A human rights study: the deal of the century ... between the logic of force and international law

Waseem Jaber Al-Shanti *

On January 28, 2020, US President Donald Trump announced his peace plan between Israel and the Palestinians, known to the media as the "Deal of the Century". It contained a set of items that came in 181 pages, and dealt with various issues: from borders, through the right of return, to Jerusalem, and to the shape of the Palestinian economy.

According to the provisions of international law, the overall US peace plan is an illegal document, as it is based on the principle of force, de facto policy, and non-compliance with international legitimacy decisions, and contains gross violations of the provisions of international humanitarian law, international human rights law, international criminal law, law International customary.

It also contains texts contrary to the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, Security Council resolutions, the International Court of Justice, and other decisions of institutions that have preserved the Palestinian people their minimum rights and decided their right to self-determination.

The plan contained many legal violations, most notably the following:

First: Violating the Palestinian people's right to self-determination
The "Deal of the Century" violates one of the most fundamental principles of international human rights law, which is the right to self-determination, as it transformed the occupation from being a temporary occupation to a permanent occupation, by stipulating the establishment of a Palestinian entity under full Israeli control, the deal did not stipulate any Palestinian state It is independent, and it did not allow the Palestinians to determine their fate and obtain their independence from Israeli control.

What the Palestinians need is for them to have the right to govern themselves, and to be able to freely choose their political system and future, and this right will only be applicable if the Palestinian people can live on their entire land continuously and continuously.

The United Nations General Assembly has recognized the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in dozens of resolutions, including Resolution 3089 (XXVIII) issued on 7/12/1973, Resolution 3236 (XXIX) issued on November 22 1974, and others.

Second: Violating the principle of the temporary nature of the occupation
The provisions of the "Deal of the Century" stipulate that the Palestinian state - to be established according to the deal - will be without sovereignty, and will be subject to Israeli control, and this is what is considered a law of legislation and a guarantee of the state of permanent military occupation.

As Article (42) of the Land War Regulations attached to the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907 stipulates that "the land of the state is occupied when it is under the effective authority of the enemy's army, and the occupation includes only the lands in which this authority can be exercised after its establishment."

The "Deal of the Century" has transformed the state of the Israeli occupation from being a temporary occupation to a permanent occupation, according to the provisions of international law. The occupation may not be permanent in any way, as it is a de facto situation created by force majeure, and it is a reality that is not based on law. Also, the state of occupation does not give the occupier the right to property in the occupied territories, and the occupied territory may not be annexed to the occupying country.

Third: Violation of the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949
The "Deal of the Century" expressly violates the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which prohibited changing the demographic character and legal status of the occupied territories.

Among the most important articles that the terms of the deal violate is the text of Article (49) of the agreement, which prohibits the forced or mass forcible transfer of residents of the occupied territories.

Fourth: Violating the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council
The "Deal of the Century" violates dozens of resolutions issued by the United Nations General Assembly, related to the Palestinian issue, as it included texts that eliminated international resolutions and draft solutions promising dozens, and the most dangerous of which was a challenge to the international legitimacy that set the Palestinian cause and the two-state solution clear paths.

Among the most prominent decisions that the plan violated were Resolution No. 194 of December 11, 1948, which stipulated the necessity of the return of Palestinian refugees to their homes, and Resolution 242 of November 22, 1967, which stipulated the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the lands occupied in the conflict The latter (during the June 1967 war), and Resolution 2851 of December 20, 1971, in which the United Nations called on Israel to cancel all procedures for annexing any part of the occupied Arab territories, and to cancel the establishment of settlements in the occupied territories.

Fifth: Forcibly annexing the Palestinian territories to Israel
In international law, annexation means "the forcible seizure of land by one state at the expense of another, and presupposes actual occupation of the land, and shows the clear intention to seize it permanently."

Provisions of international law prohibited annexation, as the United Nations Charter prohibited "the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."

The international community previously condemned the annexations carried out by the occupying power by force, especially Resolution No. 242 of 1967 issued by the Security Council, which stressed "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of land by war" and called on Israel to withdraw its armed forces from the lands of 1967.

The American plan came to legitimize the annexations of the occupied territories by Israel, and it was decided to annex other regions such as the Jordan Valley, which constitutes about 28.5% of the occupied West Bank, and is home to the majority of the natural resources in occupied Palestine, and constitutes a third of the groundwater reserves in the West Bank.

Sixth: Violating international law regarding the Jerusalem issue
The deal stipulates avoiding the physical division of the Holy City, and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel, and this is in violation of the United Nations resolutions that confirmed that East Jerusalem is a complete part of the West Bank, and that it is also in violation of the partition plan established by the United Nations in 1947, which legitimizes the establishment of the State of Israel .

The United Nations recognizes East Jerusalem as occupied land (subject to the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention) and thus refuses to recognize Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem, and Security Council Resolution 252 of 1968 confirmed that all Israeli actions in Jerusalem are illegal and a flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention.

The "Deal of the Century" violated almost all Security Council and United Nations General Assembly resolutions which in total are equivalent to twenty resolutions, and thus the plan contained twenty parts in which it attempted to legislate about sixty international legal violations regarding the Jerusalem issue.

Seventh: Legitimization of settlements as part of the Israeli state
The deal clearly stipulated the legitimacy of the settlements, by stipulating that Israel is not obligated to uproot any settlement, and will annex these settlements in adjacent Israeli lands.

Whereas, it overlooked that the Palestinian issue could not be solved and resolved while these settlements remain within the Palestinian territories, because the annexation of those settlements to Israel would turn the Palestinian territories into small separate areas with no possibility of Palestinian geographical unity.

Article (8 / b / 8) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, issued in 1988, defines "the direct or indirect transfer by the occupying state of parts of its civilian population to the land it occupies" as a war crime criminalized by the International Criminal Court.

Resolution (465) of the UN Security Council in 1980 also states that "Israel's policy and actions to resettle part of its population and from new immigrants in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilians at the time of The war also constitutes a serious obstacle to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. " The decision also called on Israel to "dismantle existing settlements".

The American administration comes through the deal of the century to initiate the settlement process at a time when no legal man in the world has been able to give the settlement a legal or legal character, and this is for a very simple reason that the occupation itself is a temporary case, and the occupier is not permitted to reside his subjects in the country Occupying it for whatever reason, within the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Treaty and the United Nations Charter, how has the Trump administration dared to settle the settlement legislation in this plan!

Eighth: Liquidation of the Palestinian refugee issue
The plan states that there will be no right to return, or to absorb any Palestinian refugees in the state of Israel, and upon the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, the status of the Palestinian refugee will cease to exist, and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) will be terminated and its responsibilities transferred. To the governments concerned.

The United Nations General Assembly issued, following the Palestinian Nakba, a special resolution for the return of Palestinian refugees, on which the question of Palestine was based, and the legitimacy of the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes from which they were displaced in 1948 depended on it.

It carries Resolution No. 194 expressly stating that the Palestinian refugees should return to their original homes and villages from which they were displaced, as a people who were expelled from their lands, and they have the right to return as a people, and not as a group of individuals affected by wars like many cases. Not only did he assert the right of return, he went beyond that to the establishment of an international relief agency, UNRWA, until a just and lasting solution was found to their cause.

The announcement of the deal at this time, in this unilateral review manner, by the United States and away from parties involved in the conflict in the region, and without regard to existing agreements, international law and international legitimacy resolutions represents a coup not only in international law and international conflict management, but rather a coup. In international politics and management of international conflicts and dragging the world to the turning point of chaos that will lead to an international clash in the face of the aspirations and policies of the influential and conflicting countries in the world.

The actions of the United States and the Israeli occupation authorities to announce this deal unilaterally and without invoking any legal references, and ignoring international legitimacy decisions, puts them in confrontation with the world and not only with the Palestinians, given that the whole world shares the principles of international law governing state relations and the administration of Conflicts.

This gives the Palestinians enthusiasm to move forward in moving the international rejection of this deal and trying it and dropping it by law to protect the international system and stability in the region and even the world at large, because proceeding with this American-style deal will blow up the entire region and return the conflict in the region to the first square.
--------------
* Researcher, Research and Studies Unit, Protection Center for Human Rights, Gaza