“Settling” constitutes a warcime according to international law and ICC statute. Even under US’ own military legislations’
Law resources below this article
Israeli Peace Now Movement issued a press release denouncing a new Israeli decision of the Israeli Government of Benjamin Netanyahu, to build additional 1889 units for Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank, and in occupied Jerusalem.
Peace Now said that the tenders include 1.061 units in the West Bank, and 828 units in occupied East Jerusalem.
It added that the new tenders are the last stage before the actual implementation and construction of these illegal units starts.
The Movement further stated that only a few months after the tenders are published, winning bids are selected, and the contractors who won the bids may apply for construction permits and begin the actual construction just a few weeks, or a few months, later.
This is part of the serious and rapidly escalating construction and expansion of illegal Jewish settlements in occupied Palestine, to preclude any future outcome of direct peace talks with the Palestinians.
Illegal under International Law and the Fourth Geneva Convention to which Israel is a signatory, settlements are also largely built on private Palestinian property, leading to the massive illegal annexation of Palestinian lands and orchards for the construction itself, and further illegal annexation of lands for “security zones” and settler-only roads.
Israel’s illegitimate settlements, and its Annexation Wall, have turned the West Bank into isolated cantons, divided from each other, making the villagers separated from most of their lands, and have transformed several villages into open-air prisons after becoming completely isolated.
Commenting on the new Israeli decision, Peace Now said, “Whenever Netanyahu makes one small step towards peace, he makes two larger steps to make it harder to get peace”.
Furthermore, Peace Now also said that the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization published, last week, a tender for the construction of 30 units in Beit El settlement, near Ramallah.
— The new tenders as published by Israel’s Peace Now Movement;
Elkana – 283 units
Maale Adumim – 114 units (112 of them in neighborhood 06, and another two in neighborhood 07)
Karnei Shomron – 196 units – the settlement is located east of the built route of the Barrier
Givat Zeev – 102 units – at the Banana Hill neighborhood
Ariel – 18 units – in the eastern part of the settlement – east of the built route of the Barrier.
Adam (AKA Geva Binyamin) – 80 units – east of the Separation Barrier. The plan and the infrastructure were prepared for the evicted settlers of Migron who have chosen a different location, and now it is marketed for the general public.
Beitar Illit – 238 units – in neighborhood B2.
In addition, the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization published last week a tender to build 30 units in Beit El.
This is not a regular tender offering the rights to build and sell a construction project, but a special tender where the Government is funding the construction and will grant the buildings to a private body dedicated in advance.
This construction is part of the compensation deal that the Government signed with the settlers of the Ulpana Hill that was built on private Palestinian land and evicted following a court order.
In East Jerusalem:
Gilo – 311 units – in Western Gilo Slopes
Ramat Shlomo – 387 units – it is part of the plan for 1,500 units that became published during the visit of Vice President Biden in 2010.
Har Homa B – 130 units for the elderly – this tender was first published in 2008 and then again in 2011 and 2012 – but no bids were awarded.
“States may not deport or transfer parts of their own civilian population into a territory they occupy.”
State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in international armed conflicts.
International armed conflicts
The prohibition on deporting or transferring parts of a State’s own civilian population into the territory it occupies is set forth in the Fourth Geneva Convention.
It is a grave breach of Additional Protocol I.
Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, “the transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.
Many military manuals prohibit the deportation or transfer by a party to the conflict of parts of its civilian population into the territory it occupies.
This rule is included in the legislation of numerous States.
Official statements and reported practice also support the prohibition on transferring one’s own civilian population into occupied territory.
Attempts to alter the demographic composition of an occupied territory have been condemned by the UN Security Council.
In 1992, it called for the cessation of attempts to change the ethnic composition of the population, anywhere in the former Yugoslavia.
Similarly, the UN General Assembly and UN Commission on Human Rights have condemned settlement practices.
According to the final report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfer, including the Implantation of Settlers and Settlements, “the implantation of settlers” is unlawful and engages State responsibility and the criminal responsibility of individuals.
In 1981, the 24th International Conference of the Red Cross reaffirmed that “settlements in occupied territory are incompatible with article 27 and 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention”.
In the Case of the Major War Criminals in 1946, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg found two of the accused guilty of attempting the “Germanization” of occupied territories.
 Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 49, sixth paragraph (cited in Vol. II, Ch. 38, § 334).
 Additional Protocol I, Article 85(4)(a) (adopted by consensus) (ibid., § 335).
 ICC Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(viii) (ibid., § 336).
 See, e.g., the military manuals of Argentina (ibid., §§ 346–347), Australia (ibid., § 348), Canada (ibid., § 349), Croatia (ibid., § 350), Hungary (ibid., § 351), Italy (ibid., § 352), Netherlands (ibid., § 353), New Zealand (ibid., § 354), Spain (ibid., § 355), Sweden (ibid., § 357), Switzerland (ibid., § 357), United Kingdom (ibid., § 358) and United States (ibid., § 359).
 See, e.g., the legislation of Armenia (ibid., § 361), Australia (ibid., §§ 362–363), Azerbaijan (ibid., §§ 364–365), Bangladesh (ibid., § 366), Belarus (ibid., § 367), Belgium (ibid., § 368), Bosnia and Herzegovina (ibid., § 369), Canada (ibid., §§ 371–372), Congo (ibid., § 373), Cook Islands (ibid., § 374), Croatia (ibid., § 375), Cyprus (ibid., § 376), Czech Republic (ibid., § 377), Germany (ibid., § 379), Georgia (ibid., § 380), Ireland (ibid., § 381), Mali (ibid., § 384), Republic of Moldova (ibid., § 385), Netherlands (ibid., § 386), New Zealand (ibid., §§ 387–388), Niger (ibid., § 390), Norway (ibid., § 391), Slovakia (ibid., § 392), Slovenia (ibid., § 393), Spain (ibid., § 394), Tajikistan (ibid., § 395), United Kingdom (ibid., §§ 397–398), Yugoslavia (ibid., § 399) and Zimbabwe (ibid., § 400); see also the draft legislation of Argentina (ibid., § 360), Burundi (ibid., § 370), Jordan (ibid., § 382), Lebanon (ibid., § 383) and Trinidad and Tobago (ibid., § 396).
 See, e.g., the statements of Kuwait (ibid., § 405) and United States (ibid., §§ 406–407) and the reported practice of Egypt (ibid., § 402) and France (ibid., § 403).
 See, e.g., UN Security Council, Res. 446 , 452 and 476 (ibid., § 408), Res. 465 (ibid., § 409) and Res. 677 (ibid., § 410).
 UN Security Council, Res. 752 (ibid., § 411).
 See, e.g., UN General Assembly, Res. 36/147 C, 37/88 C, 38/79 D, 39/95 D and 40/161 D (ibid., § 412) and Res. 54/78 (ibid., § 405); UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 2001/7 (ibid., § 413).
 UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights, Final report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfer, including the Implantation of Settlers and Settlements (ibid., § 415).
 24th International Conference of the Red Cross, Res. III (ibid., § 419).
 International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Case of the Major War Criminals, Judgement (ibid., § 421).