Does Israel Follow the Law? A Critical Analysis of Israel's Application of the International Law of Belligerent Occupation in the Occupied Territories

Israel's occupation of territories it captured in 1967 has become one of the longest and most controversial occupations of the last fifty years. Eschewing the traditional political analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this paper aims to explore whether Israel has adequately applied international law in the occupied territories, in particular, the law of belligerent occupation. The two actors under assessment are the Israeli government, particularly its military which enforces and maintains the law in the territories, and the Supreme Court of Israel, which has the power of review over military actions in the territories. The particular issues of the occupation that are critically analyzed are the general legal framework that Israel established in the territories, Israel's civilian settlement policy in territories, and Israel's construction of a barrier in the West Bank. This paper concludes that Israel has incorrectly applied the legal framework of belligerent occupation by refusing to apply the Fourth Geneva Convention; it has wrongly concluded that the establishment of civilian settlements in the territories conform with international law; yet it has rightly concluded that the construction of the barrier in the West Bank is permissible under international law, in contrast to the conclusion of the much publicized International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on the 'Wall.' Along with these general assessments, the author will also provide some historical and political insight into why the Israeli government and the Supreme Court may have applied the law in the way that they did.

Mental Health and Aging at the 2005 White House Conference on Aging: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back

Success! At the 2005 White House Conference on Aging, three-quarters of the 1,200 national delegates voted to improve “recognition, assessment, and treatment of mental illness and depression among older Americans.” This resulted in mental health being ranked as #8 of the final 50 WHCoA policy resolutions resulting from the conference. Joining this resolution in the “top ten” were two resolutions intimately tied to hopes for addressing the mental health needs of older adults—at #6 “Support Geriatric Education and Training for Health Care Professionals, Paraprofessionals, Health Profession Students and Direct Care Workers,” and #9 “Attain Adequate Numbers of Healthcare Personnel in All Professions Who are Skilled, Culturally Competent, and Specialized in Geriatrics.”