Israeli Attorney Calls for UN Action Against Israels Occupation, Prompting Strong Denouncement by Israeli Ambassador
On Monday, Israeli attorney Itay Epstein took the floor at the United Nations Security Council to criticize Israel’s policies in the occupied Palestinian territories. Speaking during a periodic debate on Resolution 2334, which declares Israeli settlements illegal under international law, Epstein urged the Council to act to end Israel’s presence, dismantle settlements and refrain from cooperating with what he described as an unlawful situation. The remarks were met with a sharp rebuttal from Israel’s UN ambassador, Danny Danon, who denounced Epstein’s statements and highlighted past inflammatory comparisons Epstein had made between Israeli and U.S. leaders and Adolf Hitler.
Resolution 2334, adopted in 2016, calls on Israel to halt settlement activity and comply with its obligations as an occupying power. In 2024 the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion affirming that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip is illegal and that the settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention. Epstein referenced this opinion, asserting that Israel’s continued presence is itself unlawful and that the international community must take concrete steps to reverse the occupation.
During the debate, Epstein also accused Israel of obstructing humanitarian aid. He urged member states to move beyond “statements of concern” and to pursue measures such as non‑recognition, non‑assistance and cooperation aimed at ending Israel’s presence in territories captured from Jordan in the 1967 Six‑Day War. He called for remedies for Palestinians, including restitution where possible and compensation through an expanded UN damage registry.
Danny Danon responded by labeling Epstein a “partner in the international campaign seeking to harm the State of Israel.” He noted that Epstein had previously compared Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler, calling the comparison “unacceptable.” Danon said the UN had “no longer been satisfied with Hamas propaganda” and that the episode demonstrated how the Security Council platform is being used by figures who present themselves as Israeli voices while advancing a legal and diplomatic campaign against Israel.
The exchange underscores the heightened tensions surrounding Israel’s diplomatic engagement with the UN. While the Security Council has not yet taken action on Resolution 2334, the debate highlights the growing pressure from some member states and civil‑society actors to address the legality of Israeli settlements and the broader occupation. Israel’s diplomatic corps continues to defend its policies, citing security concerns and the need for negotiated solutions, whereas critics argue that international law and recent ICJ findings demand immediate change.
At present, the UN Security Council has not adopted any new measures in response to Epstein’s remarks. The incident, however, has drawn attention to the contested use of UN platforms for advocacy and the divergent views within the international community on the Israeli‑Palestinian conflict. The situation remains fluid, with both sides preparing for further diplomatic engagements and potential future debates on the legality and future of Israeli settlements.
