Day 2 at ICJ hearing: Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s actions in Palestinian Territories as ‘legally indefensible’

Day 2 at ICJ hearing: Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s actions in Palestinian Territories as ‘legally indefensible’
1 / 3
Ziad Al-Atiyah, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the Netherlands, has strongly criticized Israel for its actions in the occupied Palestinian territories. (Screen grab)
Day 2 at ICJ hearing: Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s actions in Palestinian Territories as ‘legally indefensible’
2 / 3
South Africa's Ambassador to The Netherlands Vusimuzi Madonsela urged for an end to Israel's violations against Palestinian territories. (Screen grab)
Day 2 at ICJ hearing: Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s actions in Palestinian Territories as ‘legally indefensible’
3 / 3
A protester holds up the Palestinian flag during a rally outside the court house prior to the verdict on the export of parts for F-35 fighter jet, in The Hague on February 12, 2024. (File/AFP)
Short Url
Updated 21 February 2024
Follow

Day 2 at ICJ hearing: Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s actions in Palestinian Territories as ‘legally indefensible’

Day 2 at ICJ hearing: Saudi Arabia condemns Israel’s actions in Palestinian Territories as ‘legally indefensible’
  • South Africa opened second day of hearings
  • Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Netherlands, Bangladesh and Belgium also presented preliminary arguments

THE HAGUE: South Africa on Tuesday urged the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to issue a non-binding legal opinion that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal, arguing it would help efforts to reach a settlement.

Representatives of South Africa opened the second day of hearings at the ICJ, also known as the World Court, in the Hague.

The hearing follows a request by the UN General Assembly for an advisory, or non-binding, opinion on the occupation in 2022. More than 50 states will present arguments until Feb. 26.

Alongside the South African legal team, representatives from Algeria, Saudi Arabia, the Netherlands, Bangladesh, and Belgium also presented preliminary arguments.

This is said to be the largest case at the ICJ and at least three international organizations are also slated to address the judges at the UN's top court until next week. A nonbinding legal opinion is anticipated following months of judge deliberations. 

On Monday, Palestinian representatives articulated their stance on the legal repercussions of Israel's occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip. They asserted that the occupation is illegal and must cease immediately, unconditionally, and entirely.

Israel has abstained from attending the hearings but submitted a five-page written statement expressing concerns that an advisory opinion would hinder attempts to resolve the conflict, citing prejudiced questions posed by the UN General Assembly.

Read a summary of Tuesday's arguments below:

  • 2:50 p.m. (GMT) Bolivia condemns Israel's discriminatory actions 

Roberto Calzadilla Sarmiento, Bolivia's ambassador in the Netherlands, condemned Israel's discriminatory actions in the Palestinian Territories.

Sarmiento unequivocally denounced Israel's ongoing occupation of the Palestinian Territories as a clear violation of international law, the envoy said. 

Sarmiento accused Israel of implementing discriminatory measures with colonial intent, aimed at dispossessing the Palestinian population and altering the demographic landscape of Jerusalem. These actions, Sarmiento argues, deny Palestinians their rights and violate international norms.

Sarmiento emphasized that Israel's actions carry consequences and obligations for all states and the United Nations. The perpetuation of Palestinian disenfranchisement, Sarmiento asserted, is a breach of Israel's international obligations.

Sarmiento condemned Israel's continuous denial of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination over a span of 75 years. Such deprivation, Sarmiento argued, represents a clear violation of international norms and human rights principles.

Sarmiento highlighted Israel's deliberate efforts to annex Palestinian territory, including the transfer of Israeli settlers and the construction of settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. These actions, Sarmiento contends, aim to solidify Israeli control through colonization, confinement, and the fragmentation of Palestinian territories.

  • 2:40 p.m. (GMT) Belize's legal expert asserts Gaza Strip remains occupied despite withdrawal

Advocate Ben Juratowitch has reinforced the argument that the Gaza Strip remains under Israeli occupation despite the withdrawal of Israeli forces and settlers in 2005.

According to Juratowitch, Israel's occupation of Gaza predates and persists beyond specific dates like October 7. He asserts that Gaza has been under Israeli occupation since 1967, and this status remains unchanged.

Occupation, Juratowitch explains, does not solely hinge on the physical presence of troops. Even in the absence of Israeli troops, the capacity for Israel to exert control over Gaza and deploy forces if necessary constitutes continued occupation.

Contrary to claims of withdrawal, Israel's recent actions in Gaza represent a continuation and intensification of its long-term control, including violence and incursions into the territory.

Juratowitch argues that Israel's occupation of Gaza is neither necessary nor proportional. Given the peace treaties signed with Jordan and Egypt, maintaining a military presence in Gaza or the West Bank is deemed unnecessary.

He also stated that Israel's use of force in Gaza, particularly in response to the October 7 attack, is deemed disproportionate and unjustified.

  • 2:30 p.m. (GMT) Belize's stance on apartheid and its impact on self-determination

Professor Philippa Webb of King’s College London critiqued Israel's apartheid policies and their impact on Palestinian self-determination.

Highlighting apartheid as a grave violation of human rights, Professor Webb emphasized its correlation with Israel's infringement upon Palestinian self-determination. She argued that the systematic racial oppression and discrimination inherent in apartheid regimes prevent the realization of genuine self-determination for affected populations.

Examining the tangible effects of Israel's discriminatory practices, Professor Webb pointed to the separation wall, permit restrictions, checkpoints, and segregated roads in the West Bank. These measures, she argued, fragment Palestinian communities and intensify their isolation from Israeli Jews.

Turning to Gaza, Professor Webb condemned the prolonged siege and blockade, which have confined millions of Palestinians to ever-shrinking territories, resulting in widespread poverty and desperation. She described Gaza as a symbol of extreme oppression and suffering, exacerbated by Israel's policies.

Professor Webb highlighted Israel's extensive detention of Palestinians since 1967, including tens of thousands of children, as further evidence of its human rights abuses.

  • 2:15 p.m. (GMT) Belize representative urges end to Israeli impunity

Belize representative Assad Shoman emphasized at the ICJ that "Palestine must be free," underscoring the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and independence, which has been consistently denied.

Shoman condemned Israel's manipulation of negotiations to obstruct Palestinian rights, calling for an end to Israel's impunity for violating international law.

He highlighted the urgency of addressing these violations to prevent further humanitarian crises.

  • 12:35 p.m. (GMT) Belgium's legal expert condemns Israel's settlement policy as violation of international law

Belgium's legal expert, Vaios Koutroulis, has denounced Israel's settlement policy, highlighting its aim to create permanent demographic changes in Palestinian territories.

Koutroulis emphasized that Israel's settlement policy violates fundamental principles of international law, including the prohibition of acquiring territory by force and the right to self-determination.

He pointed out that the establishment of settlements leads to the creation of two separate systems, one for settlers and another for Palestinians, which exacerbates inequalities.

Belgium condemned violence against Palestinians and urged Israel to end settlement activities, restore expropriated property, and bring perpetrators of violence to justice.

Koutroulis called on third states to refrain from recognizing the legality of the situation, withhold support, and collaborate to end violations of international law.

  • 12:10 p.m. (GMT) Bangladesh argues Israel cannot use self-defense as a justification for its actions

Riaz Hamidullah, representing Bangladesh, emphasized that the principle of self-defense cannot justify prolonged occupation, addressing the ongoing situation in the Palestinian territories.

Israel's occupation contradicts three fundamental pillars of international law: the right to self-determination, the prohibition of acquiring territory by force, and the prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid.

In adherence to international law, any occupation must be temporary, and territorial acquisition is illegal. Israel's extended occupation, coupled with territorial expansion, constitutes a violation of international law.

Hamidullah underscored that the right to self-defense cannot excuse breaches of international law, including the right to self-determination. Israel's denial of Palestinian self-determination has led to widespread condemnation and hinders prospects for peace.

He called for Israel to cease all actions hindering Palestinian self-determination, including discriminatory legislation and military presence, and to provide reparations for damages incurred.

Hamidullah urged all states to ensure the cessation of any legal barriers to self-determination and to refrain from recognizing or supporting Israel's illegal acts. Cooperation among states is essential to compel Israel to comply with international law.

He also urged the UN Security Council to consider further action to end the occupation and stressed the urgency of dismantling the apartheid system in place.

  • 11:15 a.m. (GMT) Netherlands affirms Palestinians right to self-determination 

René Lefeber, representing the Netherlands at the ICJ, affirmed the court's jurisdiction and emphasized the universal right to self-determination as outlined in the UN Charter.

He highlighted how prolonged occupation undermines this principle and noted the conditions for the legitimacy of occupying foreign territory.

Lefeber concluded that an occupation failing to meet these criteria risks violating the prohibition against the use of force.

Occupying powers are prohibited from transferring populations in the territories they occupy, constituting a war crime under the Rome Statute, Lefeber said. 

Once an occupation begins, the occupying power must protect civilians, he added. 

Serious breaches of international norms should be addressed at the UN, and if necessary, states must cooperate to end unlawful situations, refraining from recognizing or supporting such breaches, Lefeber concluded for the Netherlands. 

  • 10:45 a.m. (GMT) Saudi Arabia condemns Israel's actions in Palestinian Territories as legally indefensible

Ziad Al-Atiyah, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the Netherlands, has strongly criticized Israel for its actions in the occupied Palestinian territories, stating that they are legally indefensible.

Al-Atiyah emphasized the importance of holding Israel accountable for ignoring international law, particularly regarding its treatment of civilians in Gaza and its continued impunity.

Saudi Arabia expressed deep concern over the killing of civilians and rejected Israel's argument of self-defense, stating that depriving Palestinians of basic means of survival is unjustifiable.

Al-Atiyah accused Israel of dehumanizing Palestinians and committing genocide against them, calling for the international community to take action.

Regarding the jurisdiction of the court, Al-Atiyah asserted that the arguments against its jurisdiction lack merit, urging the court to issue an opinion on the matter.

Israel's ongoing disregard for ceasefire calls and provisional measures, as well as its expansion of illegal settlements and expulsion of Palestinians from their homes, were condemned by Saudi Arabia.

The Kingdom highlighted Israel's violations of international obligations, including ignoring UN resolutions condemning its conduct and preventing Palestinians from exercising their right to self-defense.

Israel's intentions to maintain and expand illegal settlements, as evidenced by its 2018 Basic Law declaring Jerusalem as its capital, were also criticized for undermining Palestinian self-determination.

  • 10:15 a.m. (GMT) Algeria advocates against prolonged occupation of Palestinian Territories

Algeria's legal representative, Ahmed Laraba, took the floor at the ICJ to present his country's stance on the enduring occupation of Palestinian territories. In his address, Laraba highlighted the intricacies surrounding the concept of prolonged occupation, shedding light on its legal foundations and historical context.

Referencing Article 42 of The Hague Convention of 1907, Laraba underscored the undisputed basis of the notion of occupation, as acknowledged by the court in a previous opinion. He emphasized the temporary nature of the occupation, originally conceived to manage post-conflict situations and facilitate peace agreements.

Laraba pointed out the discrepancy between the intended temporary regime and the reality of a prolonged occupation, noting that the drafters of the time did not foresee a peaceful coexistence between the occupier and the occupied. This incongruity underscores the complexities and challenges inherent in addressing the prolonged occupation of Palestinian territories.

Algeria's intervention at the ICJ serves to advocate for a comprehensive understanding of the legal, historical, and humanitarian dimensions of the occupation issue. Laraba's arguments contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding the quest for justice and resolution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

  • 9:40 a.m. (GMT) South Africa shifts focus to Palestinian right to self-determination

Pieter Andreas Stemmet, Acting Chief State Law Adviser at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, announced South Africa's commitment to advocating for the Palestinian people's right to self-determination.

Stemmet emphasized that the UN has repeatedly recognized the inalienable right of Palestinians to self-determination. He condemned Israel's expansion of settlement activity, stating that it violates Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, to which Israel is a signatory.

In addressing concerns about potential apartheid in Israel, Stemmet referenced the Namibia vs. South Africa case, where the court ruled that race-based exceptions and limitations constitute a denial of fundamental rights and violate the principles of the UN Charter.

Stemmet underscored the well-documented extent of Israel's violations and reiterated that the prohibition of apartheid applies universally, including to Israel.

Drawing parallels to South Africa's illegal presence in Namibia, Stemmet called for attention to the legal consequences of Israel's ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem.

  • 9:15 a.m. (GMT) South Africa urges for an end to Israel's violations

South Africa's Ambassador to The Netherlands Vusimuzi Madonsela urged for an end to Israel's violations against Palestinian territories, emphasizing the critical importance of this advisory opinion for Palestinians.

Madonsela highlighted the prolonged occupation, spanning over 50 years, conducted in defiance of international law with little international intervention.

He questioned when Israel's impunity for rights violations and breaches of international norms would cease, particularly amidst ongoing attacks on Gaza and Israel's disregard for legal orders, indicating its belief in unrestricted actions against Palestinians.

* With Reuters


Palestinian leader Abbas lays ground for succession

Palestinian leader Abbas lays ground for succession
Updated 28 November 2024
Follow

Palestinian leader Abbas lays ground for succession

Palestinian leader Abbas lays ground for succession
  • Abbas, 89, still rules despite his term as head of the Palestinian Authority ending in 2009, and has resisted pressure to appoint a successor or a vice president

RAMALLAH, Palestinian Territories: Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas on Wednesday announced who would replace him in an interim period when the post becomes vacant, effectively removing the Islamist movement Hamas from any involvement in a future transition.
Abbas, 89, still rules despite his term as head of the Palestinian Authority ending in 2009, and has resisted pressure to appoint a successor or a vice president.
Under current Palestinian law, the speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) takes over the Palestinian Authority in the event of a power vacuum.
But the PLC, where Hamas had a majority, no longer exists since Abbas officially dissolved it in 2018 after more than a decade of tensions between his secular party, Fatah, and Hamas, which ousted the Palestinian Authority from power in the Gaza Strip in 2007.
In a decree, Abbas said the Palestinian National Council chairman, Rawhi Fattuh, would be his temporary replacement should the position should become vacant.
“If the position of the president of the national authority becomes vacant in the absence of the legislative council, the Palestinian National Council president shall assume the duties... temporarily,” it said.
The decree added that following the transition period, elections must be held within 90 days. This deadline can be extended in the event of a “force majeure,” it said.
The PNC is the parliament of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which has over 700 members from the Palestinian territories and abroad.
Hamas, which does not belong to the PLO, has no representation on the council. The PNC deputies are not elected, but appointed.
The decree refers to the “delicate stage in the history of the homeland and the Palestinian cause” as war rages in Gaza between Israel and Hamas, after the latter’s unprecedented attack on southern Israel in October last year.
There are also persistent divisions between Hamas and Fatah.
The decree comes on the same day that a ceasefire entered into force in Lebanon after an agreement between Israel and Hamas’s ally, the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.
The Palestinian Authority appears weaker than ever, unable to pay its civil servants and threatened by Israeli far-right ministers’ calls to annex all or part of the occupied West Bank, an ambition increasingly less hidden by the government of Benjamin Netanyahu.


Israeli military says it downed drone smuggling weapons from Egypt

Israeli military says it downed drone smuggling weapons from Egypt
Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Israeli military says it downed drone smuggling weapons from Egypt

Israeli military says it downed drone smuggling weapons from Egypt

CAIRO: The Israeli military said on Wednesday it shot down a drone that was carrying weapons and crossed from Egypt to Israel.
When asked about the latest drone incident, Egyptian security sources said they had no knowledge of such an incident.
In two separate incidents in October, Israel also said it downed two drones smuggling weapons from Egyptian territory.
Israeli officials have said during the war in Gaza that Palestinian militant group Hamas used tunnels running under the border into Egypt’s Sinai region to smuggle arms.
However, Egypt says it destroyed tunnel networks leading to Gaza years ago and created a buffer zone and border fortifications that prevent smuggling.


Will ceasefire deal to end Israel-Hezbollah war achieve lasting peace for Lebanon?

Will ceasefire deal to end Israel-Hezbollah war achieve lasting peace for Lebanon?
Updated 28 November 2024
Follow

Will ceasefire deal to end Israel-Hezbollah war achieve lasting peace for Lebanon?

Will ceasefire deal to end Israel-Hezbollah war achieve lasting peace for Lebanon?
  • Iran welcomes “end of Israel’s aggression” despite terms requiring withdrawal and disarmament of its proxy Hezbollah
  • For Israel, the ceasefire is not necessarily an end to the war, but a pause in the fighting, according to analysts

BEIRUT/LONDON: The world has largely welcomed a ceasefire deal which ends 13 months of fighting betrween Israel and Hezbollah that has claimed the lives of at least 3,700 Lebanese and more than 130 Israelis.

The deal between the governments of Israel and Lebanon, brokered by the US and France, came into effect on Wednesday at 4 a.m. local time.

From the Israeli army’s perspective, the war in Lebanon was coming to a point of diminishing returns. It has succeeded in weakening Hezbollah’s military standing and eliminating its top leadership but has been unable to wipe it out entirely. For its part, Hezbollah has been seriously debilitated in Lebanon; the war has eroded its military capabilities and left it rudderless.

Looking at it optimistically, the diplomatic breakthrough — which unfolded on Tuesday night as Israel unleashed a barrage of bombs on central Beirut — could be the beginning of the end of the long-standing “Israel-Iran shadow war,” as a new administration prepares to assume power in Washington.

Hezbollah and the Israeli military began to exchange cross-border fire on Oct. 8, 2023, one day after Israel launched its assault on the Gaza Strip in retaliation for a deadly Hamas-led attack.

The conflict dramatically escalated on Sept. 23 this year, when Israel began heavily bombing several parts of Lebanon, including Hezbollah’s stronghold in the south. The airstrikes killed thousands of Lebanese, displaced some 1.2 million others, flattened residential buildings, and devastated 37 villages.

While the ceasefire deal calls for a 60-day halt in hostilities, President Joe Biden said that it “was designed to be a permanent cessation of hostilities.” Negotiators have described it as laying the groundwork for a lasting truce.

Under the terms of the deal, Hezbollah will remove its fighters and arms from the region between the Blue Line and the Litani River, while Israeli troops will withdraw from Lebanese territory during the specified period.

Thousands of Lebanese troops and UN peacekeepers will deploy to the region south of the Litani River. A US-led international panel will oversee compliance from all sides. However, uncertainty persists, as both Hezbollah and Israel have warned that they will resume fire if the other party breaches the agreement.

Lebanese army soldiers drive in Qana, southern Lebanon, on Nov. 27, 2024, after a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah took effect. (Reuters)

Hezbollah stated it would give the ceasefire pact a chance, but Mahmoud Qamati, the deputy chair of the group’s political council, stressed that Hezbollah’s support for the deal depends on clear assurances that Israel will not resume its attacks.

Likewise, Israel said it would attack if Hezbollah violated the agreement. The army’s Arabic-language spokesperson, Avichay Adraee, also urged residents of southern Lebanese villages — who had fled in recent months — to delay returning home until further notice from the Israeli military.

David Wood, a senior Lebanon analyst with the International Crisis Group, believes that while the ceasefire is desperately needed, it “will almost certainly not bring Lebanon’s troubles to an end.

“Many of the country’s displaced may not be able to return home for months, as Israel has razed entire villages near the Blue Line border,” he said. “Meanwhile, Hezbollah’s domestic foes claim they will no longer accept the group’s dominance over Lebanese politics — a pledge that promises still more instability.”

United Nations peacekeepers patrol in the southern Lebanese village of Zibqin on Nov. 27, 2024, as people returned to check on their homes after a ceasefire between the warring sides took effect. (AFP)

Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, also cannot see this ceasefire bringing an end to Lebanon’s problems as the war has already triggered shifts in internal alliances.

Describing the deal as a “capitulation,” he said during an interview with the BBC that “the majority of the Lebanese people, including Hezbollah's own support base, did not want to see Lebanon dragged into this war.”

“After all this devastation, after Hezbollah having now to capitulate and withdraw away from that border north of the Litani River, having to accept an American-led mechanism led by a general who is part of CENTCOM in the region, this is going to be highly embarrassing,” he said. “And there's going to be a day of reckoning for Hezbollah in Lebanon once the ceasefire actually goes into effect.”

Israeli army forces stand outside a house that was hit by rockets fired by Hezbollah from Lebanon in the northern Israeli border town of Kiryat Shmona on Nov. 26, 2024, hours before a ceasefire agreement took effect. (AFP)

He added that politically, this means that “the various Lebanese parties and the various also alliances that had been in place before this war are no longer going to be there.”

“We saw, for example, Hezbollah’s crucial Christian ally distance itself from the group now, very much moving towards the center or even in opposition to Hezbollah.”

Gebran Bassil, leader of the Maronite Free Patriotic Movement and a close ally of Hezbollah since 2006, said earlier this month that his party is “not in an alliance with Hezbollah.”

In an interview with Al-Arabiya TV, he added that Hezbollah “has weakened itself and exposed its military strength, leaving Lebanon as a whole vulnerable to Israeli attacks.”

A man celebrates carrying a picture of slain Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut's Dahiyeh district following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah that went into effect on  Nov. 27, 2024. (AP)l 

Also acknowledging the toll on Hezbollah is Lebanese political analyst Ali Al-Amin. He expressed concern that, while the ceasefire deal is a positive development, its terms signal a significant shift for Hezbollah.

“People were happy at first glance about the ceasefire agreement, as it is a basic demand after a fierce, destructive war,” he told Arab News. “However, there are many (unanswered) questions, starting with the nature of the agreement and its content.

“In a first reading, I believe that Hezbollah’s function has ended. The prohibition of military operations and weapons, the necessity of destroying and dismantling weapons facilities, and the ban on the supply of weapons are all preludes to ending the party’s function.”

Opinion

This section contains relevant reference points, placed in (Opinion field)

Hezbollah’s main ally, Tehran, expressed support for the ceasefire. Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, welcomed the end of Israel’s “aggression against Lebanon.”

He also reaffirmed his country’s “firm support for the Lebanese government, nation and resistance.”

Before the Israeli cabinet approved the deal, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the ceasefire would allow his country to “intensify” pressure on the Palestinian group Hamas in Gaza and focus on the “Iranian threat.”

Residents who had fled the southern Lebanese border village of Shebaa return to their homes following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah on Nov. 27, 2024. (AFP)

Mairav Zonszein, a senior Israeli analyst with the ICG, believes that “for Israel, the ceasefire is not necessarily an end to the war, but a pause” in fighting.

She said: “It will free up forces and resources to Israel’s other fronts in Gaza, the West Bank, and Iran, and is a chance to test out Israel’s ability to take military action to enforce the ceasefire, which is being sold as the main difference between the resolution that ended the 2006 war and this time around.”

Al-Amin believes Iran, Israel’s biggest adversary, has accepted this shift affecting its ally Hezbollah. However, he stressed that while the deal remains “subject to implementation,” it raises questions about the enforcement of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and Washington’s role in overseeing its execution.

Caption

Echoing Al-Amin’s concern, Heiko Wimmen, ICG project director for Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, said: “The ceasefire is based on the commitment of both Lebanon and Israel to finally implement Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah.

“The challenges are the same as 18 years ago, namely, how to make sure that both parties comply in the long term and what to do with Hezbollah’s military capabilities, which constitute a threat to the security of Israel, and potentially other Lebanese, whether they are present on the border or a few kilometers away.”

Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who welcomed the ceasefire deal, reiterated on Wednesday his government’s commitment to implementing Resolution 1701.

Lebanon's caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati delivers a statement to the press in Beirut on Nov. 27, 2024, after a government meeting to discuss the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah.  (AFP)

UN Security Council Resolution 1701, adopted to resolve the 2006 Lebanon war, called for a permanent ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel, the establishment of a buffer zone free of armed personnel other than UN and Lebanese forces, Hezbollah’s disarmament and withdrawal from south of the Litani River, and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon.

However, Maksad of the Middle East Institute, emphasizes that implementing a ceasefire in Lebanon — US-led and otherwise — will demand more than just adhering to the deal’s terms, especially on the domestic front.

“There is a crucial need to rearrange the deck in Lebanon,” he said in an interview with the BBC.

“You need to elect a president in Lebanon, one that is a sovereign-minded president that would work with the Lebanese army and provide it with the political cover it needs to help and implement this resolution together with the UN troops that are there and also the international community.”

A displaced people make their way back to their homes in the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh on Nov. 27, 2024, after a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah took effect. (AFP)

He added: “You also cannot begin the task — the mammoth task — of rebuilding, the reconstruction, the tune of billions of dollars if you don’t have a reform-minded government.”

And while the ceasefire brings a faint hope for Lebanon’s displaced population, many of those affected perceive its terms through the prism of personal loss, questioning what, if anything, had been gained from the war.

Nora Farhat, whose family home in Anqoun in Beirut’s southern suburbs was reduced to rubble, lamented that the agreement “will not restore our destroyed homes or bring back those who were killed — loved ones we have yet to bury.”

The scale of destruction in southern villages means return is not an option for many, who are left wondering about Hezbollah’s future and its ability to maintain its influence in the region.

Hezbollah supporters celebrate as they return to their destroyed homes in Beirut's southern suburbs, after a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah took effect on Nov. 27, 2024. (Reuters)

Analyst Al-Amin believes that Hezbollah’s immediate focus will likely shift to managing the domestic narrative.

“Hezbollah’s priority now will be how to reverse the defeat into victory at home, and how to prevent the Lebanese from questioning what happened and why it happened,” he said.

Some of those displaced from Shiite-majority villages in the south expressed frustration at being caught in the crossfire of Hezbollah’s conflicts with Israel.

For Ahmad Ismail, who was displaced from his home in south Lebanon, the war and its aftermath seemed “futile.”

A resident who had fled the southern Lebanese border village of Shebaa unloads personal belongings upon returning to his home on Nov. 27, 2024. (AFP)

He told Arab News: “There was no need to open a southern front under the slogan of supporting Gaza, as those who sought this war sought to humiliate us.

“If only we had implemented the May 17 agreement in the 1980s with Israel, we would have been spared wars, killing and destruction, and the Shiite sect would not have reached the point of displacement, death, and frustration it has reached today.”

Ismail, who was previously imprisoned in Israel, believes the ceasefire is the only positive aspect of the US-brokered truce deal.

“It is a good initiative toward making this the last of the wars and a step toward disarming illegal weapons,” he said. “It also paves the way for restoring the state to its role, which Hezbollah undermined by monopolizing decisions of war and peace without consulting anyone.”

Despite the Israeli military’s warning, Lebanese people displaced from their homes in the south began flocking to their villages.

Members of a displaced Lebanese family return to their village in Zibqin, southern Lebanon, on Nov. 27, 2024, to find their home demolished by Israeli strikes. (Reuters)

Ismail believes “people are currently in shock. Some still cannot believe that Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah has been killed, and many have not yet seen what happened to their homes and villages.

“When they wake up from the trauma, we will see the repercussions.”

Ismail added: “A disaster has befallen the Lebanese people, and Hezbollah must be held accountable. Hezbollah is no longer able to mobilize the people through the power of weapons, excess force, and money.”

As Lebanon begins to pick up the pieces, many still wonder if this ceasefire will offer more than just a temporary reprieve — or if it will be the beginning of an uncertain future.


 


Lebanon’s Hezbollah vows to continue resistance after ceasefire

Lebanon’s Hezbollah vows to continue resistance after ceasefire
Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Lebanon’s Hezbollah vows to continue resistance after ceasefire

Lebanon’s Hezbollah vows to continue resistance after ceasefire
  • The group made no direct mention of the ceasefire deal
  • Fighters would continue to monitor the withdrawal of Israeli forces

CAIRO: Lebanon’s Hezbollah on Wednesday vowed to continue its resistance and support Palestinians, including fighters, a day after a ceasefire deal between the group and Israel was announced.
In the first statement by Hezbollah’s operations center since the deal was announced, the group made no direct mention of the ceasefire deal.
“The Islamic resistance’s operations room affirms that its fighters in all military disciplines will remain fully equipped to deal with the aspirations and assaults of the Israeli enemy,” the group said.
It added that its fighters would continue to monitor the withdrawal of Israeli forces beyond the Lebanese borders “with their hands on the trigger.”
The ceasefire deal includes the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon within 60 days, Israeli officials said.
The deal, brokered by the US and France, ended the deadliest confrontation between Israel and the Iran-backed militant group in years. Israel is still fighting the Palestinian militant group Hamas, in the Gaza Strip.


Former ICC chief prosecutor tells of ‘threats to family’ during Israel-Palestine war crimes probe

Fatou Bensouda she was subjected to “unacceptable, thug-style tactics” while working as the ICC's chief prosecutor. (AP/File)
Fatou Bensouda she was subjected to “unacceptable, thug-style tactics” while working as the ICC's chief prosecutor. (AP/File)
Updated 27 November 2024
Follow

Former ICC chief prosecutor tells of ‘threats to family’ during Israel-Palestine war crimes probe

Fatou Bensouda she was subjected to “unacceptable, thug-style tactics” while working as the ICC's chief prosecutor. (AP/File)
  • Fatou Bensouda says she was subjected to ‘thug-style tactics’ while working on cases related to Israel and Palestine, and the war in Afghanistan
  • A newspaper investigation previously alleged she was threatened by the head of Israeli intelligence agency Mossad

LONDON: The former chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court has told how she received “direct threats” to herself and her family while working there.

Fatou Bensouda’s comments about her experiences came six months after a newspaper report alleged that the head of Israeli intelligence agency Mossad had threatened her in an attempt to get her to drop an investigation into accusations of war crimes in occupied Palestinian territories.

Appearing at a legal event in London on Tuesday, Bensouda did not mention any specific threats but said she was subjected to “unacceptable, thug-style tactics” while doing her job.

She said that while working on some of the court’s toughest cases, including those related to the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and the war in Afghanistan, she received “direct threats to my person and family and some of my closest professional advisors.”

Bensouda was the ICC’s chief prosecutor from 2012 until 2021. The Guardian newspaper reported in May that Israel’s foreign intelligence services put pressure on Bensouda after she opened a preliminary investigation in 2015 into the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

The newspaper, sighting several Israeli sources, alleged that Yossi Cohen, the director of Mossad at the time, threatened Bensouda during a series of secret meetings and warned her not to proceed with a case related to alleged Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.

Israeli authorities denied the allegations of threats and intimidation, and Bensouda opened a full criminal investigation into Israel’s actions in 2021, shortly before she left her post.

Last week, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and the military chief of Hamas, Mohammed Deif, accusing them of crimes against humanity.

The warrants were requested six months ago by Bensouda’s successor, Karim Khan, as part of an extension of the investigation that his predecessor initiated. Khan accelerated the case after the Oct. 7 attacks by Hamas and Israel’s subsequent war on Gaza.

During her lecture at the Bar Council on Wednesday, Bensouda, who is now Gambia’s high commissioner to the UK, said the arrest warrants issued last week focused exclusively on the events of Oct. 7 and those that followed, and did not include aspects of the wider conflict between Israel and Palestine that formed the basis of the investigation she initiated.

She said her initial probe focused on whether Hamas, other Palestinian armed groups or the Israeli military had committed war crimes in relation to hostilities that took place during 2014, and its scope included illegal Israeli settlements and the displacement of populations into the occupied West Bank.

“It will be important to ensure that the full extent of criminality in the context of this devastating … conflict is fully investigated and accountability is finally had for the benefit of its many victims on all sides of the conflict,” she said.

During her time as chief prosecutor, Bensouda also came under pressure from the US. Donald Trump’s administration imposed sanctions on her in 2020 after the ICC began investigating allegations of US war crimes in Afghanistan.

The sanctions were lifted by President Joe Biden. However, last week he described the ICC decision to issue an arrest warrant for Netanyahu as “outrageous” and said there was no equivalence between Israel and Hamas.

Neither the US nor Israel are members of the ICC. However, the 124 states that have signed up to it are obliged to act on warrants it issues if the accused visit their countries.