What is the legal status of the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict/

Since the beginning of the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict in 1947, many have

declared the conflict to be an international issue for multiple decades. Voluminous
legal debates have taken place, of which have failed to reach a peaceful conclusion.
Each of the nations has failed to prove the other guiltier than themselves, however
legal concerns are still in place. This essay will explore some of the legal arguments
by each side of the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict, and will sum up the legal status of this
critical disagreement.

This encounter started in 1947, when the UN suggested the land to be split into two
sections and an international border to be established. This suggestion included that
47% of the land would be given to the Israeli population, and the rest would be given
to Palestine. However, the Israeli population only owned 9% of the entire original
land, which caused Palestinian frustration. Nonetheless, Israel used Palestines refusal
for the UNs suggestion to legalize this conflict. This meant that Israel had the power
to invade, since Palestine refused to negotiate. This argument legalized the invasion,
since the Israeli population viewed the refusal as a threat to their existence, and hence
declared war on Palestine. For this reason, the refusal of the UNs suggestion gave
Israel the right to self-defense, consequently protecting their existence as a state. This
influenced the legal status, in favor of the Israeli state in 1947, leaving Palestine no
ability to argue the legal status of the invasion in 1947.

Another example of a legal argument that the Israel made is a matter of self-defense in
the Six-day war and Yom Kippur war. In 1963, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and

Iraq were in war with Israel, and the argument of self-defense against these countries
ascended. The Arab side of the war were much stronger, however the Israeli resistance
was outstanding. This had a major effect on the legal debate, of which it ruled in favor
of Israel. Moreover, there was no issue with the legality of Israel at the point, since the
Israeli state was in a defensive position. Nonetheless, Israel triumphed in victory in
1967, gaining the Sinai Peninsula and Golan Heights. Furthermore, the self-defense
legal argument also took place in 1973. In the Yom Kippur war, which involved Egypt
and Syria against the Israeli State, took place and explored Israelis right to selfdefense. Hence, the legality of the Israeli resistance cannot be questioned, as it is a
matter of self-defense.

Opposing to the previous arguments made by the Israeli state, Palestinian arguments
were also to be made. A major argument made was the right to resist Israeli
occupation. Since, the beginning of the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict, both sides has the
right to resist occupation, however many question the ability of the Palestinian
population legally. Yet it is only thought that the Palestines right to resist occupation
is only a moral matter. Hence, Israels reaction to this right to resist is absurd, leading
to the death of many innocent civilians, including women and children. The reaction
to this simple right also caused 32 breaches of international law and war crimes.
Hence, the legal argument made the Palestinian state questions the legal status of the
Israels occupation. Moreover, this reaction has not been examined or followed by
consequences. This affects the legal status of the Israeli occupation, and earnestly
questions the legality of this conflict. Finally, the Palestines authority to resist cannot
be questioned as the have the complete right to resist the occupation and fight this
conflict.

An additional argument made by the Palestinian state is the right to protest against
discrimination. Palestinians face discrimination everyday by the Israeli state, not only
socially but also professionally. In example, Palestines unemployment is currently
measured at 26.6%. This example proves the discrimination and the struggle of the
Palestinian population to get jobs. Even in the Palestinian minority living in the Israeli
State face racial discrimination everyday. This affects the legal status of the Israeli
Palestinian Conflict, as civilians shouldnt be harmed emotionally or professionally
by the other state. Furthermore, discrimination shouldnt also exist between each of
the populations, since it also breaks moral values and principles established by
humanity. Additionally, Palestine also presented the right to protest discrimination and
fight against it. This right cannot be questioned by any legal entity, yet it still isnt
practiced freely. Finally, these rights cannot doubted by any authority and should be
given to each population respectively.

In conclusion, both sides of the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict have raised arguments that
should be earnestly examined. Furthermore, these arguments should be taken into
consideration and modified by a third and neutral party, especially the UN. Both sides
have in a way canceled out each others arguments, however the legal status of this
conflict is still questioned till this day. Nevertheless, both sides have presented rights
that should be practiced freely. However, both sides have made mistakes, but the
Israeli State has broken 32 international laws. A third neutral party should examine
this matter. The legal status of the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict is still questioned till
this day, should be addressed immediately.