Turner 1

Richard Turner
Professor Dagher
UWRT 1102
5-42015

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a violent conflict that has been going on for most of the
20th century and continues today. As human beings we should feel empathetic towards other
humans that die, especially innocent civilians in these types of conflicts. If there is any room for
peace it should be exploited and pursued and the individuals impeding the peace process should
be taken out of power and reprimanded.
The Geneva Conventions are a list of regulations, agreed upon by most of the nations in
the world, intended to protect the basic human rights of everyone involved in conflict. The fourth
Geneva Convention focuses mainly on individuals who do not take part in war or hostilities or in
other words: innocent civilians. The document depicts how these protected persons should be
treated in times of war. The Geneva conventions are very specific when they describe
international law therefore they are long and exhortative; just as any domestic or international
law should be to avoid loopholes. I wish I had the time to read all four of the Geneva
conventions to completion but for the purpose of my paper I have only read what can be applied
to Israel and Palestine.
Israel started forming its nation before the United Nations and its international laws
were in effect. Israel stared with the Zionist movement in Britain in the early 1900s and even
late 1800s. The base for Israel was created using the Ottoman and British colonial land law,
(HOME, ROBERT, p.8-9) a law of its time that would hold no legal premise in todays world.

Turner 2
With the support of Great Britain, the Zionist settlers in Palestine gradually usurp more territory
in Palestine and displace the indigenous Arab population.(HOME, ROBERT, p.9-10) Whether or
not this was legal under international law at the time does not hold high importance until 1950
when the U.N. created the Nuremberg principles to punish Nazi elites under international law.
Before this principle there was no clear path to international trial.
There are 7 principles recognized in the Nuremberg Principles. I found all of them to be
straight forward except for the second one, which I believe requires more explanation. The fact
that International law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under
international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under
international law(Principles, p.2) This second principle means that just because there is no
penalty stated in international or domestic law for the crime committed, does not excuse the
individual from trial under international law.
Now that I have covered some background information on my topic I will try to analyze
the legality of Israels actions post 1950 using the Geneva Conventions and the Nuremberg
Principles. I am just analyzing Israels actions mainly because there is more information about
Israel than there is for Palestine and Israel is the dominant and occupying power.
In 1948 the nation of Israel was officially made into existence through the U.N. The
official borders of Israel are defined as the borders created in 1948(Resolution 242, p.2)but after
the war of 1967 Israel expanded its borders greatly.(HOME, ROBERT, p.7)It is hard to find any
information from the U.N. strictly defining todays borders in Israel but I believe U.N.s
resolution 242 is a good premise to what the U.N. defines Israeli borders. Resolution 242 asks
Israel to give back all occupied territories after the 1967 war.(Resolution 242, p.2-3)

Turner 3
When a country is inside another countrys land for military reasons it is called a military
occupation. To this day, most of Palestine is under Israeli military occupation,(HOME, ROBERT,
p.15-16) but lucky for Palestine, the 4th Geneva Convention has specific regulations about
military occupation. The first thing I have to say about military occupation is that all military
occupations are temporary.(Icrc, p.40 Article 5) I do not think that I am alone when I say that
Israels occupation of Palestine that has been going on interrupted since 1967 is unlawful, but
there are more aspects of the occupation I would like to evaluate.
Regardless of the motive, the Geneva Conventions finds the forced transfer of protected
persons(persons at the hand of the occupied power) illegal.(Icrc,p. 171 Article 49) Throughout
my research, I have found many examples of Israel forcefully transferring protected persons of
Palestine.(HOME, ROBERT, p. 15) I have also discovered evidence of Israel transferring parts of
their population to their occupied territories;(HOME, ROBERT, p. 15) another illegal act defined
by the fourth Geneva Convention.(Icrc, p. 171 Article 49) These are all crimes against humanity
punishable under principle VI of the Nuremberg Principles.(Principles, p. 2-3) The displacement
of protected persons by Israel has largely taken place under religious discrimination even being
compared to the apartheid in South Africa.(HOME, ROBERT) This is another crime against
humanity described in principle VI.(Principles, p. 2-3)
Israel is also guilty of the destruction of occupied property. This is a war crime under the
4th Geneva Convention and punishable by the Nuremberg Principles when the destruction of
property is done wantonly and without specific military objective.(Icrc, p. 173 Article 53) Israel
has destroyed occupied territory not only for military purposes but for agriculture and
domestication purposes for the occupying power.(HOME, ROBERT, p. 13)

Turner 4
Above are simply a few international crimes committed by Israel but that is not to say
those are all of the international and war crimes Israel is guilty of. If peace is to be achieved in
Israel and Palestine, both of the countries need to follow international law. A country cannot only
think about how their actions will effect themselves as a country. It is apparent that Israel has a
one sided view of justice and will only act in a way that will benefit their own nation. This is
why they have abandoned all peace negotiations since 2005.(Quandt, William Q, p. 2) Palestine
does not share the Israeli view of how the land should be divided therefore Palestinians fight
(inside and outside of international law) for what they claim is their land.
While Palestine is not guilty for as many war and international crimes as Israel is,
Palestine can still be faulted for impeding the peace process in the conflict. Many Palestinians
shared a view that Israel should not exist within Palestine and would not settle for peace until
Israel ceased to exist.(Quandt, William Q, p. 2-3) In late 2004 the government of Palestine
changed and so did their view towards Israel.(Quandt, William Q, p. 2) They no longer wanted
the nation of Israel to perish, but accepted Israels right to exist within the 1948 borders.(Quandt,
William Q, p. 2)Shortly after this Israel abandoned peace negotiations and started to build a wall
around what they (Israel) considered their land.(Quandt, William Q, p. 2) Palestinians reverted
back to not accepting Israels right to exist.(Quandt, William Q, p. 3)
The future for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict does not seem bright. Neither side is willing
to negotiate and have an equally obscured view of justice. The only way I can see to end this
conflict is cooperation between both sides to allow the international community of the U.N.
divide the land based on legal premise. If this does not happen the conflict will last for many
years to come and will only end when Israel has completed the genocide and diaspora of
Palestine(HOME, ROBERT, p. 17) or a major world power supports Palestine in their conflict.

Turner 5

Citations:

HOME, ROBERT. "An `irreversible Conquest'? Colonial and Postcolonial Land Law in Israel/
palestine." Social & Legal Studies. 12.3 (2003): 291-310. Print.

Turner 6
Icrc. "Geneva Conventions." (n.d.): n. pag. International Committee of the Red Cross. 14 Aug.
1949. Web. 5 Apr. 2015.

"Principles of International Law of the Charter and Judgment of the Nuremberg Tribunal,
Formulated by the International Law Commission, Second Session." International
Organization 4.4 (1950): 714-21. Web.

Quandt, William Q. On the Peace Process in the Middle East. No. 2 ed. Vol. 135. N.p.: MIT,
2006. 133-35. Print. On the Humanities (Spring, 2006).

Resolution 242.Chapter. S.l.: Book On Demand, 2013. 22 Nov. 1967. Web