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.

Marginal Return of Infrastructure Investment on Bilateral Trade Performance

Investing in transport infrastructures such as roadways, airports and seaports has proven to improve a country's trade performance through reduction of transportation costs and providing access to production and market. This research investigates the diminishing return of infrastructure investment and also the rate of return of two types of infrastructure investment strategies on trade. An augmented gravity model is used with econometric analysis methods in this study. The results have shown that as roadway and airport densities increase, the marginal returns on trade decrease. Empirical evidence from the United States and China with all their trading partners from the past twenty years has also suggested existence of diminishing return of infrastructure investment on roadways and airports. Infrastructure investment strategy that focuses on increasing roadway and airport density experiences smaller diminishing return on trade. In contrast, seaport investment that focuses on port quality and efficiency generates higher return on trade. A trade benefiting infrastructure investment strategy that best utilizes financial resources must balance between quality and quantity based on a country's current level of infrastructure asset.