The Abraham Accords are a game changer for the Middle East and for Europe; yet they have been met by European leaders with skepticism. This approach threatens to harm not only the region, but also Europe’s own interests.
Dr. Mark Goldfeder opines that the ruling is factually wrong, legally problematic, discriminatorily hypocritical and systemically dangerous.
European Court: calls for Boycott of Israeli products are allowed under Freedom of Expression – Commentary
The European Court of Human Rights (ECt.HR) has ruled that calls for boycott of Israeli products are justified under European human rights law. This case raises serious policy issues. BDS activities are at their core discriminatory and anti-Semitic.
European Court: calls for Boycott of Israeli products are allowed under Freedom of Expression – the Judgment
The European Court of Human Rights (ECt.HR) has ruled that calls for boycott of Israeli products are justified under European human rights law. This case raises serious policy issues.
Op 17 september 2020 presenteerde Andrew Tucker een ‘livestream’ voor Christenen voor Israël onder de titel ‘Europa, Israël en het internationaal recht – het verraad aan het Joods volk’. Klik op de titel voor zijn presentatie.
The EU is conditioning the minds of European consumers to fit the world-view of the bureaucrats in Brussels. This is morally wrong and breaches international law. George Orwell saw it coming in 1984.
The EU claims that labels on products made by Jews in Judea or Samaria are “misleading” if they do not specify the product is made in a “settlement” in the “West Bank”. But actually it is the EU that is misleading consumers.
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.
By Andrew Tucker, Director at thinc. On the 10th of June, over 100 international lawyers issued an Open Letter to the Israeli government, stating that Israel’s policy proposal is “clearly unlawful, and will most likely have adverse consequences, including … consequences of an internationally wrongful act … [and] a high likelihood of violent…
In this article the author analyses historical and actual objections under international law to the Two-State Solution and the unilateral declaration of the ‘State of Palestine’.