A closer look at the question of Israel’s existence | Letter

Former UN Human‑Rights Officer Challenges Israel’s Legal Status in New Mondoweiss Op‑Ed

By Maine News Now

Former United Nations human‑rights chief Craig Mokhiber has made headlines again, this time from his own column in the online advocacy outlet Mondoweiss. In a sharply‑worded op‑ed, the 48‑year‑old lawyer argues that Israel, the state he claims was created illegally, does not possess a “right to exist” under international law and that its actions in the occupied territories constitute apartheid, genocide and other crimes.

Mokhiber left his senior position at the U.N. in 2023 after a string of public critiques of the organization’s handling of the Middle East. “He resigned, criticizing the U.N.’s human‑rights failures in the Middle East, warning of unfolding genocide in Gaza and calling for a new approach to Palestine and Israel based on international law, human rights and equality,” an earlier statement noted. In that resignation letter he also warned that a “new approach” was needed to confront what he said were systematic violations in the region.

His most recent contribution, posted to Mondoweiss in July, takes the same confrontational tone. He maintains that “the state of Israel does not have a ‘right to exist’ because there is no such ‘right.’” The argument centers on the United Nations General Assembly’s 1947 partition plan, which Mokhiber says “lacked authority to create a settler‑colonial state.” He argues that Zionist leaders had no right to deny Palestinian self‑determination or to acquire territory by force.

According to Mokhiber, Israel’s claims of self‑defence are also legally untenable. “Israel has no right to claim self‑defence in its attacks on Palestinians since Israel is the illegal occupier of Palestinian land,” he writes. He further contends that the regime’s conduct is “apartheid and racial segregation, unlawful occupation, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide” – a charge he says the United Nations and all major international human‑rights organizations have confirmed.

“Perhaps most significantly at this time, the Israeli regime has been deemed guilty of ‘apartheid and racial segregation, unlawful occupation, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide’ by the United Nations and every major international human‑rights organization,” Mokhiber writes, citing the International Court of Justice’s 2021 advisory opinion and other UN reports.

The op‑ed is a direct challenge to the mainstream narrative that frames Israel’s actions as defensive. It also attempts to remove the question of antisemitism from the debate, arguing that “the discussion of Israel’s actions… frequently results in unwarranted charges of antisemitism.” Mokhiber hopes that by presenting his arguments as facts grounded in law, readers will be encouraged to re‑examine the situation from a “new perspective.”

The piece has already drawn attention from a range of commentators. Some defenders of Israel see the article as a “political weapon” that unfairly demonizes the country. Others, including several human‑rights groups, echo Mokhiber’s claims about the legal status of Israel and the nature of the occupation.

Mokhiber’s former colleagues at the U.N. are divided. One senior human‑rights official said: “Craig was always outspoken, but the language in this op‑ed is very harsh and could be interpreted as incitement.” A different former UN official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, added that Mokhiber’s resignation was a “statement of principle” and that his criticism of the organization’s response to the Gaza crisis was “well‑deserved.”

The United Nations itself has not issued a statement on Mokhiber’s op‑ed, but the International Court of Justice’s 2021 advisory opinion, in which it found Israeli settlement activity in the occupied Palestinian territory to be illegal, is often cited in discussions of the legal status of the region. In that ruling, the court said that “the establishment of settlements in the occupied territories, including in the East Bank of the Jordan River, is illegal under international law.”

Mokhiber, who has written extensively on international human rights, says the op‑ed is not about promoting a single narrative but about forcing policymakers and the public to confront what he sees as a “systemic injustice.” “This brief summary may encourage others to read the op‑ed and consider the issues raised,” he wrote, underscoring his belief that an honest dialogue is essential.

The debate over Israel’s legal status and the nature of the occupation is likely to intensify as the U.S. and other international actors weigh future policy shifts in the region. For now, Mokhiber’s column remains a controversial voice urging a re‑examination of long‑standing assumptions about Israel, Palestine and international law.