US argument at ICJ was nuanced but contemptuous and absurd: Marwan Bishara

The US has asked the UN’s top court not to order Israel’s immediate withdrawal from occupied Palestinian territories. Its legal representative made the comments at the International Court of Justice on the third day of a hearing examining the impact Israel’s occupation. According to Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst, the US demands that the ICJ subject international law to its failed peace process instead of subjugating its diplomacy to the ICJ ruling. The US argues that Israel should not be obligated to immediately withdraw from the occupied land, albeit 56 years too late! The United States defended Israel in a very clever way. Its arguments were sober and sophisticated, but this doesn’t make them any less dishonest. The overall message of the American representative is that the court should be at the service of the American and Israeli negotiation strategy – not that the American and Israeli negotiation strategy should abide by the court’s ruling. But a World Court cannot be at the disposal of the US. It is otherwise unclear why a potential ruling by the court that the occupation is illegal would be a burden on the negotiations. On the matter of Israel’s security, who defines what that means? Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defines security as Israel taking control of the territory from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, which would mean accepting the acquisition of territory by force. Subscribe to our channel Follow us on Twitter Find us on Facebook Check our website: Check out our Instagram page: Download AJE Mobile App: #ICJ #Palestine #Israel #UN #ICJHearing #IsraeliOccupation #IsraelIllegalOccupation #InternationalLaw #HumanRight #IsraelPalestineConflict