Written by Paige Stephens
The conflict between Israel and Palestine is considered one of the most complex in modern history (Gunawan et al., 2025). International law, supposed to mediate conflicts, has been a central topic debated and discussed in relation to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory. Political interference has been a large contributor to the lack of legal mediation, as powerful nations shield Israel from legal repercussions. This article examines how international law has failed to control Israel’s occupation of Palestine, the connections to political interference, and why the conflict is so complex to mediate.
How does the international legal system work?
The United Nations Information Service Vienna (n.d.) defines international law as an outline of the legal responsibilities of states in their conduct with each other. The United Nations (UN) plays a pivotal role in international law, facilitating treaties and creating resolutions between parties, thereby promoting global peace and setting global norms (United Nations, n.d.).
The central judicial bodies responsible for upholding international law are the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICC prosecutes individuals for serious war crimes, usually only interfering when a state is unwilling to investigate a crime (International Criminal Court, n.d). The ICJ aims to settle legal disputes between states, only taking cases when requested by states (International Court of Justice, n.d).
Israel’s occupation of Arab territories
A key moment in the Israel-Palestine conflict occurred in 1967 when Israel occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula (Mohhamed-Shahi, 2014). Although Israel withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights, and arguably the Gaza Strip in 2005 by removing military and civilian presence, the prolonged occupation of Palestinian territories remains problematic (Lemay-Hébert, 2019). It is important to understand that Israel’s original occupation of Arab territories is not the current issue, but rather its failure to withdraw from the occupied territories.
Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, occupations should be temporary, prohibiting occupier settlements on the occupied land (International Committee of the Red Cross, n.d.). Therefore, Israel’s prolonged occupation, building of settlements, and imposing military rule on Palestinian land violate international law, as declared by an advisory opinion from the ICJ (2024). Despite global recognition of violations and UN resolutions, such as Resolution 242 calling for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from Palestinian territories (United Nations Security Council, 1967), no legal action has forced Israel to withdraw. Tocci (2023) argues this symbolises a power gap, as large nations continue to support Israel’s occupation, disregarding the suffering of the Palestinian population and Palestine’s right to self-determination.
Political interference – Undermining ICC legitimacy
Although the ICC has investigated alleged war crimes from both Israeli and Palestinian groups throughout Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory, political pressures from Israel and allies have majorly disrupted the process (Kearney, 2024). Pressure is extreme from the United States, a nation that does not recognise Palestine as a state and rejects ICC jurisdiction over Israel (THINC Israel, 2021). Although Palestine joined the ICC in 2015, granting jurisdiction to the ICC, Israel and allies – for example, the United States and Canada – argue that Palestine is not a state and therefore not within the ICC’s jurisdiction (Loengarov, 2024). This rejection grew curiosity: Can political interests override International law? The answer is clear. When powerful nations are involved, yes.
Not only has this debate weakened the perceived legitimacy of ICC proceedings involving Palestine, but it has ultimately deferred a peaceful solution between Israel and Palestine. As supported by discussion from Soni (2024), political interference from the US and Israel, particularly pressure to avoid issuing arrest warrants for Israeli officials, has repeatedly obstructed ICC investigation. Zhu (2006) states that since the ICC relies on state cooperation, Israel (a non-member state) is not obliged to comply with rulings or assist in investigations, and why would we expect them to? Ultimately, this allows Israel to mitigate the risk of legal accountability and continue to pursue the occupation of Palestinian land.
Dictating United Nations resolutions – US powerplay
As supported by Isaacs (2006), the United States’ power to protect its undeniable alliance with Israel in the UN is obvious. The US is a permanent member of the UN with veto power, allowing for the blockage of a resolution. Historically, the US has used its veto over 40 times to block resolutions which criticise Israel, including calls to enforce international court rulings, investigate Israeli war crimes, and end settlement expansion (Safieh, 2023). It has prevented international collaboration on a practical solution by ruling out possible solutions, permitting Israel’s occupation.
To make matters worse, in 2025, the Trump administration sanctioned ICC officials, intimidating members of the ICC for investigating Israeli war crimes in Palestinian territory (Human Rights Watch, 2025). When one of the world’s most powerful nations emphasises the ability to intimidate officials in charge of legal investigations, the message is clear: Justice is optional.
Summary – So why is the conflict so hard to mediate?
Israel’s occupation of Palestine showcases a significant flaw in the international legal system: its weakness to political interference. Although international law intends to protect human rights, powerful states such as the US often dictate how and when it applies, making it ineffective for complex situations. As long as political allies continue to protect Israel from legal accountability, people will continue to view international law as a performative measure of defending Israel’s actions, rather than mediating the prolonged conflict, making it increasingly difficult for Palestinians to seek justice.
References
Gunawan, Y., Pangestu, R. A., Hardiyanti, L. A., & Genovés, M. B. (2025). The effectiveness of international law in limiting humanitarian disasters in the Palestine‑Israel conflict. Journal of Human Rights, Culture and Legal System, 5(1), 217–245. https://doi.org/10.53955/jhcls.v5i1.307
Human Rights Watch. (2025). U.S. Trump authorises International Criminal Court sanctions. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/02/07/us-trump-authorizes-international-criminal-court-sanctions
International Court of Justice. (n.d.). How the Court works. https://www.icj-cij.org/how-the-court-works
International Committee of the Red Cross. (n.d.). What is international humanitarian law? https://www.icrc.org/sites/default/files/external/doc/en/assets/files/other/what_is_ihl.pdf
International Criminal Court. (n.d.). How the Court works. ICC–CPI. https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works
International Court of Justice. (2024, July 19). Legal consequences of the continued presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem: Advisory opinion [Press release]. https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204160
Isaacs, S. (2006). The United States–Israel strategic relationship (Master’s thesis, Missouri State University). Missouri State University ScholarWorks. https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses/1421/
Kearney, M. (2024). Politics and justice at the International Criminal Court. Israel Law Review, 57(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223724000012
Loengarov, A. (2024). State of Jurisdiction: The International Criminal Court and the “Situation in Palestine” (PolicyWatch PolicyPaper No. 3978). Washington Institute for Near East Policy. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/state-jurisdiction-international-criminal-court-and-situation-palestine
Safieh, D. (2023). How the U.S. persistently shields Israel from accountability at the UN. Balfour Project. https://britainpalestineproject.org/how-the-us-persistently-shields-israel-from-accountability-at-the-un/
Sellers, (2017). The purpose of international law is to advance justice —and international law has no value unless it does so. In Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting (Vol. 111, pp. 301–305). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/amp.2017.64
