Dimi came closest to the central issue. Any legal test that would be applied to settlements in the West Bank would have to address the legality of the seizures at some arbitrary point in time. Such a legal test would have to pick a year when military seizures and state expropriation where legal under international law, and 1948 is as problematic as 1967 in terms of the legal right of a state engaged in ethnic cleansing, which has never been deemed “legal” at any time in history.
It’s the definition of a slippery slope argument. Any argument for justice – a remedy for injury – has to account for the root of all injuries across time and not pretend that 1967 was the origin of injustice.
Comments are closed.
This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning. By closing this banner, you agree to the use of cookies.Ok
Dimi came closest to the central issue. Any legal test that would be applied to settlements in the West Bank would have to address the legality of the seizures at some arbitrary point in time. Such a legal test would have to pick a year when military seizures and state expropriation where legal under international law, and 1948 is as problematic as 1967 in terms of the legal right of a state engaged in ethnic cleansing, which has never been deemed “legal” at any time in history.
It’s the definition of a slippery slope argument. Any argument for justice – a remedy for injury – has to account for the root of all injuries across time and not pretend that 1967 was the origin of injustice.