Anti-BDS Motion Passed by German Federal Parliament

On Friday 17 May, the German Bundestag became the first national parliament in the European Union to adopt a motion denouncing the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement for its anti-Semitic ‘pattern of argument and methods’.

Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ and the ‘Two-State Solution’

The so-called ‘Two-state Solution’ appears to be up for grabs. Basically, the Two-state Solution says that the Palestinians have a right to a state covering all of the so-called West Bank, including ‘East Jerusalem’ as their capital. Years of failed negotiations have given way to the growing sentiment that the two-state solution is simply no longer feasible.

Former EU Leaders Urge EU to Reject Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’

In a recent letter titled ‘Europe must stand by the two-state solution for Israel and Palestine’, 37 high-ranking former EU and NATO officials urge the EU to reject President Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ unless this plan commits to the two-state solution and adequately addresses Palestinian demands.

The future of the Two-state Solution

On 13 September 2018, the 25th anniversary of the ‘Oslo Accords’ was passed. The Dutch government has always been a supporter of these accords. Unfortunately, the implementation of the Oslo Accords has stalled and the belief in the Two-state Solution is waning. Positions on both sides of the conflict harden and the situation among the […]

The Legal Status of Jerusalem: Is Trump Right?

President Donald Trump’s decision to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has been subject to intense international scrutiny. Amid the debate, what does the law suggest? Read here what Professor Gregory Rose of the School of Law at the University of Wollongong, Australia, wrote about it.

Secure and Recognized Borders: UN Resolution 242 and the ’67 Lines

In this article the author, Dr. Cynthia Day Wallace, demonstrates cogently that the 1967 lines are not  “borders” under international law. Therefore, this word should not be used to create and perpetuate the impression that Israel has illegally transgressed the borders of another State.

The boy who cried wolf?

On the 21st of December 2017 the UN GA again adopted a resolution on Jerusalem within a month of its previous resolution on the same topic . The most recent resolution came in response to the speech of the President of the United States on the 6th of December 2017, in which he recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced the removal of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv and its relocation to Jerusalem.

UN General Assembly Resolution on Jerusalem contravenes international law

On the 30th of November, 2017, the General Assembly (GA) of the United Nations (UN) adopted a resolution on Jerusalem (A/RES/72/15). Below, some of the presuppositions and findings of the GA on keys issues are subjected to closer scrutiny, including the Temple Mount and Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. This resolution was adopted with […]

Court of Justice quashes removal of Hamas from EU terror list

Judgment of the Court of Justice (EU), Grand Chamber, 26 July 2017 in CaseC-79/15 P (ECLI:EU:C:2017:584) * This is a judgment in appeal in which the Court of Justice set aside a judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2014 (Hamas v Council). The issue is that since 2001, Hamas has been included in […]

The Importance of Studying the Position of Israel under International law

Every day, media around the world report on the “illegality” of Israeli settlements, and the obligations of Israel under international law to withdraw from the “occupied Palestinian territories”. Time again, Israeli presence in the “Palestinian territories” is claimed to be an “obstacle to global peace”, and as a result all states are required not to recognize those illegalities, and are even obliged to ensure that they stop.  Such  statements are repeated time and again in the UN organisations like the General Assembly, the Security Council and UNESCO, and are often picked up and repeated by religious bodies like the World Council of Churches. Many national governments, following those statements, are committed as a matter of foreign policy to condemnation of the illegality of many of Israel’s activities and policies, and recognition of the State of Palestine on the basis of the “1967 borders”. Challenging these assertions is often regarded as politically incorrect and those who do so are subject to being shouted down as opponents of peace and justice.

Support thinc. - Your guide to Israel and international law

Welcome. thinc offers our growing network of friends and experts worldwide insights relevant to the conflict between Israel and their adversaries through the lens of international law. – Support us from today from €5 per month.