On 18 September the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) voted to adopt a resolution which reaffirms the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) of 19 July 2024. The vote followed a debate concerning Israeli actions in occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. There were 124 votes in favour, 14 against, and 43 abstentions.
The ICJ has declared that Israel’s continued presence in the Territory “is unlawful” and that “all States are under an obligation not to recognise” the occupation of 1967.
The UK abstained in the vote. This decision is very disappointing: it ducks the UK’s obligations under international law and Labours pledged political commitments. It’s an opportunity missed – we need to press for more, and better, from our Government.The following response to the resolution details the areas of gravest concern to the Balfour Project following the UK’s abstention. It takes into consideration the wider legal framework in which this decision sits and offers suggestions as to how the UK Government should now act.
Balfour Project proposals
The UK Government should now:
- Recognise the State of Palestine, alongside the State of Israel, on the land illegally occupied by Israel since 1967, acknowledging the right of the Palestinian people to national self-determination and to demonstrate our respect for equal national and individual rights for both Palestinians and Israelis. Nothing can override or negate the Palestinian people’s right to determine its own future;
- Henceforth refer to the “illegally Occupied Palestinian Territory”;
- Refuse accreditation to Israeli diplomats living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory or associated with the illegal settler movements;
- Tell British nationals that they must not live in illegal settlements;
- Review all remaining arms sales to Israel in line with the UK’s obligations under the international Arms Trade Treaty, and suspend any further current or existing arms licences that risk entailing breaches of IHL; stop buying military security equipment from Israeli companies; and end any logistical support, including intelligence, to Israel’s military campaigns in Gaza and the West Bank;
- In light of the ICJ’s confirmation that all Israeli settlements on occupied land are illegal, ban trade with settlements, and ban UK-based companies (including banks and other financial institutions) from all involvement with settlements or their support structure;
- Widen its advice to UK–based businesses to highlight the economic, legal and reputational risks of involvement with the unlawful Occupation or with Israel’s war on Gaza;
- Impose sanctions, modelled on those in force against Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and the Donbas, on those involved in the funding or construction of settlements and their underlying infrastructure;
- Vote in the UN Security Council to enforce ICJ measures over Israel’s actions in Rafah;
- Increase existing UK sanctions against violent settlers, all those who incite violence against Palestinian civilians, or advocate dispossession, expulsion or genocide, and the organisations that fund these activities, including those outside Israel;
- Support the ICJ, International Criminal Court and UN Human Rights Council in holding to account all parties involved in breaches of international law, whether Israeli or Palestinian.
Below, please find a detailed analysis of the UNGA resolution and our assessment of the required UK response.
With best wishes,
The Balfour Project team
The Resolution
The resolution, which is non-binding but has moral and political force, demands that Israel “brings to an end without delay its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” and sets a twelve month deadline.
Ten years ago, the UK voted for UNGA resolutions 69/165, 69/91and 69/92, which confirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; the applicability of the Geneva Conventions to the OPT; and the illegality of the Israeli settlements in the OPT, including East Jerusalem and in the occupied Syrian Golan, respectively.
Twenty years ago, the ICJ held, in “Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, that the construction of the separation wall constituted an unlawful use of force in violation of international law – highly relevant to the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 19 July. Emphasis was placed on the fundamental need to ensure accountability for violations of law to end impunity, ensure justice, and deter future violations. The resolution demands that Israel comply with all of its legal obligations under international law, including as stipulated by the ICJ.
The UK position
There was an overwhelming majority in favour of the resolution, including France, the UK’s partner as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. The UK abstained, while reiterating its commitment to the international rule of law and renewing its call for international cooperation.
Ambassador Woodward reasoned the abstention was “not because we do not support the central findings of the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion, but rather because the resolution does not provide sufficient clarity to effectively advance our shared aim of a peace premised on a negotiated two-State solution”.
The resolution affirmed the right to “an independent and sovereign State, living side by side in peace and security with Israel, in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly”, and emphasised, six times, the Palestinian right to self-determination.
Recognition of the State of Palestine is not predicated on the prior achievement of two independent states. Legally and politically, the latter is not conditional on the former. The fact of recognition of the State of Palestine by 146 UN member states (out of 193) amply demonstrates this. The UK abstention does not in any way advance the stated UK Government’s oft-repeated policy objective – to make irreversible progress towards a two-state solution. Quite the contrary.
The Balfour Project places the need for UK recognition of the State of Palestine now at the forefront of our advocacy of Palestinian rights. The UNGA resolution seeks an end to hostilities and violence in the OPT – a declared UK aim. Though the General Assembly does not have the power to create binding resolutions, it demonstrates the collective political and moral will of the world community. This time, it sought to take steps towards a peaceful political solution in Palestine and Israel. The UK abstention hindered that effort.
Annexation and occupation
The UNGA rightly holds that Israel’s illegal settlement project constitutes annexation of Palestinian lands. The resolution recalled the Advisory Opinion conclusion that Israel’s policies and practices in the West Bank reflect a permanent intention to acquire sovereignty through an unlawful use of force. In this regard, the UK has fallen short of what the Labour party had pledged, agreeing on the illegality of the settlements and the need for measures to hold Israel to account.
Ambassador Woodward condemned Israel’s expansion of settlements in the West Bank as “clear violations of international law”. She added that “efforts must be made to create the conditions for negotiations which provide for a sovereign, viable and free Palestine, alongside a safe, secure and free Israel”. These are words, which, at least in the first part, echo the conclusions of the ICJs judgment in their Advisory Opinion. The resolution contained detail on the required removal of the settlers from Palestinian territory occupied by Israel in 1967 and international divestment from Israeli entities profiting from the land.
Throughout 2024 there have been increasing instances of blatant IDF and settler violence in the West Bank. The UK Government needs to follow through with action, not just words.
Geneva Conventions
The resolution reiterates UNGA resolution 69/91 of 2014: confirming the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war in the OPT. Israel has historically denied its obligations as an occupier, not least through their denial of the occupation of Gaza since 2005 – but the rest of the world holds Israel responsible as the occupying power throughout the OPT. In the past, the UN has called upon states parties to the GCIV to meet to discuss their obligations under Article 1 – to ensure respect for the GCIV – in relation to Israel’s occupation of Palestine. Meetings of High Contracting Parties met in1998, 1999 and 2001 and reiterated the applicability of the GCIV to the OPT. Contained within the UNGA resolution is a requirement for Switzerland to convene a conference of High Contracting Parties to the GCIV within six months of the adoption of the resolution. Mindful that the Geneva Conventions are not intending to bring conflict to an end, but to regulate the actions of parties during hostilities – including during occupation – and to ensure the protection of civilians, the Balfour Project urges the UK, with utmost urgency, to put its political weight into supporting and ensuring adherence to the GCIV.
The Balfour Project Position
We call upon the UK Government to do more than pledge to uphold international law; to comply with the obligations placed on states, through General Assembly resolutions that the UK has previously voted for, UNSC resolutions and the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 19 July and to set out the actions that the UK will take to further these obligations and aims.
We renew our call for the UK Government to recognise the State of Palestine immediately and to demonstrate a serious commitment to compliance with the ICJ Advisory Opinion of the 19th July and the obligations of states party which it details. Our detailed proposals for UK action – giving a lead to like-minded international partners – are summarised above.