

(Top)


Evolution of international law

Toggle Evolution of international law subsection


Annexations since the foundation of the United Nations

Toggle Annexations since the foundation of the United Nations subsection


See also


References


Notes


Further reading

Annexation
63 languages

 Article
 Talk
 Read
 Edit
 View history

Tools













From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the incorporation of additional territory into a nation state. For the
incorporation of additional territory into an urban area, see Municipal annexation.

Basic Law: Jerusalem, Capital of Israel, passed by the Knesset on 30 July 1980

Federal Law  Admitting to the Russian Federation the Republic of Crimea, passed by the State Duma on 21
March 2014

Two examples of unilateral annexation laws, both illegal under international law

Annexation,[1] in international law, is the forcible acquisition and assertion of legal

title over one state's territory by another state, usually following military occupation of
the territory.[2] In current international law, it is generally held to be an illegal act.
[3]
 Annexation is a unilateral act where territory is seized and held by one state, [4] as
distinct from conquest[a][7][8] and differs from cession, in which territory is given or sold
through treaty.
Annexation can be legitimized if generally recognized by other states and
international bodies.[4][9][2]
The illegality of annexation means that states carrying out such acts usually avoid
using the word annexation in describing their actions; [10][11] in each of the unresolved
annexations by Israel, Morocco and Russia, the states have avoided characterizing
their actions as such.[11][12]

Evolution of international law[edit]

See also: Right of conquest

Illegality[edit]
International law regarding the use of force by states evolved significantly in the 20th
century.[13] Key agreements include the 1907 Porter Convention, the 1920 Covenant
of the League of Nations and the 1928 Kellogg–Briand Pact,[b][13] culminating in Article
2(4) of Chapter I of the United Nations Charter, which is in force today: "All Members
shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner
inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations". [13]
These principles were reconfirmed by the 1970 Friendly Relations Declaration.
[15]
 Since the use of force against territorial integrity or political independence is illegal,
the question as to whether title or sovereignty can be transferred in such a situation
has been the subject of legal debate.[16] '[A]nnexation by the use of force of the
territory of another State or part thereof' is an act of aggression according to the
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.[17]
Occupation and annexation[edit]
Illegally annexed territory is considered as still occupied under international law and
the provisions of international humanitarian law continue to apply, for precision such
territory may be referred to as "occupied and illegally annexed". [18] In a report to
the United Nations General Assembly, Michael Lynk contrasted de jure annexation
as a formal declaration[2] by a state that it is claiming permanent sovereignty over
territory and de facto annexation without the formal declaration [3] as a descriptive
term for a state establishing facts on the ground as the prelude to a future claim of
sovereignty.[19]
The Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) of 1949 amplified the Hague Conventions of
1899 and 1907 with respect to the question of the protection of civilians, [20] and the
rules regarding inviolability of rights have "an absolute character", [21] making it much
more difficult for a state to bypass international law through the use of annexation. [21][c]

Annexations since the foundation of the United

Nations[edit]
Unresolved[edit]
By Israel[edit]

Israel and the territories Israel occupied in the Six-Day War.

East Jerusalem[edit]
Main articles: Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem and Jerusalem Law

During the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel captured East Jerusalem, a part of the West

Bank, from Jordan. It has remained occupied until the present day. On June 27,
1967, Israel unilaterally extended its law and jurisdiction to East Jerusalem and
some of the surrounding area, incorporating about 70 square kilometers of territory
into the Jerusalem Municipality. Although at the time Israel informed the United
Nations that its measures constituted administrative and municipal integration rather
than annexation, later rulings by the Israeli Supreme Court indicated that East
Jerusalem had become part of Israel. In 1980, Israel passed the Jerusalem Law as
part of its Basic Law, which declared Jerusalem the "complete and united" capital of
Israel. In other words, Israel purported to annex East Jerusalem. [22][23][24] The
annexation was declared null and void by United Nations Security Council (UNSC)
resolutions 252, 267, 271, 298, 465, 476 [25] and 478.[26]
Jewish neighborhoods have since been built in East Jerusalem, and Israeli Jews
have since also settled in Arab neighborhoods there, though some Jews may have
returned from their 1948 expulsion after the Battle for Jerusalem. Only Costa Rica
recognized Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem, and those countries who
maintained embassies in Israel did not move them to Jerusalem. [27] The United States
Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which recognizes Jerusalem as the
united capital of Israel and requires the relocation of the U.S. embassy there in 1995,
[28]
 The act included a provision permitting the President to delay its implementation
due to national security concerns. This waiver was used by
presidents Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump, but was allowed to expire in 2019.[29]
West Bank excluding East Jerusalem[edit]
See also: Proposed Israeli annexation of the West Bank

Law professor Omar M. Dajani and others[30][31] discuss de facto annexation (also

referred to as "creeping annexation"[32]). The debate considers whether, in all the
circumstances, there is a pattern of behavior suf