How about Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territories?
Kuleana
I take exception to this statement you made. I’ll try not to get into too much detail because it is long and drawn out. But basically, International law and the law in the U.N. at the time of the 6 Day War says otherwise. International law basically states that a country that was attacked on it’s sovereign soil can claim certain types of land from where the attackers came and occupy said lands. In order to do this legally, Israel has to abide by International law and norms. And Israel has done just that. Then there were a series of agreements between the PLO and Israel up to and including the Oslo Accords/Agreements (Oslo 1 and 2). Those agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority at the time agreed to Israel’s occupation of certain territories. This is where we are left. We are still waiting to further negotiate the terms of the Oslo Accords. This is the actual law and agreements that are still in effect to this day. Anything else is all leftist BS.
These are the territories you claim are illegally occupied. I believe you that are incorrect about this. Israel has followed International law to a T. And is LEGALLY occupying the territories per their agreement with the Palestinian Authority and within International law. All of the laws and agreements that effect this situation are in this article below. It is very long and dry. But if you want to believe the leftist claims that all occurred after Israel’s LEGAL occupation of the territories, that is your prerogative. But you would be wrong to believe this. All resolutions past in the U.N. After the Oslo Accords are non-binding. Meaning it is just one country’s way of trying to condemn Israel. Because we all know people hate the Jews for no good reasons.
BTW, the article below is very good at providing links to the International law and agreements that were in place at the time. If you would like to dispute what I am saying here, please provide links to the international laws (Not condemnations and not non-binding issues) that are applicable BEFORE the 1995 Oslo 2 Accords since anything after that is not applicable.
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/294359/israels-rights-in-the-west-bank-under-international-law“Firstly, and underscoring all other considerations, are the international legal rights emanating from the indigenous and historic claims of the Jewish people in the area as a whole, virtually from time immemorial. These rights were acknowledged in 1917 by the Balfour Declaration’s promise of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, and subsequently recognized internationally and encapsulated into international law through a series of international instruments.
Secondly, Israel’s legal rights following the 1967 Six-Day War, as the power administering the West Bank areas of Judea and Samaria (so described in the U.N. 1947 Partition Resolution 181), and the concomitant, unique sui genesis status of the area.
Thirdly, Israel’s rights under international law following the 1993-1995 Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO, and especially the 1995 Interim Agreement, (commonly known as Oslo 2) which established a unique territorial arrangement as a form of lex specialis, that divided the control and governance of the West Bank areas between a Palestinian Authority established for that purpose, and Israel.”
***
“As such, the PLO, as the formal representative of the Palestinian people, formally agreed that in addition to those West Bank and Gaza Strip areas in which all powers and responsibilities for governance and administration would be transferred into the hands of the Palestinian Authority (Areas A and B and the Gaza Strip), Israel would retain powers and responsibilities in part of the area (Area C) vis-a-vis both local Palestinian residents in the area, as well as the Israeli citizens residing in settlements and villages. The parties agreed that this arrangement would remain valid pending the outcome of negotiations between them on the permanent status of the areas.
Despite attempts by the international community, through nonbinding political statements and resolutions in the U.N., to prejudge the outcome of the negotiations by claiming that the territories are “occupied Palestinian territories,” there exists no such legally accepted or agreed to determination.
Similarly, the Oslo Accords did not specify the form the permanent status of the area would take—whether one state, two states, federation, confederation or otherwise. Thus, states and organizations advocating a “two-state solution” are, in fact preempting the outcome of the negotiations that have yet to take place. Any agreed solution will only emanate from negotiations between the Palestinian leadership and Israel and cannot be imposed unilaterally by U.N. resolutions, or by any international forum, or individual leaders.
Any permanent status agreement, if and when reached, will be the sole agreed upon instrument duly determining the status of the area and the respective international and bilateral rights and commitments both of Israel and the Palestinians.
Time will tell.”