Model UN Background Guide

Committee: International Court of Justice (ICJ)

Topic: Israel’s Obligations Regarding the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Advisory)

Conference Year: 2025

Topic Background

The question of Israel’s obligations in the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT) remains one of the most contentious and enduring issues in international law and diplomacy. The territories in question primarily include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, territories captured by Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War. Since then, Israel has maintained military control over the West Bank and East Jerusalem, while Gaza has been governed by Hamas since 2007, though Israel continues to control its borders, airspace, and maritime access.

The legal status of these territories and Israel’s responsibilities under international law have been debated extensively. Central to this debate are principles of the law of occupation as codified in the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949) and customary international law. Israel’s settlement activity, military operations, and administrative policies in the OPT have raised questions about compliance with obligations to protect the civilian population, prohibit the transfer of population into occupied territory, and respect human rights.

This topic is on the ICJ’s agenda following renewed calls for an advisory opinion on Israel’s legal obligations in the OPT, reflecting ongoing concerns about the humanitarian situation, settlement expansion, and the broader peace process. The ICJ’s advisory role is critical as it can clarify legal norms without binding judgments, thus guiding UN organs and member states in their policies and actions. The issue’s urgency is heightened by recent escalations in violence, stalled peace negotiations, and increasing international debate about the applicability of international law to the facts on the ground.

Key Actors

States:

• Israel: Central actor whose policies and actions in the OPT are under scrutiny. Israel contests certain interpretations of international law regarding the territories.
• Palestine: Recognized by many states as a non-member observer state in the UN, Palestine seeks affirmation of Israel’s obligations and international support for its claims to statehood and rights under occupation law.
• United States: A key ally of Israel, often providing diplomatic and military support, while advocating for negotiated solutions. The U.S. has historically used its veto power in the Security Council to shield Israel from certain resolutions.
• European Union Member States: Generally critical of settlement activity and supportive of a two-state solution, the EU advocates adherence to international law and often calls for negotiations based on pre-1967 borders.
• Arab League States: Support Palestinian claims and frequently call for international legal action against Israeli policies in the OPT. Positions vary in intensity and approach depending on individual states’ politics.
• Other Regional States: Countries such as Iran, Turkey, and some Gulf states have varying degrees of involvement, often supporting Palestinian rights and condemning Israeli actions.

International Organizations:

• United Nations: Various organs including the General Assembly, Security Council, and Human Rights Council engage with the issue. The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) provides humanitarian assistance to Palestinian refugees.
• International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): Plays a key role in interpreting and promoting compliance with international humanitarian law in the OPT.
• Quartet on the Middle East: Composed of the UN, EU, U.S., and Russia, it aims to mediate peace efforts and uphold relevant international legal frameworks.

Bloc Positions

1. Pro-Israel Bloc:
Includes Israel and close allies such as the United States and some Central European states. This bloc emphasizes Israel’s right to self-defense and security, questions the applicability of certain international legal norms, and often rejects the characterization of the territories as “occupied” in the strict legal sense. They advocate for direct negotiations without preconditions and oppose unilateral international legal actions that could delegitimize Israel.

2. Pro-Palestinian Bloc:
Includes Palestine, the Arab League states, Turkey, and some members of the Non-Aligned Movement. This bloc stresses Israel’s obligations under international law, condemns settlement expansion and military practices, and calls for recognition of Palestinian rights including statehood and self-determination. They support the ICJ issuing a strong advisory opinion affirming Israel’s legal responsibilities and encouraging international enforcement measures.

3. European Union and Like-Minded States:
This group supports a two-state solution and adherence to international law, including the Geneva Conventions and UN resolutions. They criticize settlement activity and advocate for peaceful negotiations based on 1967 borders with mutually agreed land swaps. They tend to support an ICJ advisory opinion as a legal clarification tool but emphasize diplomacy and conflict resolution over punitive measures.

4. Neutral/Non-Aligned States:
Some countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America maintain a neutral stance, emphasizing the need for dialogue and peaceful resolution without taking strong positions on legal interpretations. They often call for respect for human rights and humanitarian law but avoid direct confrontation in international forums.

Past UN Action

• UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947): Partition plan recommending the creation of independent Arab and Jewish states.
• UN Security Council Resolution 242 (1967): Called for withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the Six-Day War and respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.
• UN Security Council Resolution 338 (1973): Called for a ceasefire and implementation of Resolution 242.
• UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016): Reaffirmed the illegality of Israeli settlements in the OPT and called for cessation of settlement activities.
• UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/19 (2004): Requested the ICJ advisory opinion on the legal consequences of the construction of the wall in the OPT.
• ICJ Advisory Opinion (2004): The ICJ ruled that the construction of the Israeli separation barrier in the OPT violated international law and called for its dismantling.
• Human Rights Council Resolutions: Numerous resolutions addressing human rights violations and calling for accountability in the OPT.

Questions a Resolution Should Answer

1. What are the specific legal obligations of Israel under international humanitarian law and human rights law in the OPT?
2. How should the ICJ advisory opinion clarify Israel’s responsibilities concerning settlement activity and the transfer of population?
3. What measures should be recommended to ensure protection of the Palestinian civilian population under occupation?
4. How can the advisory opinion contribute to advancing a peaceful resolution consistent with international law?
5. What role should the international community play in monitoring and enforcing compliance with Israel’s obligations?
6. How should the advisory opinion address the status and rights of Palestinian refugees and internally displaced persons?
7. What guidance can the ICJ provide regarding the legal status of East Jerusalem and its implications for Israeli policies?

Further Reading

UN Documents:
Official UN resolutions, reports from the Secretary-General, Human Rights Council investigations, and previous ICJ advisory opinions provide authoritative legal and political context for the topic. These documents outline the international legal framework and the UN’s evolving stance on the issue.

Think-Tank Reports:
Analyses from international law institutes, Middle East policy centers, and human rights organizations offer detailed examinations of legal arguments, policy implications, and humanitarian assessments. These sources help delegates understand the complexities of international law as applied to the OPT and the practical impact of various policies.

News Outlets:
Reputable international news agencies and specialized Middle East media provide up-to-date coverage of developments on the ground, diplomatic efforts, and reactions from key stakeholders. These sources help contextualize the legal debate within current political realities and public opinion.

This background guide aims to equip delegates with a comprehensive understanding of the legal, political, and humanitarian dimensions of Israel’s obligations regarding the occupied Palestinian territory, enabling informed debate and effective participation in the ICJ advisory proceedings.