Zaha Hassan
{
"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 Plan for GazaArticle
- The Board of Peace and Funding for Gaza Reconstruction: On Whose Account?Article
Zaha Hassan, Charles H. Johnson
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
- In the Trump Gaza Plan, Diplomatic Failure is SuccessCommentary
By failing to address Palestinian representation, the current process is bound to lead to just another temporary arrangement.
Nathan J. Brown
- From Hormuz to the Maghreb: The Geopolitical Reach of a Gulf CrisisArticle
Morocco and Algeria, each in its own way, are having to navigate the global economic fallout of the U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran.
Yasmine Zarhloule
- The West’s Climate Colonialism in the Greater Middle EastCommentary
There is a disturbing structural parallel between the old global energy economy and the new green transition.
Angie Omar
- New Syria, Old Lebanon: Absence of the StateCommentary
Any move by the United States to make good on Trump’s suggestion that Washington persuade Damascus to confront Hezbollah militarily would have catastrophic consequences.
Kheder Khaddour
- Lebanon Should Try to Place Hezbollah on the U.S.-Iran TableCommentary
As talks begin between Washington and Tehran, Beirut has an opening to advance a regional plan for the party’s disarmament.
Michael Young