\n<\/p>\n
A day after vetoing calls for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza<\/a>, the United States on Wednesday defended Israel\u2019s decades-long occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, arguing at the United Nations\u2019 highest court that Israel faced \u201cvery real security needs.\u201d<\/p>\n The latest U.S. defense of Israel on the global stage came at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, where Richard C. Visek, the acting legal adviser at the U.S. State Department, urged a 15-judge panel not to call for Israel\u2019s immediate withdrawal from occupied Palestinian territory.<\/p>\n He said that only the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel could bring about lasting peace, repeating a longstanding U.S. position but one whose prospects appear even more elusive amid the war in Gaza.<\/p>\n The court is hearing six days of arguments<\/a> over the legality of Israel\u2019s occupation of Palestinian-majority territories, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which has been the subject of years of debates and resolutions at the United Nations. The hearings \u2014 involving more than 50 countries \u2014 were called long before Israel went to war against Hamas in Gaza, but have become part of a concerted global effort to stop the conflict and examine the legality of Israel\u2019s policies toward Palestinians.<\/p>\n Israel has said it would not participate in the hearings, and sent a letter to the court last year arguing that they were unwarranted and failed to \u201crecognize Israel\u2019s right and duty to protect its citizens\u201d or its right to security.<\/p>\n The United States has strongly defended Israel during the war, including on Tuesday, when it cast the lone veto<\/a> against a U.N. Security Council resolution that called for an immediate cease-fire, saying it would disrupt efforts to free hostages held in Gaza.<\/p>\n On Wednesday, Mr. Visek asked the court to uphold the \u201cestablished framework\u201d for peace that he said U.N. bodies had agreed to \u2014 one that is contingent on a \u201cbroader end to belligerence\u201d against Israel \u2014 rather than to heed calls by other nations for Israel\u2019s \u201cunilateral and unconditional withdrawal\u201d from occupied territories.<\/p>\n The Oct. 7 Hamas-led attacks on Israel were a reminder of the threats facing the country and of its security needs, Mr. Visek said, \u201cand they persist.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cRegrettably, those needs have been ignored by many of the participants in asserting how the court should consider the questions before it,\u201d he said, referring to others countries\u2019 testimony in the hearings.<\/p>\n Mr. Visek\u2019s appearance directly preceded that of Vladimir Tarabrin, Russia\u2019s ambassador to the Netherlands.<\/p>\n When he took the microphone, Mr. Tarabrin said Russia values its \u201cstable relations\u201d with Israel and expressed condolences over Oct. 7. But in what appeared to be a thinly veiled swipe at the United States, he said Russia \u201ccannot accept the logic\u201d of those who \u201ctry to defend the indiscriminate violence against civilians\u201d in Gaza by citing Israel\u2019s right to defend itself.<\/p>\n \u201cViolence can only lead to more violence,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The court, which often hears staid disputes among nations, has lately become a venue for countries to oppose Israel. Last month, South Africa argued at the court that Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza \u2014 a charge Israel strongly rejected. The judges have not ruled on that claim, but issued an interim order for Israel to take steps to prevent genocide<\/a> in Gaza.<\/p>\n On Tuesday, South Africa forcefully condemned<\/a> Israel\u2019s policies against Palestinians, calling them \u201ca more extreme form of apartheid,\u201d the race-based system of laws that deprived Black South Africans for decades. <\/p>\n Israel has long rejected accusations that it operates an apartheid system, calling such allegations a slur<\/a> and pointing to what it says is a history of being singled out for condemnation by U.N. bodies and tribunals.<\/p>\n The United States has remained Israel\u2019s staunchest defender internationally. But the Biden administration, under increasing pressure from parts of the Democratic Party, has also shown signs of impatience with Israel\u2019s conduct of the war, the rising toll in Gaza and the plight of Palestinians under Israeli occupation. <\/p>\n President Biden this month said that Israel\u2019s military response in Gaza \u2014 which began after Hamas\u2019s Oct. 7 attacks \u2014 had been \u201cover the top<\/a>\u201d and that the immense civilian suffering had \u201cgot to stop.\u201d The remarks came days after Mr. Biden imposed broad financial sanctions against four Israeli men<\/a> over violent attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank.<\/p>\n After the hearings, which are scheduled to conclude on Monday, the court will give an advisory opinion, a decision that is expected to take several months. The opinion will be nonbinding.<\/p>\n Cassandra Vinograd contributed reporting.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n