Thread by @EpshtainItay

What does the imminent (or possible) #UkraineInvasion have to do with the prolonged occupation of #Palestine? Here are my thoughts on the failure of the international community to prosecute the crime of aggression.

Resolution 3314, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1974, defines aggression as “[t]he invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack (...)

or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof.” The international community had failed in ending #Israeli belligerent occupation of #Palestinian territory for 55 years and likewise failed to prevent annexation, de jure, and de facto.

Underpinning its failure is the refusal to attribute the crime of aggression to #Israeli unnecessarily prolonged occupation and denouncing it as an unlawful occupant based on the peremptory character of the prohibition on the use of force in interstate relations.

Complacency regards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict eroded the normative basis for effective prosecution of #Russian aggression in the #Ukraine since 2014 and at present. Restoring the efficacy of peremptory norms of international law requires ending the occupation of #Palestine

The nexus of #Resolution3314 with occupied #Palestine owes to the definition of State, without prejudice to recognition or UN membership. Drafters at the time had Palestinian right to self-determination and statehood claim in mind.

The nexus with #UkraineConflict going back to the 'little green men' invasion of 2014 owes to the inclusion in acts of aggression armed bands, groups, irregulars, or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force.

Now, more than in any time since the end of the Cold War, the international rules-based legal order and global peace and human security depends on refocusing efforts on ensuring respect for peremptory norms and rights. From Palestine to Ukraine.