Israel And The Struggle Over The International Laws Of War

The author argues that Israel stands on the frontlines of a new struggle over the international laws of war and exposes abuses of law that have been promulgated by international human rights lawyers, UN bodies, and intellectuals to illegitimately circumscribe the right of liberal democracies to defend themselves against transnational terrorists. The Goldstone Report, which was published by the United Nations in September 2009, and the Gaza flotilla controversy, which erupted at the end of May 2010, are examples of those abuses. This book criticizes the flawed assumptions and defective claims arising from both the Goldstone Report and the Gaza flotilla controversy, showing how the legal principles and conclusions advanced by many of Israel's critics threaten not only Israel's national security interests but the United States' as well.

"The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" offers a comprehensive and systematic legal treatment of Jewish national and political rights to all of the Land of Israel. The author, Howard Grief, is the originator of the thesis that de jure sovereignty over the entire Land of Israel and Palestine was vested in the Jewish People as a result of the San Remo Resolution adopted at the San Remo Peace Conference on April 24, 1920. Yuval Ne'eman, a former Israeli government minister said: "For about 400 years, the Ottoman Empire ruled over all the Balkans, the Middle East and North Africa. The struggle for the liberation of those areas began in the Balkan lands at the beginning of the 19th century and ended in 1913. In the First World War, the job [of liberation] was completed and Turkey was reduced to the Anatolian Peninsula. All of this was contained in the San Remo Agreement of April 1920. The fact that it was precisely at that place and time that Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the states of the Arabian Peninsula obtained [thanks to the victory of the Principal Allied Powers over the Central Powers] the very same liberation from the Ottoman yoke, strengthens the approach of Grief who presents the proof for the inclusion of Palestine [i.e., the Jewish People] in the list of beneficiaries in regard to the "settlement [or disposition] of the inheritance of the Ottoman Empire." Dr. Ya'akov Meron, former Adviser on the Law of Arab Countries at the Ministry of Justice, Jerusalem, Israel and Professor of Moslem Law in the Faculties of Law of Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv wrote: "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" is a forceful and erudite pleading for the respecting of the letter and spirit of the law, not only Israeli law but also the international law that came into existence in the wake of World War I. This law, now largely forgotten or neglected, is still relevant today in regard to the status and borders of the Land of Israel. The author makes a thorough analysis of the international documents which recognized the rights of the Jewish People to the land of their ancestors, most significantly the San Remo Resolution on Palestine, agreed to by the victorious Allies at the Peace Conference of April 1920.

An insider's look at the role international law plays in Arab-Israeli negotiations in the Middle East.

Delegitimation has become the new battleground for Israel and the critics of Israeli military operations. But the Israeli experience reveals a more general engagement where all states act strategically to build legitimacy for their policies and all resist attempts at delegitimation. To understand these processes it is necessary to see how politicized moral and legal judgments shape both the use of force by states and our judgments about the means and the outcomes. This is a book about legitimacy, military lawyers, and security. More particularly, it is about how the legitimacy of Israel’s asymmetric military operations cannot be detached from the politics of law and ethics. Sometimes it is enough that states respect the laws of armed conflict, but at other times they may be held to a higher standard. This does not happen in a vacuum. Rather it is the product of political engagement in the murky politics of international legitimacy where standards are negotiable and some states get a harder time than others. There is a strong theoretical analysis underpinning a discussion that constantly returns to the practical problems of modern armed conflict where combatants hide among civilians and states complain about the unrealistic expectations of human rights NGOs. Here, the law is unclear and there are choices to be made. The book presents new research into the involvement of Israeli military lawyers in operational targeting decision making that has life and death consequences. The case studies concern targeted killing during the Second Intifada, Israel’s 2006 Lebanon War, the 2009 Operation Cast Lead in Gaza and, finally, the 2010 Israeli maritime interception of the ‘Turkish Flotilla’ to Gaza. The investigation identifies a struggle between the proponents of human rights in war and those who promote the rights of states to deploy military force for the security of their citizens. But not all parties to a military conflict are held to the same standards. In fact, the analysis maps a complex political deployment of law and ethics in the strategic calculation of legitimacy costs and the diplomatic processes whereby they are contested, with policy implications for those in charge of the design and execution of military operations.

This book provides a comprehensive examination of land law for Arab Palestinians under Israeli law. Land is one of the core resources of human existence, development and activity. Therefore, it is also a key basis of political power and of social and economic status. Land regimes and planning regulations play a dynamic role in deciding how competing claims over resources will be resolved. According to legal geography, spatial ordering impacts legal regimes; whilst legal rules form social and human space. Through the lenses of international law, colonisation and legal geography, the book examines the land regime in Israel. More specifically, it endeavours to understand the spatial strategies adopted by Israel to organise the entire territorial expanse of the country as Jewish, while also excluding Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel and residents of East Jerusalem from the landscape. The book then details how the systematic nature and processes of marginalisation are mapped out across the civil, political and socio-economic landscape. This monograph will be of interest to international legal theorists, legal geographers, land lawyers and human rights practitioners and students; as well as to international scholars, NGOs and others focusing on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

“A brilliant and bracing analysis of the Palestine question and settler colonialism . . . a vital lens into movement lawyering on the international plane.” —Vasuki Nesiah, New York University, founding member of Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) Justice in the Question of Palestine is often framed as a question of law. Yet none of the Israel-Palestinian conflict’s most vexing challenges have been resolved by judicial intervention. Occupation law has failed to stem Israel’s settlement enterprise. Laws of war have permitted killing and destruction during Israel’s military offensives in the Gaza Strip. The Oslo Accord’s two-state solution is now dead letter. Justice for Some offers a new approach to understanding the Palestinian struggle for freedom, told through the power and control of international law. Focusing on key junctures—from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to present-day wars in Gaza—Noura Erakat shows how the strategic deployment of law has shaped current conditions. Over the past century, the law has done more to advance Israel’s interests than the Palestinians’. But, Erakat argues, this outcome was never inevitable. Law is politics, and its meaning and application depend on the political intervention of states and people alike. Within the law, change is possible. International law can serve the cause of freedom when it is mobilized in support of a political movement. Presenting the promise and risk of international law, Justice for Some calls for renewed action and attention to the Question of Palestine. “Careful and captivating . . . This book asks that the Palestinian liberation struggle and Jewish-Israeli society each reckon with the impossibility of a two-state future, reimagining what their interests are—and what they could become.” —Amanda McCaffrey, Jewish Currents

In Counterinsurgency Law, William Banks and several distinguished contributors explore from an interdisciplinary legal and policy perspective the multiple challenges that counterinsurgency operations pose today to the rule of law - international, humanitarian, human rights, criminal, and domestic. Addressing the considerable challenges for the future of armed conflict, each contributor in the book explores the premise that in COIN operations, international humanitarian law, human rights law, international law more generally, and domestic national security laws do not provide adequate legal and policy coverage and guidance for multiple reasons, many of which are explored in this book. A second shared premise is that these problems are not only challenges for the law in post-9/11 security environments-but matters of policy with implications for the international community and for global security more generally.

A diverse group of contributors offer different perspectives on whether or not the different experiences of our military and the broader society amounts to a "gap"—and if the American public is losing connection to its military. They analyze extensive polling information to identify those gaps between civilian and military attitudes on issues central to the military profession and the professionalism of our military, determine which if any of these gaps are problematic for sustaining the traditionally strong bonds between the American military and its broader public, analyze whether any problematic gaps are amenable to remediation by policy means, and assess potential solutions. The contributors also explore public disengagement and the effect of high levels of public support for the military combined with very low levels of trust in elected political leaders—both recurring themes in their research. And they reflect on whether American society is becoming so divorced from the requirements for success on the battlefield that not only will we fail to comprehend our military, but we also will be unwilling to endure a military so constituted to protect us. Contributors: Rosa Brooks, Matthew Colford,Thomas Donnelly, Peter Feaver, Jim Golby, Jim Hake, Tod Lindberg, Mackubin Thomas Owens, Cody Poplin, Nadia Schadlow, A. J. Sugarman, Lindsay Cohn Warrior, Benjamin Wittes