UN against Israel’s occupation of Palestine

Most countries have backed a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution that sets a deadline for Israel to end its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory amid rising international criticism of Israel.

The resolution, passed on Wednesday, is not legally binding. But it includes stern rebukes of Israel and won the support of many nations in the West that have traditionally backed Israel.

It was the first time in the history of the UN that Palestine introduced its own draft resolution for voting in the 193-member General Assembly, thanks to the enhanced rights and privileges it received – still as an observer state – after a resolution in May.

PSOOSOOOO

What does the resolution say?

The resolution demands that “Israel brings to an end without delay its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, which constitutes a wrongful act of a continuing character entailing its international responsibility, and do so no later than 12 months”.

The resolution calls for Israel to comply with international law and withdraw its military forces, immediately cease all new settlement activity, evacuate all settlers from occupied land and dismantle parts of the separation wall it constructed inside the occupied West Bank.

It says Israel must return land and other “immovable property” as well as all assets seized since the occupation began in 1967 and all cultural property and assets taken from Palestinians and Palestinian institutions.

The resolution also demands Israel allow all Palestinians displaced during the occupation to return to their places of origin and make reparations for the damage caused by its occupation.

What does the underpinning ICJ ruling say?

The UNGA document was based on an advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in July that declared the occupation illegal and said all states are obliged not to “render aid or assistance in maintaining” it.

The world’s highest court ruled that Israel is “abusing its status as the occupying power” by building and expanding settlements, using the area’s natural resources, annexing and imposing permanent controls over lands, and undermining Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

The court issued the opinion after it was sought in 2022 by the General Assembly and as the UN and the vast majority of the international community consider the Palestinian territory as Israeli-occupied.

Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem in the six-day Arab-Israeli war in 1967.

It was forced to withdraw from Gaza under international pressure in 2005 but maintained a land, sea and air blockade over the enclave.

What do the votes show?

The resolution was approved by 124 UN member states with 43 countries abstaining and 14 rejecting it.

Against: The list of those opposed includes Israel and its top ally, the United States. Argentina, which in 2010 had recognised Palestinian statehood, has under current President Javier Milei shifted its stance and grown into one of Israel’s staunchest diplomatic supporters. It too opposed the resolution. Paraguay is the only nation in the America that voted against the resolution.

Hungary and the Czech Republic were the only ones to vote no from Europe, joined by Malawi from Africa and multiple Pacific island countries.

For: France, Spain, Finland and Portugal were some of the main European countries to vote in favour. Other prominent backers included Japan, China, Russia and Brazil. Overall, almost all of Africa, Europe, Asia and Latin America voted yes.

Abstentions: India’s decision to abstain meant that it broke with the rest of the BRICS group of leading Global South countries and with all of South Asia, excluding Nepal. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu counts his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi, as a close friend. Under Modi — who in 2017 became the first Indian prime minister to visit Israel — ties between the nations have grown substantially as New Delhi has slowly drifted away from its traditional, steadfast support for Palestine.

Since the start of the war on Gaza, Israel’s Western allies have been mostly abstaining or voting against UN resolutions that seek to protect Palestinians or hold Israel to account. Even watered-down binding resolutions that have been passed by the UN Security Council have not been implemented.

Wednesday’s vote also had considerably more abstentions than some previous votes, including a Gaza ceasefire vote in the General Assembly in December.

Does Israel’s ‘right to defend itself’ extend to occupation?

All sovereign nations have a right to defend themselves against attacks, an argument that Israel’s allies have consistently emphasised to justify the country’s killing of tens of thousands of people in the Gaza Strip and the occupied West Bank since the October 7 attacks by Hamas on Israel.

The US, along with allies that abstained during Wednesday’s vote — including Australia, Canada, Germany and Ukraine — said they cannot vote in favour of a resolution that does not spell out Israel’s right to defend itself.

But they did not explain how the occupation was needed for Israel to defend itself.

The US mission to the UN said it believes Israeli settlements in occupied territory are “inconsistent with international law” and Washington “respects” the role of the ICJ but views the document as “a one-sided resolution that selectively interprets the substance of the ICJ’s opinion, does not advance what we all want to see, and that is progress toward two states, living in peace, side by side”.

Washington claimed the resolution advances a “false” idea that a text adopted in New York can resolve the complex conflict.

But UN special rapporteurs, a wide array of experts in international law and a number of countries have asserted that Israel cannot claim it is defending itself as an occupying power that is actively killing Palestinian civilians or depriving them of basic necessities.

The ICJ also ruled in an advisory opinion in 2004 that Israel could not invoke the right to self-defence in an occupied territory when the court was reviewing Israel’s construction of the separation wall in the West Bank for alleged security purposes.

Israel’s right to self-defence is a difficult question that remains divisive, according to James Devaney, a senior lecturer of the School of Law at the University of Glasgow.

He explained that the ICJ in the past has insisted that states’ inherent right to self-defence in international law relates to defence against other states.

“While many states express support for a broader right that would allow self-defence also in relation to nonstate actors, the issue of Palestine’s statehood is, of course, bound up in such questions. As such, I would say that the question of self-defence is a difficult legal issue that certain states may legitimately disagree on the effects of and may also provide cover for states to vote in a way that aligns with their political positions,” Devaney told Al Jazeera.

Will this change anything on the ground?

The nonbinding resolution cannot be enforced and is, therefore, unlikely to change anything for Palestinians in occupied territory in the foreseeable future, analysts said.

Devaney said that while the General Assembly resolution sets a deadline for Israel to vacate occupied Palestinian territory, that fact does not change the non-enforceable nature of the resolution.

“This 12-month deadline has political significance and may play a role in future political and procedural steps taken at the UN but in my opinion does not change anything in terms of the legal effect of the resolution or the advisory opinion,” he said.

Meanwhile, Palestinians continue to be killed, maimed or detained without charge in Gaza and the West Bank on a daily basis, and violence by both the Israeli military and settlers has been sharply increasing.

Israeli forces have also been demolishing Palestinian structures – or forcing Palestinians to do it themselves on fear of fines and arrests – at a rapidly rising rate since the start of the war on Gaza.

At least 11,560 Palestinian structures have been demolished and 18,667 people displaced since the UN started registering this data in 2009, according to the latest figures. More than 1,250 structures have been destroyed in 2024 alone.

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA