While Israel proceeds to carry out its genocidal policies in the Gaza Strip publicly, it is implementing its annexation agenda in the West Bank at the same time. As seen in example E1, New Jewish settlement plans that will further segregate the areas where Palestinians are located are being approved in the Knesset. Not satisfied with this highly controversial plan, Tel Aviv has also publicly shared new settlement areas this week. Israel continues its occupation and apartheid policies. Moreover, the illegality and the prolongation of the occupation show that it is progressing towards the annexation of the West Bank.
As a result of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, Israel occupied the West Bank, along with Gaza and East Jerusalem. Israel does not acknowledge that it occupied the West Bank, as in Gaza and East Jerusalem. Israel claims to control the region. It labels the West bank as “disputed’’, “administered’’ or “under control’’.
Not content with mere occupation, Israel has increased the number of Jewish settlements in the West Bank since 1967 and expanded the boundaries of existing settlements. The continuity of the occupation and settlements brings the nature of these two elements into question. Israel’s presence in the West Bank, occupied Palestinian territory, can be described as a regime with a segregationist settler colonial nature. Besides, the continuation of the construction of Jewish settlements indicates the illegality of the occupation. Indeed, in the Palestinian side’s statement, Israel’s settlement policies have been described as war crimes. Israel, through its settlement policies, is systematically altering the status of Palestinian territories. The exploitation of Palestine’s natural resources, the construction of infrastructure for mere settlements, the building of roads for mere settlers, and the settlement of Israeli citizens in occupied Palestinian territories are considered indicators of Israel’s permanent alteration of Palestinian territory.
The occupation is recognized as an exceptional situation and temporary under international law. Therefore, like any action by Israel, the prolongation of the occupation and its result in the annexation of the occupied territory signifies the violation of international law. Steps to alter the political and legal status of the occupied territory should not be taken. This is because, according to international law, the occupying power must preserve the status quo of the territory in question. However, it must use its power for ensuring public order and social life in the territory. It must guarantee the security of the community. However, Israel bases the presence of the occupation on self-defense. Israel’s continued use of force for prolongation of the occupation and such use not being based on military necessity bring up a violation of the prohibition of the use of force as well as the illegality of the prolonged occupation.
Under international law, not only the presence of the occupation but also the legality of the occupation and the concepts of illegal occupation are brought to the agenda. For example, according to prominent provisions of international law, occupation must not result in the occupying power achieving sovereignty over the territory. The occupation regime should be implemented within the scope of authorizations recognized by law. Through such a regime, occupying power control over the territory should be aimed. The occupying power has several certain authorizations and responsibilities regarding ensuring and maintaining public order and social life. Occupation law mandates the occupying power with such responsibilities as protecting the local people and respecting certain rights of the local people. Such examples as the protection of individual freedoms and the protection of public and private properties can be given. The legal regulations, administrative framework, and living conditions prior to the occupation constitute legal limitations that should be complied with by the occupying power during the implementation of the occupation regime.
Occupation must be temporary, and a temporary administration should be established for a temporary period. Preserving the order and system prior to the occupation as much as possible is aimed. The occupying power would not make permanent changes to the territory under its military and effective control. The occupation may be carried out on condition that it is based on temporary and military necessity within the scope of international law.
Contrary to Israel’s claims, with the expression “prolonged military occupation’’, it is intended that there is an occupation in Palestine, and, in fact, it is attempted to be made permanent. With such expression and discourse, the existence of the occupation and the reason for its continuation are focused on. Concentrating on the character of the occupation, the colonialist attitude is emphasized.
The occupying power must not take any de facto or de jure steps towards a permanent occupation. Therefore, such steps can be considered actions aiming to establish a permanent occupation and change the status of the occupied territory. The construction of the Jewish settlements, the use of Palestinian territory and natural resources by Israel, and actions that would alter the status quo in East Jerusalem can be mentioned as practices aiming to establish a permanent occupation and change the status of the occupied territory.
If the occupying power aims to permanently alter the international status, administration or democratic nature of a foreign territory/country and has permanently altered, then it is possible to mention “illegal occupation”. For example, has de jure annexed West Jerusalem. De jure annexation takes place through official declaration or by occupying power having the acquisition of territory in its legal order. The situation in the West Bank indicates that it is de facto annexation, especially in terms of the presence of Jewish settlements. In the context of de facto annexation, alterations in the occupied territory are made through state practices and policies. Moreover, Israel incorporates the settlements into its own borders through administrative and legal regulations it implemented.
That Israeli occupation is permanent can be understood because of various indicators. Making Jewish settlements permanent through various policies, the regulation of industrial agricultural areas in accordance with the settlements as well as the organization of infrastructure systems such as water systems and roads in compliance with the settlements show that the occupation is permanent. Furthermore, the situation can be examined as de facto annexation.
Israel’s apartheid practices against Palestinians are also encountered. Israel’s citizenship law, nationality and immigration laws, and land and property laws can be given as examples. The most significant indicator of an apartheid in Palestine may be Jewish settlers. In this context, colonization, the character of the racist system and the forced displacement are indicators. Some areas in the West Bank have been reserved by Israel for the mere use of Jewish people. Palestinians are prohibited from entering such areas without permission, and Israelis are also prohibited from entering areas inhabited by Palestinians. The roads connecting these areas can also be mentioned as evidence of the apartheid system, as well.
That judicial institutions treat Palestinians and Jewish Israelis differently and apply different regulations to Palestinians, the implementation of separate of different policies for the two communities regarding housing and access to natural resources, and the constitution and implementation of separate and different policies in topics such as citizenship and freedom of movement are among the evidence that link Israel and apartheid. Settlers are subject to Israeli civil law and are under the constitutional protection. On the other hand, Palestinians are subject to military law. In other words, Israel has established an inclusive legal system in the West Bank, however, in order to refrain from the apartheid accusations, the relevant legal regulations do not apply to Jewish people inhabited in the occupied Palestinian territories. Jewish settlers in the West Bank are subject to different laws and courts than Palestinians. This situation also discloses systematic discrimination and domination.
Apartheid highlights the connection between Israel’s prolonged occupation of Palestine and its settler-colonial system. Moreover, Israel’s demand to be recognized as a Jewish state is another indicator of apartheid governance. In official discourses, particularly in peace negotiations, the condition that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state shows the existence of a different group and the state’s wish to prioritize that certain group.
Since the beginning of the Israeli occupation, Israel has aimed to purge the region of Palestinians or de-Palestinize the region, and the process in question continues. Strategic separation to limit the sovereignty of Palestine, obstruction of economic welfare by claiming rights on natural resources, erasement of Palestinian identity by depriving Palestinians of their cultural and civil rights, and prevention of Palestinians from enjoying their right to self-determination by blocking their political existence and the tools to statehood have been the intentions. For instance, the addition of new Jewish settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, separates Palestinians not only from their land but also from other Palestinians.
Apartheid, the prolonged occupation discourse, and the illegality of Israeli occupation indicate that Israel’s presence in the West Bank is against to politics, law and normative values. Palestine, based on that, aims to increase the given international support. Although such prominent international actors as the United Kingdom opposed, Israel’s new settlement plans demonstrate that the process moves forward annexation of the West Bank.
