Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
DISCLAIMER WE make no warranty of any kind on the subject matter included or the completeness or accuracy of this website. We aren't liable for any actions (or lack) resulting from the information here. And in no event shall we be liable for any damages resulting from reliance on or use of this information. The posts at this site are for general information only. Get expert help when dealing with specific situations and do not rely on the information here.
The fact is that "international law" is unclear. All nations have a right to defend themselves against systematic attacks, which in large measure is what the settlements are all about. Also, under international law, there is absolutely no ownership of the West Bank. It had been claimed by Jordan, which abandoned the claim more than 20 years ago, and so the question of who has the right to settle there is open. Do you think that "internatinal law" says that Jews have no right to live in areas in near Jerusalem and that they must continue to negotiate in good faith with a party that refuses to even come to face to face meetings and which has not renounced the use of terrorism and violence? I.The situation on the ground in and around the West Bank can only be solved by honest negotiations between the PA and Israel. Notions about "international law" -- whatever that is -- are irrelevant. Any kind of law is something that is enforceable against parties, say nation states, who are bound by it. Moreover, it is the law of relations between nations -- and the Palestinian Authority is the government of a nation in any sense of the word but does not on an ongoing basis sees itself bound by the rule of law