Israeli Occupation of Palestinian Territory ‘Illegal’, Says UN Top Court

The panel of judges, with President Nawaf Salam (C), at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands, during a non-binding ruling on the legal consequences of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, 19 July 2024. (EPA)
The panel of judges, with President Nawaf Salam (C), at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands, during a non-binding ruling on the legal consequences of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, 19 July 2024. (EPA)
TT

Israeli Occupation of Palestinian Territory ‘Illegal’, Says UN Top Court

The panel of judges, with President Nawaf Salam (C), at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands, during a non-binding ruling on the legal consequences of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, 19 July 2024. (EPA)
The panel of judges, with President Nawaf Salam (C), at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands, during a non-binding ruling on the legal consequences of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, 19 July 2024. (EPA)

The UN's top court, in a sweeping opinion on Friday, said that Israel's decades-long occupation of Palestinian territory was "illegal" and needed to end as soon as possible.

The advisory opinion by The Hague-based International Court of Justice was immediately slammed as a "decision of lies" by Israel, but welcomed by the Palestinian presidency, which called it "historic".

The ICJ's statement, called an "advisory opinion", is not binding, but it comes amid mounting concern over the death toll and destruction in Israel's war against Hamas sparked by the group's brutal October 7 attacks.

It is also likely to increase diplomatic pressure on Israel, whose lawmakers on Thursday voted to oppose a Palestinian state, calling it an "existential threat".

In The Hague, ICJ presiding judge Nawaf Salam said: "The court has found... that Israel's continued presence in the Palestinian Territories is illegal."

Israel is "under the obligation to bring to an end its unlawful presence as rapidly as possible," the judge said in its finding, read at the Peace Palace, seat of the ICJ.

The ICJ added that Israel was "under an obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities and to evacuate all settlers" from occupied land.

Israel's policies and practices, including the maintenance of a wall between the territories, "amount to annexation of large parts" of the occupied territory, the court said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slammed the ICJ's opinion as a "decision of lies".

"The Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land -- not in our eternal capital Jerusalem, nor in our ancestral heritage of Judea and Samaria" (the occupied West Bank), Netanyahu said in a statement.

Palestinian foreign minister Riyad Al-Maliki called it a "watershed moment".

A separate, high-profile case that South Africa has brought before the court alleges that Israel has committed genocidal acts during its Gaza offensive.

South Africa, in a statement, called upon the international community "to bring an immediate end to the occupation and the gross violations of international humanitarian and human rights law being perpetrated by Israel against the Palestinian people".

- 'Extreme danger' -

In late 2022, the UN's General Assembly asked the ICJ to give an "advisory opinion" on the "legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem".

The ICJ held a week-long session in February to hear submissions from countries following the request -- supported by most countries within the Assembly.

During the hearings, most speakers called on Israel to end its 57-year occupation. They warned a prolonged occupation posed an "extreme danger" to stability in the Middle East and beyond.

But the United States said Israel should not be legally obliged to withdraw without taking its "very real security needs" into account.

Israel did not take part in the oral hearings.

- 'Ongoing violation' -

The General Assembly asked the ICJ to consider two questions.

Firstly, the court should examine the legal consequences of what the UN called "the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination".

In its answer, the ICJ's judges said Israel's "unlawful policies and practices are in breach" of its "obligation to respect the rights of the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination".

In June 1967, Israel defeated some of its Arab neighbors in a six-day war, seizing the West Bank and East Jerusalem, at the time annexed by Jordan, the Golan Heights from Syria, and the Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula from Egypt.

Israel then began to settle the 70,000 square kilometers (27,000 square miles) of seized Arab territory.

The UN later declared the occupation of Palestinian territory illegal, and Cairo regained Sinai under its 1979 peace deal with Israel.

- 'Restrictions' -

The ICJ also was asked to look into the consequences of what it described as Israel's "adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures".

In this finding, the ICJ said a "regime of comprehensive restrictions imposed by Israel on Palestinians consisted of systemic discrimination based on race, religion or ethnic origin."

The ICJ rules in disputes between states. Normally, its judgements are binding but it has few means to enforce them.

In this case, however, the opinion is non-binding, although most advisory opinions are in fact acted upon.

The ICJ has previously issued advisory opinions on the legality of Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia and apartheid South Africa's occupation of Namibia.

It also handed down an opinion in 2004 declaring that parts of the wall erected by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory were illegal and should be torn down.

Israel has not complied with that ICJ ruling.



Official Contacts Aim to Keep Lebanon out of War on Iran as Israel Raises Readiness on Northern Front 

This photograph shows a memorial for slain Lebanese Hezbollah longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah at the entrance of the southern village of Qannarit on February 16, 2026. (AFP)
This photograph shows a memorial for slain Lebanese Hezbollah longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah at the entrance of the southern village of Qannarit on February 16, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Official Contacts Aim to Keep Lebanon out of War on Iran as Israel Raises Readiness on Northern Front 

This photograph shows a memorial for slain Lebanese Hezbollah longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah at the entrance of the southern village of Qannarit on February 16, 2026. (AFP)
This photograph shows a memorial for slain Lebanese Hezbollah longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah at the entrance of the southern village of Qannarit on February 16, 2026. (AFP)

Israel has raised the alert level of its military along the border with Lebanon, raising questions that Lebanon’s south may again be involved in a regional confrontation should the US attack Iran.

Given the heightened tensions between the US and Iran, questions have been asked over whether Hezbollah will become involved in a new war. Its Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem had recently announced that the party will not remain on the side if Iran is attacked.

On the ground, Israel blew up houses in southern Lebanon border towns and carried out air strikes in the south. Israeli military spokesman Avichay Adraee said the raids targeted “Hezbollah infrastructure,” including arms caches and rocket launchers.

Their presence in the south is a violation of current agreements, he added.

Amid the high regional tensions, Israel’s Maariv quoted a military source as saying that the army has come up with plans, including a preemptive strike against Hezbollah, which would drag the south and the whole of Lebanon into a new war.

Ministerial sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that the presidency has been carrying out internal and foreign contacts since Thursday morning to keep Lebanon out of any escalation.

Hezbollah had launched a “support front” war against Israel a day after Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack. In 2024, the war spiraled into an all-out conflict, with Israel decimating the Hezbollah leadership and severely weakening the party.

Israel believes that Hezbollah has been rebuilding its capabilities since the ceasefire that was struck in November 2024.

Kassim Kassir, a political analyst who is close to Hezbollah, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “No one knows what Hezbollah will do because the situation is tied the extent of the attack, should it happen.”

He noted that Qassem was ambiguous when he said the party will decide what to do when the time is right, but at any rate, he stressed that the party will not remain on the sidelines or abandon Iran.

“No one knows what Hezbollah’s abilities are, so everything is possible,” Kassir said.

Riad Kahwaji, a security and defense affairs expert, said he does not rule out the possibility that Hezbollah would join the war should the US attack Iran.

Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, he stressed that Iran is now the United States’ main target, when previously it used to confront its proxies.

It has now taken the fight directly to the heart of the problem, which is the Iranian regime, he remarked.

The extent of the military mobilization in the region and the frequent American statements about regime change all indicate that a major military operation may be imminent, he added.

Israel’s military also favors preemptive operations, so it is watching Hezbollah, which remains Iran’s most powerful regional proxy despite the blows it received in 2024 war, Kahwaji said.

Hezbollah still possesses a rocket arsenal that can threaten Israel, he remarked.

Israel’s high level of alert on the border with Lebanon could be in readiness for any development. Should Tel Aviv receive word from Washington that it intends to attack Iran, then it could launch operations against Hezbollah as part of preemptive strikes aimed at preventing the party from launching attacks against it, Kahwaji said.

“As long as Hezbollah possesses heavy weapons, such as rockets, and drones, that it has not handed over to the army, then Lebanon will continue to be vulnerable to attacks in the next confrontation. It will be exposed to Israeli strikes as long as this issue remains unresolved,” he added.


Israel Keen to Attack Iran’s Regional Proxies before they Can Join the War

Two Israeli soldiers launch a drone. (Israeli Army)
Two Israeli soldiers launch a drone. (Israeli Army)
TT

Israel Keen to Attack Iran’s Regional Proxies before they Can Join the War

Two Israeli soldiers launch a drone. (Israeli Army)
Two Israeli soldiers launch a drone. (Israeli Army)

The Israeli army is preparing to carry out “massive and unprecedented” strikes against groups backed by Iran, including the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and armed factions in Iraq, should they join a potential war in the region, revealed Israeli military sources.

Iran is applying great pressure on these groups to take part in any upcoming conflict because the regime in Tehran concluded that their staying on the sidelines during the 12-day June war in 2025 was a strategic error, the sources said according to Israeli estimates.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had on Thursday warned Iran that his country is making its own preparations for possible Iranian missile strikes in response to any US action.

“We are prepared for any scenario,” he said, adding that if Iran attacks Israel, “they will experience a response they cannot even imagine.”

A military source said the Houthis pose a “direct threat not just to Israel, but to the whole world.” He accused the Houthis of impeding international trade in the Red Sea.

Even though the Houthis are not firing at all ships, they are still a threat to everyone, added the source. The militants are producing weapons and possess advanced technology, he warned, comparing them to a “dangerous ticking timebomb that must be swiftly neutralized.”

Israeli and foreign experts revealed that Iran is providing large financial support to its allied armed groups in the region in order for them to join a war should US President Donald Trump act on his threat to strike Iran.

In 2025, Iran allotted a billion dollars to these groups so that they can carry out rocket attacks against Israel.

It remains to be seen if these groups will respond to Iran’s pressure. Israeli estimates believe that the Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq are unlikely to join a war, while Hezbollah and the Houthis are more prepared to do so.

Israel has turned to mediators to warn these parties that any attack against it will be met with a “massive and unprecedented response.”

In Lebanon, the sources said that the military operations Israel is carrying out against Hezbollah and other armed groups are aimed at undermining the party’s efforts to bolster its combat abilities.

They acknowledged, however, that the Israeli military establishment senses that Hezbollah is rebuilding its capabilities at a faster pace than Israel’s operations at reining it in.

The Houthis, meanwhile, have a relatively greater margin of independence, but they are always ready to take part in any regional war to shift attention away from the situation inside Yemen, said Israeli estimates.

The Houthis are receiving Iranian funds to boost their military capabilities and produce more weapons. They also continue to smuggle weapons to Hamas in Gaza. Israel also accuses them of extorting several countries, whereby they pledge not to attack their ships in exchange for money.

The Houthis are ultimately fully supportive of Iran’s goals despite the blows they have been dealt by Israel. The Houthis are suffering from a drop in combat abilities. The pace of their training of fighters has also dropped, while their airports have been damaged in Israeli attacks and the Houthis are facing difficulties in rebuilding them.

Despite the losses, the Houthis are still a threat. They possess heavy long-range missiles and drones and still have the ability to shut Israel’s southern Eilat port.


Iraqi Confusion Over Allegations of US Warning of Sanctions

The Coordination Framework faces a dilemma after nominating Nouri al-Maliki for Prime Minister (INA)
The Coordination Framework faces a dilemma after nominating Nouri al-Maliki for Prime Minister (INA)
TT

Iraqi Confusion Over Allegations of US Warning of Sanctions

The Coordination Framework faces a dilemma after nominating Nouri al-Maliki for Prime Minister (INA)
The Coordination Framework faces a dilemma after nominating Nouri al-Maliki for Prime Minister (INA)

Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein said that the authorities have received an oral message from Washington, “clearing and explicitly” hinting at possible sanctions if former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki was named to head the new government.

The Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement on Thursday that Hussein, who also serves as Deputy Prime Minister, had discussed in a televised interview the nature of cooperation and joint work with the US, particularly with regard to the formation of the upcoming government, without addressing the threat of sanctions, which led to “confusion in media coverage.”

The ministry stated that the US message included two main points. The first referred to the possibility of imposing sanctions on “certain individuals and institutions” if the largest bloc in parliament held onto its current nominee for the PM’s post, while the second addressed the standards for joint cooperation, mainly the nature of the upcoming government.

The ministry’s clarifications come amid increasing US warnings against selecting al-Maliki to head the government. The US State Department affirmed that Washington’s position is “firm and resolute,” and that his selection would force Washington to reassess its relationship with Iraq.

The Coordination Framework, which includes ruling Shiite parties, is divided over al-Maliki’s nomination, and attempts are being made to persuade him to withdraw his candidacy to preserve the unity of the alliance.

The Sunni Sovereignty Alliance, led by Khamis al-Khanjar, expects al-Maliki to take the initiative to withdraw his nomination to spare the country economic sanctions.

Fahd al-Rashed, a senior figure in the Sunni alliance, told Shafaq News that al-Maliki is expected to step aside given “his concern for the country’s interests.”

“We have no objection to al-Maliki personally,” al-Rashed added, “but we fear the repercussions of US reservations over the candidate, including threats of economic sanctions.”