Fadel Abdulghany
The question of the legal status of the Golan Heights under international law is a prime example of how the post-World War II international legal order’s foundational commitment to prohibiting territorial conquest and the acquisition of territory by force can be tested. This territory, occupied by Israel following the June 1967 war and unilaterally annexed in 1981, remains the subject of ongoing legal and political dispute.
However, the international legal position leaves no room for fundamental ambiguity: the Golan Heights constitute occupied Syrian territory, and any attempt to annex them is null and void under the basic principles governing the conduct of states. This conclusion is based on the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force, the temporary nature of military occupation, and the continued applicability of the rules of international humanitarian law and UN resolutions, which safeguard Syrian territorial sovereignty regardless of de facto military control or any unilateral recognition to the contrary.
Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations is a cornerstone of the modern international legal system, obligating states to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. The International Court of Justice has enshrined this prohibition as a peremptory norm of customary international law, meaning it is a binding rule that cannot be deviated from under any circumstances. This prohibition extends unequivocally to the acquisition of territory by force, such that territorial gains resulting from the use of force are not legitimate and cannot be recognized or conferred with legal effect.
The 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States affirmed that the acquisition of territory by means of the threat or use of force is not legally recognized. Crucially, this prohibition applies regardless of whether the war is described as defensive or not, as military control does not confer sovereignty nor does it produce a transfer of territorial ownership. This also entails a general obligation for States to refrain from recognizing situations arising from unlawful territorial acquisition and to refrain from providing assistance that would perpetuate or entrench an illegal situation.
On December 17, 1981, three days after Israel passed the Golan Heights Law, which extended Israeli law and administration to the occupied territories, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 497. This resolution represents the most decisive expression of the international legal position regarding the attempted annexation of the Golan.
The Council decided that Israel’s imposition of its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and has no international effect, and demanded that it immediately withdraw from it, and affirmed the continued applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the Syrian territories occupied since 1967.
The consensus surrounding the resolution, including the vote in favor by permanent members, is particularly significant, as it demonstrates that the characterization of the Golan Heights as occupied territory and the lack of legal effect of annexation measures has been firmly established internationally. This position has been reiterated in subsequent General Assembly deliberations and resolutions concerning the occupied Syrian Golan, reflecting the enduring legal principle that prohibits the transformation of occupation into sovereignty through domestic legislation or on-the-ground practices.
International humanitarian law establishes precise standards for military occupation that underscore the illegitimacy of claims seeking to establish permanent control. The Hague Regulations define occupation as the presence of a territory under the effective authority of a hostile army; however, effective control, however extensive, does not transfer sovereignty. The regime of military occupation must be understood as a legal arrangement for temporary control over foreign territory, which, in principle, ends with the return of control to the original sovereign.
During this phase, the occupying power is obligated to administer the territory as a trusteeship authority, making only the minimum changes necessary for the administration of public life and preserving the legal status quo at the start of the occupation. The structural logic of the law of occupation is based on preventing any measures that lead to annexation or entrench permanent control, as this contradicts the temporary nature of the occupation and the prohibition against the acquisition of territory by force.
Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention is pivotal in this context, prohibiting the transfer of the occupying power’s population into the occupied territory to prevent settlement activity and demographic change that would transform the occupation into a permanent reality. Israeli settlement activity in the Golan Heights, in principle, constitutes a violation of this prohibition, reinforcing the conclusion that field administration practices do not alter the legal status of the territory nor do they confer sovereign rights upon the occupying power.
Although the advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice in July 2024 addressed the Palestinian territories, its legal reasoning reaffirms general principles directly related to annexation and acquisition by force.
The court held that declaring sovereignty over occupied territory and annexing it, whether through domestic legislation or policies and practices on the ground, contravenes the prohibition on the use of force and the principle of the inadmissibility of acquiring territory by force. It also rejected the argument that security considerations could restrict or override this prohibition, affirming that security concerns do not suspend a peremptory norm nor create a right to annexation or the acquisition of sovereignty over occupied territory.
Syria’s territorial sovereignty over the Golan Heights remains inviolable under the principle of territorial integrity and is reaffirmed by successive UN resolutions. The unilateral recognition by the United States in 2019 of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan does not alter the legal status of the territory, because the peremptory norm against annexation imposes the obligation not to recognize situations arising from a grave breach, as well as the obligation not to provide any assistance that would facilitate such a breach.
The fact that no other country has followed suit underscores the continued international consensus that the Golan Heights is occupied Syrian territory and that the annexation is illegitimate.
