewish people’s historic “homeland.” But the resounding breadth of the decision could impact international opinion and fuel moves for unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state.
The judges pointed to a wide list of policies, including the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem, use of the area’s natural resources, the annexation and imposition of permanent control over lands and discriminatory policies against Palestinians, all of which it said violated international law.
The court said Israel had no right to sovereignty in the territories, was violating international laws against acquiring territory by force and was impeding Palestinians’ right to self-determination. It said other nations were obliged not to “render aid or assistance in maintaining” Israel’s presence in the territories. It said Israel must end settlement construction immediately and that existing settlements must be removed, according to a summary of the more than 80-page opinion read out by court President Nawaf Salam.
Israel’s “abuse of its status as the occupying power” renders its “presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful,” the court said, saying its presence must be ended as “rapidly as possible.”
The court’s opinion, sought by the UN General Assembly after a Palestinian request, came against the backdrop of Israel’s devastating military assault on Gaza, which was triggered by the Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7. In a separate case, the International Court of Justice is considering a South African claim that Israel’s campaign in Gaza amounts to genocide, a claim that Israel vehemently denies.
The court said the General Assembly and Security Council — where staunch Israeli ally the United States holds a veto — should consider “the precise modalities” to end Israel’s presence in the territories.
Israel, which normally considers the United Nations and international tribunals as unfair and biased, didn’t send a legal team to the hearings. Instead, it submitted written comments, saying that the questions put to the court are prejudiced and fail to address Israeli security concerns. Israeli officials have said the court’s intervention could undermine the peace process, which has been stagnant for more than a decade.
“The Jewish people are not conquerors in their own land — not in our eternal capital Jerusalem and not in the land of our ancestors in Judea and Samaria,” Netanyahu said in a statement issued by his office, using the biblical terms for the West Bank. “No false decision in The Hague will distort this historical truth and likewise the legality of Israeli settlement in all the territories of our homeland cannot be contested.”
Speaking outside the court, Riad Malki, an adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, called the opinion “a watershed moment for Palestine, for justice and for international law.”
He said other nations must now “uphold the clear obligations” outlined by the court. “No actions of any kind ... to support Israel’s illegal occupation.”
Hamas welcomed the court’s decision and said in a statement that “serious steps on the ground” need to be taken in response.
Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians seek all three areas for an independent state.
Israel considers the West Bank to be disputed territory, whose future should be decided in negotiations, while it has moved populations there in settlements to solidify its hold. It has annexed east Jerusalem in a move that isn’t internationally recognized, while it withdrew from Gaza in 2005 but maintained a blockade of the territory after Hamas took power in 2007. The international community generally considers all three areas to be occupied territory.
The court’s decision strikes at the heart of the ambiguity of Israel’s administration of the territories. Israel hasn’t annexed the West Bank — though settler groups have pressed it to do so — but it calls it part of its homeland and has effectively treated it as an extension of the nation. Along with the settlements, it has appropriated large swaths of the territory as “state lands.” At the same time, Netanyahu’s government has repeatedly rejected the creation of any Palestinian state. Abbas’ Palestinian Authority has been restricted to control over divided enclaves scattered around the West Bank.
The Palestinians presented arguments at hearings in February, along with 49 other nations and three international organizations. In the hearings, Malki accused Israel of apartheid and urged the United Nations’ top court to declare that Israel’s occupation of lands sought by the Palestinians is illegal and must end immediately and unconditionally for any hope for a two-state future to survive.
Erwin van Veen, a senior research fellow at the Clingendael think tank in The Hague, said before the decision that a ruling that Israel’s policies breach international law would “isolate Israel further internationally, at least from a legal point of view.”
He said such a ruling would remove “any kind of legal, political, philosophical underpinning of the Israeli expansion project.” It could also increase the number of countries that recognize a Palestinian state, in particular in the Western world, following the recent example of Spain and Norway and Ireland, he said.
It’s not the first time the ICJ has been asked to give its legal opinion on Israeli policies. Two decades ago, the court ruled that Israel’s West Bank separation barrier was “contrary to international law.” Israel boycotted those proceedings, saying they were politically motivated.
Israel says the barrier is a security measure. Palestinians say the structure amounts to a massive land grab, because it frequently dips into the West Bank.
The court said that Israel’s construction of settlements in the West Bank violated international laws prohibiting countries from moving their population into territories they occupy.
Israel has built well over 100 settlements, according to the anti-settlement monitoring group Peace Now. The West Bank settler population has grown by more than 15 percent in the past five years to more than 500,000 Israelis, according to a pro-settler group. Their residents are Israeli citizens governed by domestic law and served by government ministries, services, banks and other businesses — effectively integrating them into Israel.
Israel also has annexed east Jerusalem and considers the entire city to be its capital. An additional 200,000 Israelis live in settlements built in east Jerusalem that Israel considers to be neighborhoods of its capital. Palestinian residents of the city face systematic discrimination, making it difficult for them to build new homes or expand existing ones.
The international community considers all settlements to be illegal or obstacles to peace since they are built on lands sought by the Palestinians for their state.
Netanyahu’s hard-line government is dominated by settlers and their political supporters. Netanyahu has given his finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, a former settler leader, unprecedented authority over settlement policy. Smotrich has used this position to cement Israel’s control over the West Bank by pushing forward plans to build more settlement homes and to legalize outposts.

 


India reviewing crypto position due to global changes, senior official says

India reviewing crypto position due to global changes, senior official says
Updated 26 sec ago
Follow

India reviewing crypto position due to global changes, senior official says

India reviewing crypto position due to global changes, senior official says
  • The review follows crypto-friendly policy announcements by US President Donald Trump
  • It may further delay publication of a discussion paper that was due for release in Sept. 2024

India is reviewing its stance on cryptocurrencies due to shifting attitudes toward the virtual asset in other countries, a senior government official told Reuters on Sunday.
The review, which follows crypto-friendly policy announcements by US President Donald Trump, could further delay publication of a discussion paper on cryptocurrencies that was due for release in September 2024.
“More than one or two jurisdictions have changed their stance toward cryptocurrency in terms of the usage, their acceptance, where do they see the importance of crypto assets. In that stride, we are having a look at the discussion paper once again,” India’s Economic Affairs Secretary Ajay Seth said in an interview.
Seth said that because such assets “don’t believe in borders,” India’s stance cannot be unilateral.
He did not specifically mention the United States, where Trump last week ordered the creation of a cryptocurrency working group tasked with proposing new digital asset regulations and exploring the creation of a national cryptocurrency stockpile, making good on his promise to overhaul US crypto policy.
Indians have poured money into cryptocurrencies in recent years despite the country’s tough regulatory stance and steep trading taxes.
India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) issued show-cause notices to nine offshore cryptocurrency exchanges in December 2023 for non-compliance with local rules.
Binance, the world’s biggest crypto exchange, was hit with a fine of 188.2 million rupees ($2.25 million) in June 2024, a month after it registered with the FIU in an effort to resume operations in the country.
Last year, India’s market watchdog recommended that several regulators oversee trade in cryptocurrencies, in a sign that at least some authorities in the country are open to allowing the use of private virtual assets.
That position stood in contrast to statements by the nation’s central bank, which has maintained that private digital currencies represent a macroeconomic risk.


Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban

Afghans push back against international calls for cricket team ban
  • Cricket is considered the most popular sport in Afghanistan, representing hope for many Afghans
  • British lawmakers urge national cricket body to boycott Feb. 26 match against Afghanistan

KABUL: Afghans are pushing back against calls to ban their national cricket team from participating in international competitions, saying such a move would not reverse the Taliban’s increasing restrictions on women in the country.

Regarded as the most popular sport in Afghanistan, cricket has represented a rare bright spot for many as they struggle amid a devastating economic and humanitarian crisis sparked by sanctions slapped on them by the Taliban administration following their takeover in 2021.

Since last month, foreign campaigns calling for Afghanistan’s men’s team to be barred from international matches have been gaining traction as a protest against the Taliban restricting women’s access to education, the workplace and public spaces, as well as sports.

This includes British lawmakers urging the England and Wales Cricket Board to boycott England’s upcoming match against Afghanistan in the ICC Champions Trophy, which is scheduled to take place on Feb. 26.

“There are problems in the country — we can’t deny that — but cricket is certainly not one of them,” Ahmad Nadim, a 23-year-old cricket fan in Kabul, told Arab News.

“The national players were among the first ones to criticize the restrictions on girls’ education and they have continuously voiced their support for Afghan women’s rights. Cricket has been a great source of happiness for Afghans and still continues to be one.”

Despite record-setting performances — including high-profile victories against England, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Australia — over the last few years, Afghanistan’s place on the world cricket stage has become increasingly controversial.

After the Taliban disbanded the country’s women’s team following their takeover, most squad members fled to Australia, where they reunited for a match just last week.

Though the International Cricket Council requires member nations to have both a men’s and a women’s team, as Afghanistan kept its status as a full member it triggered boycotts from countries like Australia and England, which have refused to play them in bilateral matches.

Human Rights Watch have also called on the ICC to suspend Afghanistan’s membership “until women and girls can once again participate in education and sport” in the country.

In their home country, Afghans are openly opposing the boycotts and are calling for sports to be separated from politics.

“Afghanistan’s cricket team is all supportive of women’s rights to education because education is the foundation of a strong society and development in the country,” Hasti Gul Abid, an Afghan cricketer who has played for the national team, told Arab News.

“Afghanistan’s cricket reached the current stage with a lot of difficulties,” he said. “The people of Afghanistan have been supporting their national team since day one. Our people contributed to the advancement of cricket as much as the players did.”

As the men’s team’s popularity and victories have brought joy across the country on many occasions, some argue that the squad should not be seen as representatives of the Taliban government.

“The cricket team belongs to the whole country and all Afghans. It represents us all, not a specific political or ethnic group,” said 21-year-old Khanzada Shaheen, who plays in a local cricket team in Kabul.

Banning Afghanistan’s cricket team will not change the Taliban’s policies against women, said Lal Pacha, a fruit vendor in Kabul.

“We all want Afghan girls to return to schools and universities but why punish our cricket team for that?” he told Arab News.

“Let’s say the cricket team is banned from playing internationally, will this change the Islamic Emirate’s policy? There’s no logic in the demand for banning the cricket team.”


Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning

Man arrested in UK over alleged Qur’an burning
  • Incident took place in Manchester, from where it was live-streamed on social media
  • Man, who held up Israeli flag during broadcast, remains in custody on suspicion of racially aggravated offense

LONDON: A 47-year-old man has been arrested in the UK on suspicion of a racially aggravated offense after a Qur’an was reportedly set on fire.

The incident occurred in the center of the city of Manchester on Saturday and was live-streamed on social media.

It took place in front of the Glade of Light memorial, which was installed to honor the memory of the victims of the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing.

On the live stream, an individual tore out pages of a book appearing to be a Qur’an, before setting fire to each one. He also held up an Israeli flag during the broadcast.

Greater Manchester Police said in a statement that it arrested a man on the same day “on suspicion of a racially aggravated public order offence.” The man, who has not been named, remains in police custody.

Assistant Chief Constable Stephanie Parker said: “We understand the deep concern this will cause within some of our diverse communities and are aware of a live video circulating.

“We made a swift arrest at the time and recognise the right people have for freedom of expression, but when this crosses into intimidation to cause harm or distress we will always look to take action when it is reported to us.”


Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
  • Trump placed duties of 10 percent on all imports from China, 25 percent on imports from Mexico and Canada
  • Says decision necessary “to protect Americans,” although it could throw global economy into possible turmoil

OTTAWA: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Saturday Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods in response to tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

C$30 billion would take effect from Tuesday and C$125 billion in 21 days, Trudeau told a news conference.

China also said it “firmly opposes” the new tariffs imposed on Beijing and vowed to take “corresponding countermeasures to resolutely safeguard our own rights and interests.”

Trump earlier signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Tuesday except Canadian energy products, which will be subject to a 10 percent duty.

Trudeau warned the tariffs would hurt the United States, a long-time ally. He encouraged Canadians to buy Canadian products and vacation at home rather than in the US.

He said some non-tariff measures, including some relating to critical minerals, energy procurement and other partnerships are being looked at.

Trump also unveiled sweeping measures against China, announcing an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports on top of existing duties.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s commerce ministry slammed Washington’s “erroneous practices,” saying Beijing was “strongly dissatisfied with this and firmly opposes it.”
The ministry said Beijing would file a lawsuit at the World Trade Organization, arguing that “the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States seriously violates WTO rules.”

It added that the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation.”

“China hopes that the United States will objectively and rationally view and deal with its own issues like fentanyl, rather than threatening other countries with tariffs at every turn,” the ministry said.

It said Beijing “urges the US to correct its erroneous practices, meet China halfway, face up to its problems, have frank dialogues, strengthen cooperation and manage differences on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect.”


Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
Updated 02 February 2025
Follow

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’

Canada announces retaliatory measures against Trump tariffs; China also vows ‘countermeasures’
  • Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods, PM Trudeau says
  • China says the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation”

OTTAWA: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Saturday Canada would impose 25 percent tariffs on C$155 billion ($106.5 billion) of US goods in response to tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.

C$30 billion would take effect from Tuesday and C$125 billion in 21 days, Trudeau told a news conference.

China also said it “firmly opposes” the new tariffs imposed on Beijing and vowed to take “corresponding countermeasures to resolutely safeguard our own rights and interests.”

Trump earlier signed an executive order imposing 25 percent tariffs on all goods from Canada and Mexico starting on Tuesday except Canadian energy products, which will be subject to a 10 percent duty.

Trudeau warned the tariffs would hurt the United States, a long-time ally. He encouraged Canadians to buy Canadian products and vacation at home rather than in the US.

 

 

He said some non-tariff measures, including some relating to critical minerals, energy procurement and other partnerships are being looked at.

Trump also unveiled sweeping measures against China, announcing an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports on top of existing duties.

In a statement on Sunday, China’s commerce ministry slammed Washington’s “erroneous practices,” saying Beijing was “strongly dissatisfied with this and firmly opposes it.”
The ministry said Beijing would file a lawsuit at the World Trade Organization, arguing that “the unilateral imposition of tariffs by the United States seriously violates WTO rules.”

It added that the duties were “not only unhelpful in solving the US’s own problems, but also undermine normal economic and trade cooperation.”

“China hopes that the United States will objectively and rationally view and deal with its own issues like fentanyl, rather than threatening other countries with tariffs at every turn,” the ministry said.

It said Beijing “urges the US to correct its erroneous practices, meet China halfway, face up to its problems, have frank dialogues, strengthen cooperation and manage differences on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect.”