↑ About 90 percent of the Jordan valley alone is in the West Bank zone and known as "Area C", an area given over to full Israeli control. See: Benhaida, Sarah (3 tháng 8 năm 2016). “Israeli army donkey sales stir Palestinian outrage” (bằng tiếng Anh). AFP (via Yahoo.com). Truy cập ngày 10 tháng 3 năm 2017.
↑ Roberts, Adam. “Prolonged Military Occupation: The Israeli-Occupied Territories Since 1967”. The American Journal of International Law (American Society of International Law) 84 (1): 85–86. doi:10.2307/2203016. The international community has taken a critical view of both deportations and settlements as being contrary to international law. General Assembly resolutions have condemned the deportations since 1969, and have done so by overwhelming majorities in recent years. Likewise, they have consistently deplored the establishment of settlements, and have done so by overwhelming majorities throughout the period (since the end of 1976) of the rapid expansion in their numbers. The Security Council has also been critical of deportations and settlements; and other bodies have viewed them as an obstacle to peace, and illegal under international law... Although East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights have been brought directly under Israeli law, by acts that amount to annexation, both of these areas continue to be viewed by the international community as occupied, and their status as regards the applicability of international rules is in most respects identical to that of the West Bank and Gaza.
↑ Pertile, Marco (2005). “'Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory': A Missed Opportunity for International Humanitarian Law?”. Trong Conforti, Benedetto; Bravo, Luigi. The Italian Yearbook of International Law 14. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. tr. 141. ISBN978-90-04-15027-0. the establishment of the Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has been considered illegal by the international community and by the majority of legal scholars.
↑ Barak-Erez, Daphne (2006). “Israel: The security barrier—between international law, constitutional law, and domestic judicial review”. International Journal of Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press) 4 (3): 548. doi:10.1093/icon/mol021. The real controversy hovering over all the litigation on the security barrier concerns the fate of the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Since 1967, Israel has allowed and even encouraged its citizens to live in the new settlements established in the territories, motivated by religious and national sentiments attached to the history of the Jewish nation in the land of Israel. This policy has also been justified in terms of security interests, taking into consideration the dangerous geographic circumstances of Israel before 1967 (where Israeli areas on the Mediterranean coast were potentially threatened by Jordanian control of the West Bank ridge). The international community, for its part, has viewed this policy as patently illegal, based on the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prohibit moving populations to or from territories under occupation.
↑ Drew, Catriona (1997). “Self-determination and population transfer”. Trong Bowen, Stephen. Human rights, self-determination and political change in the occupied Palestinian territories. International studies in human rights 52. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. tr. 151–152. ISBN978-90-411-0502-8. It can thus clearly be concluded that the transfer of Israeli settlers into the occupied territories violates not only the laws of belligerent occupation but the Palestinian right of self-determination under international law. The question remains, however, whether this is of any practical value. In other words, given the view of the international community that the Israeli settlements are illegal under the law if belligerent occupation, what purpose does it serve to establish that an additional breach of international law has occurred?
