The UN Assembly is expected to resume its deliberations after the Christmas break, and among the decisions it will make will be the request from the International Court of Justice in The Hague (ICJ) to determine whether the Israeli presence in the territories of Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem constitutes a permanent occupation of territory, contrary to international law.
The proposed resolution was initiated by the Palestinians, contrary to an explicit request by the United States to refrain from it. Due to the automatic majority that the Palestinians have in the assembly, there is no doubt that the resolution will pass. However, in the political system, efforts are being made to increase the number of countries that will oppose the initiative or at least abstain. The effort is focused on the countries that identify themselves as democracies which in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs attach more weight to their position.
The International Court of Justice in The Hague, photo: Reuters
It should be noted that already at the time of the initial decision by the Fourth Committee of the United Nations that prepared the decision a month ago, 17 countries objected, including the USA, Germany and Australia, while 57 countries abstained or were absent.
Political officials explained that the way the powers vote in the assembly is of great importance, as it will signal to the judges of the tribunal what the mood is in the international community.
In addition, opposition to the proposal of central countries such as the USA will serve Israel in the future, if and when a decision problematic for Israel is made in the House itself.
The assessment in Israel, based on past experience, is that from the moment the General Assembly addresses the request to the court in The Hague to receive an opinion, it will take about a year and a half until the judges publish their position.
At this stage there is still no decision in Israel whether to cooperate with the tribunal and try to convince the judges of Jerusalem's position, or to avoid any contact with it, similar to Israel's attitude towards the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The one who will make the decision on this issue is the next government.
UNRA facility, photo: I.P
Political parties emphasize that the court's position is not binding but will only be a recommendation to the international community.
"A problematic decision for Israel should not be underestimated if there is one, but it should not be seen as the end of the world either," said a political source.
According to him, "Israel enjoys respect in the international community and is seen as an 'asset' country. The Abraham Accords are an expression of this. So even if at the end of the process the result is not good, Israel is not a widow."
The goal: to stop UNRA
In the coming days, the General Assembly is also expected to make a final decision regarding the financing of the UN agency UNRWA, which handles the Palestinian "refugees".
Israel and the US continue to work behind the scenes to stop the initiative revealed in "Israel Today" - to charge the UN with the financing of the program.
An official at the State Department told Israel Hayom: "As stated in the UN, the US does not support efforts to transfer UNRWA's budget from voluntary contributions to assessed contributions through the regular UN budget."
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us