Dear Prof. Gavison, Why are settlements established before the Rome Statute (1998) any less unlawful than those established after? The Rome Statute may have added a "gloss" of explicit criminalisation, but wasn't the transfer of populations into occupied territory already prohibited - and thereby prima facie unlawful - under Art. 49 GC IV (1949) and (as a grave breach) under Art. 85 AP I (1977)? Looking forward to clarification.
U.S. defense chief tells Congress: Military options remain against Iran (DPA)
from the article: By ignoring international law, Israel is only hurting itself