The Israel–Palestine conflict stands as one of the most sensitive, prolonged, and complex disputes in international relations. Although often framed as a political and territorial clash, it is deeply rooted in legal questions of statehood, sovereignty, occupation, war crimes, and humanitarian law. Public International Law provides analytical tools to examine the conflict; however, its ability to enforce peace remains limited.

• Historical Background
  The roots of the conflict trace back to the early 20th century under British colonial rule. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 expressed Britain's support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. Tensions between Jews and Arabs intensified, especially after World War II. In 1947, the United Nations proposed a partition plan dividing Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. Israel accepted the plan and declared independence in 1948, whereas Arab states and Palestinians rejected it, leading to war. Subsequently, Israel captured more territory than originally allotted, displacing over 700,000 Palestinians.
   
• Right to Self-Determination
  A central legal claim of Palestinians is their right to self-determination, enshrined in Article 1 of the UN Charter and Article 1 of the ICCPR. This right empowers people to determine their political status and pursue development freely. Although more than 138 UN member states recognize Palestine as a state, it has not achieved full UN membership. Simultaneously, Israel asserts its right to sovereignty, recognized by the majority of the international community.
   
• Occupation and Settlements
  Following the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. According to Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention, "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." Despite this, Israel has established numerous settlements in these regions, widely regarded as illegal under international law. These settlements further complicate the possibility of a viable two-state solution.
   
• ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Wall (2004)
  In 2004 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion in Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The ICJ ruled that the separation barrier Israel built in the West Bank was illegal under international law, violating Palestinian rights and amounting to de facto annexation. Although non-binding, the opinion strongly reinforced the view that Israel's actions breached multiple international legal standards.
   
• Use of Force and Proportionality
  Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, states are prohibited from using force against others except in self-defense or with Security Council authorization. In the Israel–Palestine context, both sides have been accused of violating this principle. Israeli military operations in Gaza often result in heavy civilian casualties and infrastructure destruction. Meanwhile, Hamas has launched indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli cities. These actions raise serious concerns under international humanitarian law, especially the principles of distinction and proportionality.
   
• War Crimes and ICC Investigation
  In 2021, the International Criminal Court (ICC) opened an investigation into alleged war crimes by Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups since 2014. The investigation covers attacks on civilians, use of human shields, and disproportionate force. While Israel does not recognize ICC jurisdiction, Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute in 2015, authorizing investigations within its territory. Though symbolic, such efforts reflect the growing international demand for accountability.
   
• The Goldstone Report (2009)
  Commissioned by the UN after the 2008–09 Gaza War, the Goldstone Report accused both Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes, documenting deliberate attacks on civilians, disproportionate force, and the targeting of civilian structures. Though controversial and heavily criticized by Israel, the report significantly advanced global awareness of violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

International Organizations and Responses
The United Nations continues to advocate for a two-state solution, passing numerous resolutions condemning Israeli settlements and supporting Palestinian rights. Organizations like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) monitor humanitarian conditions, while political support for Palestine is provided by the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Nevertheless, geopolitical interests, particularly U.S. vetoes in the UN Security Council, frequently hinder effective action.

Enforcement Challenges in International Law
Despite clear violations, enforcement of international law remains weak. Legal frameworks such as the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, and the Rome Statute provide guidance, but political will is essential for enforcement. The Israel–Palestine conflict highlights the limitations of international law where global consensus and strong enforcement mechanisms are absent.

Conclusion
The Israel–Palestine conflict is not merely a territorial or religious struggle; it is a profound test of the relevance and reach of international law. While legal instruments provide clarity on rights and wrongs, justice often remains symbolic rather than practical. Nonetheless, international law plays a vital role in shaping global discourse, documenting violations, and framing the pathway to peace. Ultimately, it reminds us that while law can guide toward justice, political courage is essential for delivering it.

References:

• Amnesty International. (2022). Israel's apartheid against Palestinians: A cruel system of domination and a crime against humanity.
• Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention). (1949), Article 49(6).
• Human Rights Watch. (2021). A threshold crossed: Israeli authorities and the crimes of apartheid and persecution.
• International Criminal Court. (2021). Situation in the State of Palestine.
• International Court of Justice. (2004). Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: Advisory Opinion.
• Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2009). Report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (Goldstone Report) (A/HRC/12/48).
• United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations, Article 1(2). URL: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/chapter-1
• United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 1.
• United Nations General Assembly. (2012). Resolution 67/19: Status of Palestine in the United Nations. URL: https://www.un.org/webcast/pdfs/GARes67-19.pdf
• United Nations. (1998). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.