The paper found that conditions in Gaza are not consistent with definitions of apartheid, colonialism and genocide.
By Shula Rosen
Researchers Gunther Jikeli and Philippe Karpe have rejected the application of three prominent accusations against Israel, arguing in a paper published this month that apartheid and genocide have not been established under the relevant legal standards and that settler colonialism is an inadequate framework for understanding Zionism and Israel.
Their paper, “Three Accusations against Israel: Apartheid, Settler Colonialism, and Genocide under Legal and Historical Scrutiny,” considers each charge separately rather than treating the terms as different descriptions of the same phenomenon.
Jikeli and Karpe conclude that conditions inside Israel do not meet the legal requirements for apartheid.
While recognizing discrimination and disparities, they point to the political and legal rights of Arab citizens, including participation in elections, representation in the Knesset, the ability to organize political parties and access to the courts.
The authors give greater consideration to the apartheid allegation in Judea and Samaria, examining Israeli settlements, restrictions affecting Palestinians, separate legal systems and the length of the occupation.
Their analysis nevertheless finds insufficient evidence of a purpose or intent to impose systematic racial domination.
Among the factors considered are Palestinian self-government, Israel’s stated security considerations, judicial review and negotiations concerning withdrawal and Palestinian statehood.
A different set of questions arises over the description of Israel as a settler colonial project.
The paper finds that the concept can help explain certain developments, including Jewish settlement before Israel’s establishment, Palestinian displacement and Israeli settlement in Judea and Samaria after 1967.
Jikeli and Karpe argue, however, that the framework leaves significant elements unexplained.
These include Jewish historical connections to the land, Zionism’s character as both a national and refugee movement and the absence of a conventional colonial metropole.
Their examination of the genocide allegation focuses on the requirement of intent rather than solely on the consequences of the Gaza war.
The paper recognizes extensive Palestinian deaths, injuries, deprivation and civilian suffering but says those conditions do not by themselves establish genocide.
Under the Genocide Convention, the authors say the evidence must demonstrate specific intent to physically or biologically destroy Palestinians, in whole or in substantial part, as a group.
They conclude that the evidence they examined does not establish such intent.
.
Do You Love Israel? Make a Donation - Show Your Support!
Donate to vital charities that help protect Israeli citizens and inspire millions around the world to support Israel too!
Now more than ever, Israel needs your help to fight and win the war -- including on the battlefield of public opinion.
Antisemitism, anti-Israel bias and boycotts are out of control. Israel's enemies are inciting terror and violence against innocent Israelis and Jews around the world. Help us fight back!