Zaha Hassan, Charles H. Johnson
{
"authors": [
"Zaha Hassan"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"Palestine",
"Levant"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy"
]
}Source: Getty
Airbnb Stopped Listing Rentals in the Occupied West Bank. It Hasn’t Gone Far Enough.
Airbnb says it will no longer list properties to rent in the occupied West Bank. Other companies will be watching to see what happens next.
Airbnb recently announced that it would no longer allow listings located in the occupied West Bank. Although the decision attracted controversy, it was in fact carefully hedged, and made after consultation with experts.
Yet the ban does not go far enough. Properties in occupied East Jerusalem (a part of the West Bank), and the occupied Golan Heights, are exempt.
This distinction is difficult to reconcile. Under international law, all settlements in occupied territory are illegal, constituting war crimes under the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan Heights does not change this. The extension of Israeli civil law there is invalid under international law. The UN Security Council most recently reaffirmed this with respect to East Jerusalem in 2016 in Resolution 2334. Last week, the UN General Assembly also reiterated that Israel has no right to extend sovereignty in either Jerusalem or the Golan Heights.
Apparently, illegality of possession is not enough for Airbnb to remove properties from its listings. While offering no explanation for excluding East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights from its decision, Airbnb said that its new criteria for de-listing included: (1) potential safety concerns; (2) the opinion of experts and community stakeholders; (3) the extent listings contributed to human suffering; and (4) the direct connection the listings have to the larger dispute.
Even by Airbnb’s own criteria, properties in settlements in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights should have also been struck off the list. By its very nature, the occupation denies people their basic human rights. Forced removal of an occupied people and the transplantation of settlers in their place causes deep human suffering.
Because Israel’s settlement policy involves home demolitions, forced evictions, and revoking residency rights, Airbnb’s business of organizing home rentals in settlements is directly connected to a larger dispute—Israel’s military occupation and its associated human rights violations. It is not a tangential matter.
Palestinian Jerusalemites, in particular, are among the most likely to be dispossessed, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. The city of Jerusalem’s Master Plan encourages this displacement by limiting the number of Palestinians who can live in the city to just 40 percent of the city’s population.
U.S. citizens who have listed homes in the occupied West Bank have filed suit against Airbnb alleging discrimination. They may have just opened themselves to legal action from the legal Palestinian owners, who could seek to intervene as interested parties.
People on both sides of the argument will continue to pressure Airbnb to revise its decision. Those opposed to the de-listing of properties in West Bank settlements have described the company’s decision as “corporate anti-Semitism“ and called for a boycott of the platform. Other tourism and property listing platforms are watching to determine which way the wind of customer dollars will blow. So far, Booking.com has indicated that it has no plans to change its current policy of allowing dealings with settlements. Ultimately, the corporate bottom line, rather than international law, will decide whether settlement properties continue to be advertised on such platforms.
About the Author
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Zaha Hassan is a human rights lawyer and a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- The Board of Peace and Funding for Gaza Reconstruction: On Whose Account?Article
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
- Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?Commentary
Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.
Angie Omar
- Smuggling and Civil Peace on Lebanon’s Border: The Case of SummaqiyyehArticle
The Lebanese authorities’ clampdown on illicit cross-border activity threatens to leave inhabitants of the historically neglected village, and the wider Akkar region, in an economically precarious position.
Mohanad Hage Ali
- Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?Commentary
A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.
Michael Young
- How Lebanon’s Sunnis Approach Peace With IsraelCommentary
The community seeks maintain a distance from Hezbollah, and an even greater one from normalization with their southern neighbor.
Mohamad Fawaz
- A Military Balance Sheet in the U.S. and Israeli War With IranCommentary
In an interview, Jim Lamson discusses the ongoing regional conflict and sees an unclear picture when it comes to winners and losers.
Michael Young