John Strawson

Partitioning Palestine
Examining international law in the Palestine-Israeli conflict

John Strawson

Faith in law and human rights may be prolonging the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is the surprising conclusion of John Strawson’s latest book, which argues for international action to complete the partition of Palestine begun by the United Nations in 1947.

In partitioning Paletine:Legal Fundamentalism in the Palestine-Israeli Conflict, Strawson uses discourse analysis to unpick the legal narratives employed by each side. He explains: “Both sides claim monopoly on legal rights. One of the reasons why we don’t have a solution is both sides think international law backs them and therefore they don’t have an obligation to compromise. It’s a belief in the law and in human rights that fuels the conflict.”

The frankly-written book analyses how law has been used by both sides to “dignify lurid threats and violent acts” and engender a “festering sense of justice”. It states that each side “has become cocooned within a legal righteousness in which its own legitimacy is unimpeachable while that of the other is compromised.” It suggests that both sides should move beyond such “legal fundamentalism” and see the legal texts and narratives of the conflict for what they are - products of their time, contingent and open to interpretation.

“It is evident that neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis can negotiate a solution. The Americans are not able to act as the main interlocutors. In a sense you have to rebuild the international framework to move towards peace,” says Strawson.

Professor Bill Bowring, of Birkbeck College, London, calls John Strawson’s work “highly original”. He adds: “In his critique, international law has been turned into a magical substance to ensure that good triumphs over evil, as if in the world of Harry Potter. Strawson wishes to break the spell of the past, in which each party has constantly refreshed its confidence in the legal justice of its case.”

The book explains why bilateral negotiations have failed to produce a settlement and has helped stimulate fresh thinking about the conflict.

“The proposal that is now before the United Nations General Assembly - to adopt a new resolution recognising an independent Palestinian State in the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, with its capital in East Jerusalem - is a step in the right the direction. Even President Obama has accepted that the 1967 borders are the basis of settlement. The whole international community has to spell this out to both Palestinian and Israelis.” says Strawson.