(Jerusalem Post) Eugene Kontorovich and Paula Kweskin - A staple claim of Palestinian supporters is that Israel's occupation of Gaza did not end with the military withdrawal and the accompanying uprooting of nearly 10,000 Jewish residents. Yet Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations provides that a "territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army." Similarly, the Geneva Conventions require that ground forces exercise "control within" the territory. Moreover, an occupying power must be able to provide all governmental functions - to run things inside the occupied territory, not simply patrol the borders. Yet the de facto government of Hamas rules Gaza without Israeli intervention. Some claim that border control amounts to "effective control" of the interior. But prior blockades, like that of Cuba by President John F. Kennedy, were never considered occupations. Moreover, border controls are typical along every international frontier, even among the friendliest of nations. In March, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973 that authorized military action, delineated a no-fly zone across all of Libya, froze Libyan assets, and authorized the extensive use of force against Libyan troops. Yet Resolution 1793 specifically rules out any "occupation" of Libyan territory. So we now have confirmation from the Council that a broad embargo, no-fly zone and months of constant aerial bombardment do not constitute an "occupation." Obviously Israel's much less comprehensive and invasive measures against Gaza do not constitute an occupation by this standard. Eugene Kontorovich is a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, and Paula Kweskin is an attorney at NGO Monitor.
2011-06-02 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive