In this op-ed, the authors place the facts and consequences of the 2001 Durban Declaration in the light of international law. What was once intended as a call against racism and discrimination has turned into a manifestation of anti-Semitism whose consequences are manifested to this day, including in the form of the BDS movement. Certainly no reason for a celebratory commemoration.
The discourse, which without irony uses the rhetoric of human rights to undercut international law, diverts attention from the incontrovertibly illegal attacks by Hamas on Israel.
Hamas is playing a dangerous game by exposing the Gaza civilians to feed its media campaign.
Neutral application of property law becomes an international incident because a landlord is a Jew.
The authors, all working at the ICC, opine that it is in the interest of the State of Israel to engage with the ICC rather than ignore the Court.
Several US senators and representatives have signed letters contending that “Israel has an obligation under international law” to provide free vaccines for all Palestinians in the Palestinian Authority (PA). The claims are baseless, and they call into question the credibility of the legal experts who have been peddling them.
In this op-ed the author argues that recognizing “Palestine” as a state before it is in fact a state will not help resolve the Israel/Palestine conflict. In fact it will probably worsen it.
In giving itself jurisdiction over the “Situation in Palestine,” the ICC ignores previous treaties and delegitimizes its own authority.
Dr. Mark Goldfeder opines that the ruling is factually wrong, legally problematic, discriminatorily hypocritical and systemically dangerous.
In response to the Open Letter in Opinio Juris about the plans of the Israeli Government to “annex” certain parts of the “West Bank”, the author points at the misrepresentation of the planned act as ‘annexation’; you cannot annex territory where you already possess sovereignty.