State borders: a question for the ICJ

At the request of a Palestinian, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution requesting an advisory opinion from the highest international judicial body (the International Court of Justice) on the legal nature of occupation.

The court in the Netherlands issued on 8-2-2023 a decision that the United Nations and member states are able to provide information about questions submitted to the court pursuant to Article 66 of its statute, and set 7-25-2023 as a time limit for submitting written statements about questions to the court, and 10-25-2023 as a time limit for states and organizations to submit written comments or objections to written statements submitted by other countries or organizations.

The question that I wish to include and study, and repeat in every political or diplomatic meeting, 75 years after the recognition of the State of Israel at the United Nations, and after the intransigence of Member States - which have been calling for the dissolution of the two powers for decades - on recognizing the Palestinian state, and from here, if there is an international consensus on the necessity of ending the occupation, why not ask the following questions:

Why does the United Nations not demand that the State of Israel define its geographical borders, as it does for other member states, and in accordance with the principles of the international system? Based on an explicit answer, member states decide whether to continue proposing the two-state solution or dispense with it out of respect for the imposed realities on the ground.

Isn't it wise for the international system to deal with the occupation as a UN legal issue and not as a subject for negotiation? Isn't it time to realize that negotiations in themselves are a means, not an end?

Is the tool of "bilateral negotiations" between the Palestinians and the Israelis really a "single and sufficient tool" for achieving peace and securing a politically independent Palestinian state? Isn't it time to draw the court's attention to consider peaceful measures and means of conflict resolution other than "negotiations" to achieve the same goal? Is it not wise to resort to mediation, conciliation, or arbitration, among the methods that the court may deem appropriate, while maintaining the ultimate goal of achieving peace for the two peoples? Avoid further procrastination and achieve self-determination for the Palestinian people, as it is an inalienable right in the international system.

It is necessary for the Palestinians to learn from their experiences in these arenas. In 2004, when an advisory opinion was issued by the International Court of Justice on the wall, it affirmed the duty to establish a Palestinian state as soon as possible, affirmed the illegality of the wall, and placed responsibility on the United Nations. However, the advisory opinion was not properly built upon and is not binding in the end!

The international community is aware of the extremist Israeli government's determination to continue its occupation and undermine the right of Palestinian self-determination. This time, the court will present an advisory opinion on the legitimacy of the long-term Israeli occupation. It is necessary that the statements and questions focus on exposing the obsessive settlement purpose of prolonging the occupation, which is an explicit violation of the peremptory standards of international law. Therefore, we hope that the Palestinian legal and diplomatic team will conduct a hearing and feed the public with the developments of the sessions. It is necessary to present written statements, comments and international responses to achieve the supreme Palestinian interest. It is necessary to reactivate the national and legal committees to mobilize and unify efforts to follow up the file and avoid wasting any opportunity!

Going to the ICJ, coinciding with a bloody extremist Israeli government, is a positive Palestinian diplomatic step to seek an advisory opinion, which constitutes an initiative to break out of the circle of emptiness and to direct the gravity towards the "occupation" and the need to start ending it.

Dalal Erekat: Professor of Diplomacy and Strategic Planning, Faculty of Graduate Studies, Arab American University.