During a February press briefing, U.S. State Department spokesperson Ned Price — a former CIA agent and frequent visitor to the Israeli Embassy in Washington, DC — related the Biden administration’s belief that the Israeli regime’s intention to build 10,000 new settler homes in the occupied West Bank was a matter of “sovereign decisions.”
The State Department recently refused to concede that Palestinians are “occupied,” and has repeatedly rebuked Palestinians for exercising their sovereign rights under international law, such as seeking redress for Israeli human rights violations at The Hague. But some humans are more equal than others, and with the words “sovereign decisions,” the Biden White House has carved out a new exemption to international law for the apartheid state.
Never mind that the Israeli regime does not exercise any legitimate rule in the occupied territories — even by its own illiberal standards, the regime is not sovereign in the West Bank. More worryingly, when it comes to international law and human rights, the U.S. has never before endorsed the principle that nations are within their rights to violate them provided they act within their borders; that adherence to the law is simply a sovereign decision that any nation can uphold or ignore. At least, that has been official U.S. policy since the end of WWII.
The United States has repeatedly demonstrated — through its interventions across the Middle East — that its objectives trump sovereignty, by using the language of human rights to justify deployments. The United Nations meanwhile, made a solemn (albeit selectively enforced) pledge to protect persecuted communities. The argument that the Israeli regime has a sovereign right to build settlements on expropriated Palestinian land in violation of the international and human rights of Palestinians runs contrary to this global order. In fact, it is an argument that comes straight out of the playbook of anti-human rights regimes, which are often aligned against the West.
China and Russia, for instance, abide by the premise that countries should be free to act within their borders as they wish. China, for instance, believes that its mass human rights abuses against the Muslim Uighurs are no one’s business since it is happening in China. The U.S. has consistently rebuked regimes parroting this line and reminded them that human rights are an international issue. As Vice-President, Biden reportedly told Chinese Premier Xi Jinping that America would not be America if it did not speak out about human rights in China. It is unimaginable that the U.S. would pass off detention camps for Chinese Muslims as a matter left to China’s “sovereign decisions.” Instead, both the U.S. Congress and the White House have imposed sanctions and trade bans on China.
Of course, the U.S. has always been selective about which nations can get away with human rights abuses. But this hypocrisy has traditionally been one of omission: publicly condemning Iran, say, while staying mute about Saudi persecutions of dissidents.
But the Israel carve-out is explicit. While the U.S. may not endorse Israeli settlements, as Price put it, the American government believes that the settlers have the right to do whatever they want within their declared borders. It beggars the question: is there a limit to Israeli sovereignty? Would an Israeli decision to expel 100,000 Palestinians in order to build even more settlements be characterized as a legitimate “sovereign decision”?
The Biden Administration is establishing a dangerous precedent that will enable the worst Israeli abuses by granting the apartheid regime the right to violate international law in the name of absolute sovereignty — a right accorded to no other nation, except perhaps Saudi Arabia and the UAE, two U.S. allies that have significant clout in DC.
The Israeli regime and its American defenders constantly claim that the settler project is the victim of unfair double standards but the double standards that really matter are in Israel’s favor. Unconditional American support for Israel enables the regime to violate international law without ever facing meaningful penalties. Few other nations are so lucky. Even global behemoths like China are sanctioned by the U.S.
The UN Human Rights Council may spill plenty of ink on the Occupation of Palestine. But when it comes to the Security Council, where real power exists, Israel is protected from sanctions by an American veto. Other major human rights violators – such as Iran and Venezuela — would probably also receive an avalanche of toothless UN reports if it meant that they could otherwise carry on being brutes without the threat of economic penalties. When it comes to the Israeli regime and international law, it is an endless stream of exceptions.
