The Palestine-Israel Conflict

Abstract

This article aims to analyze the conflict between Palestine and Israel through a legal-international perspective, grounded in the historical and geographical evolution of the region. From the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Balfour Declaration (1917), the establishment of the State of Israel (1948), the Six-Day War (1967), and the Oslo Accords (1993), to the most recent developments, especially after the attacks on October 7, 2023, the study identifies the legal weaknesses in Israel’s claim of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. The analysis suggests that certain Israeli actions may constitute violations of international law, including potential apartheid practices, as pointed out by organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

Keywords: Israel-Palestine conflict; International Public Law; Self-defense; Apartheid; UN Charter; Oslo; Hamas.

Introduction

The conflict between Israel and Palestine is one of the most prolonged and complex geopolitical disputes of the 20th and 21st centuries. The issue goes beyond territorial or religious dimensions, deeply involving principles of International Public Law (IPL), especially concerning military actions, sovereignty, self-determination, and the legal validity of self-defense claims. This article aims to contextualize the conflict using a historical-geographical framework and, from there, examine the legal consistency of Israel’s invocation of the right of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Palestine under the Ottoman Empire and Post-WWI Territorial Redefinitions

Until the early 20th century, Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire—a political-religious entity that controlled vast regions across the Middle East, North Africa, and Southeastern Europe. With the collapse of the Empire following World War I (1914–1918), Arab territories were redistributed among the victorious colonial powers under the League of Nations’ Mandate system. Palestine fell under British control, established by the British Mandate of Palestine (1922), based on the Balfour Declaration (1917).

The Balfour Declaration and the Creation of a “National Home for the Jewish People”

The Balfour Declaration, issued in 1917 by the British government, was a diplomatic milestone supporting the creation of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. While it promised not to infringe on the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities, the mass immigration of European Jews and the growing tensions with the Arab population triggered waves of violence and uprisings, such as those in 1920, 1929, and 1936–39.

From an international legal standpoint, the Balfour Declaration lacked solid legitimacy. It is questionable whether a colonial power had the right to promise the establishment of a new state in occupied territory, particularly under the principle of self-determination.

The Partition of Palestine and the Creation of the State of Israel

In 1947, the UN approved Resolution 181, proposing the partition of Palestine into two states—one Jewish and one Arab—with Jerusalem under international governance. Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948, triggering the First Arab-Israeli War (1948–49). The proposed Palestinian state was never established, as its territory was partly occupied by Israel, Egypt (Gaza), and Jordan (the West Bank).

The non-implementation of Resolution 181 and the failure to create a Palestinian state remain central to Palestinian demands in international forums.

The Six-Day War (1967) and the Prolonged Occupation

In 1967, Israel launched a preemptive attack against Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, resulting in the occupation of Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The UN responded with Resolution 242, demanding Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories—a demand still not fully met today.

The continued occupation of territories without Security Council authorization and without a declared state of war raises questions about the legality of Israeli actions under IPL. In a 2004 advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel’s construction of a barrier within occupied territory was illegal, reaffirming the principle of the inadmissibility of acquiring territory by force.

The Oslo Accords (1993): Progress or Regression?

Signed between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the Oslo Accords outlined a transition plan toward the creation of a Palestinian state. However, the legal status of the treaty is debatable, since Palestine was not yet fully recognized as a state—raising doubts under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), which applies only to agreements between international legal subjects.

Despite establishing the Palestinian Authority, the Oslo process failed to result in full statehood for Palestine or halt Israeli settlement expansions.

The Right of Self-Defense and Article 51 of the UN Charter

Israel frequently invokes Article 51 of the UN Charter to justify military operations in Gaza and the West Bank. However, the article permits self-defense only in the event of an armed attack by one state against another. Although Hamas exercises de facto control over Gaza, it is not a recognized state.

Moreover, valid self-defense under international law must be immediate, proportional, and reported to the Security Council—criteria that Israel often neglects. To date, no UN Security Council resolution has endorsed or legitimized Israeli bombings in Gaza following the October 7, 2023 attacks.

Hamas: Political-Military Structure and Legal Implications

Hamas is not merely an armed group. Since 2006, it has held the majority in the Palestinian Parliament (76 of 132 seats), provides public services, and exercises administrative control in Gaza. While rejecting the Oslo Accords and classified as a terrorist organization by Western nations, Hamas remains a central political actor in the region.

Complete delegitimization of Hamas as a political entity justifies Israel’s refusal to engage in negotiations, perpetuating a strategy of endless military response without diplomatic progress.

Considerations on the Crime of Apartheid

Several organizations, including Human Rights Watch (2021), Amnesty International (2022), and UN rapporteurs, have argued that Israel may be committing the crime of apartheid. Defined by the Rome Statute as inhumane acts committed under a regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another, this applies to Israel’s dual legal systems, movement restrictions, home demolitions, and economic blockades imposed on Palestinians.

The Role of the United States and the Geopolitics of Arms

The U.S. plays a decisive role in the conflict. Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. military aid, receiving over $3.8 billion annually in recent years. In November 2023, the U.S. vetoed a Brazilian-proposed ceasefire resolution at the UN Security Council, reaffirming its alignment with Tel Aviv.

U.S. arms manufacturers directly benefit from the ongoing conflict, as demonstrated by recent contracts supplying Israel with guided munitions and advanced defense systems.

Conclusion

Israel’s invocation of the right to self-defense presents significant legal inconsistencies under International Public Law. The absence of an armed attack by a state, the lack of Security Council authorization, and the disproportionate use of force undermine the legitimacy of such claims. Meanwhile, Israel’s refusal to recognize Palestinian self-determination and its continued territorial occupation by force constitute serious violations of international law. The current scenario demands an urgent multilateral, legal, and diplomatic solution—centered on the recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state—as the only viable path to lasting peace in the region.

References

• BEVILAQUA, Clovis. Conceito de Estado. 1930, p.3.
• BBC NEWS. Gaza Strip Maps. 2023. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/articles/c9xkn90p550o
• UNITED NATIONS CHARTER. 1945. Available at: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto/1930-1949/D19841.htm
• HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH. A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution. 2021.
• UNITED NATIONS. Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem. Part I (1917–1947). 1978.
• AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL. Israel’s Apartheid Against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime Against Humanity. 2022.
• PODER 360. Territory Evolution of Palestinians and Israelis. 2023.
• SPUTNIK. U.S. Authorizes Sale of Precision Bomb Equipment to Israel. 2023.