The United Nations’ highest court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), declared on Friday that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories and its settlements are illegal, urging their immediate withdrawal. Although the advisory opinion is not binding, it holds significant weight under international law and could impact global support for Israel.
ICJ President Nawaf Salam stated, “Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the regime associated with them, have been established and are being maintained in violation of international law.” The court emphasized Israel’s obligations to pay restitution and evacuate all settlers from existing settlements.
Israel’s foreign ministry swiftly rejected the opinion, calling it “fundamentally wrong” and one-sided, reiterating that only negotiations can resolve the conflict. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office echoed this sentiment, asserting, “The Jewish nation cannot be an occupier in its own land.”
The opinion also provoked strong reactions from West Bank settlers and nationalist politicians, such as Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who called for the annexation of the West Bank in response.
The ICJ further noted that the U.N. Security Council, the General Assembly, and all states have a duty not to recognize the occupation as legal or provide aid to maintain Israel’s presence in the territories. The Palestinian Foreign Ministry hailed the opinion as “historic” and urged adherence to it, calling for no support of any kind for Israel’s occupation.
The case originated from a 2022 request by the U.N. General Assembly, prior to the recent conflict in Gaza. Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem during the 1967 Middle East war and has since expanded settlements in these areas. While Israel argues these territories are disputed, the international community largely views them as occupied.
Earlier this year, over 50 states presented their positions to the court, with Palestinian representatives demanding Israel’s withdrawal and the dismantling of settlements. Israel did not participate in the oral hearings but argued in a written statement that an advisory opinion would hinder peace efforts.
Most participating states supported the view that the occupation is illegal, though some, including Canada and Britain, advised against an advisory opinion. The United States urged the court not to mandate an unconditional withdrawal, stressing the importance of negotiations toward a two-state solution.
In a similar 2004 advisory ruling, the ICJ declared an Israeli separation barrier around the West Bank illegal and condemned the settlements as breaches of international law. Israel dismissed that ruling.