"The Current Position"

Israel's cabinet brands Gaza an "enemy entity." Here's the BBC's reaction:

Correspondents say that by formally declaring Gaza "hostile", Israel could argue that it is no longer bound by international law governing the administration of occupied territory to supply utilities to its 1.5 million inhabitants.
But the current position is that, under international law, Israel remains legally responsible for the coastal strip, despite withdrawing two years ago, because it still controls Gaza's borders, air space and territorial waters.

Does international law really hold, as the BBC asserts, Israel legally responsible for administering Gaza?

Posted at 07:29 PM

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/5874/21739825

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "The Current Position":

Comments

If, and only if, Israel is considered an occupier (meaning, legal or no) then it is responsible for the welfare of the occupied until such time that the government of the occupied is allowed to take control.

So, if we disregard Prof. Stone's opinion that the British Mandate is still in effect, then Gaza, and the WB *had* the status of 'occupied' territority. The fact that '67 was a defensive war may or may not matter for annexation purposes, but Israel HAS NOT annexed. Therefore, it would be legally occupied. And, again, an occupied territory is the responsibility of the occupier.

The question is about the borders, which Israel does control airspace (sort of) water space (somewhat). But as for international crossing, I thought that Egypt was in charge of some????

Posted by: Bertram at Sep 20, 2007 12:20:03 PM