This contribution engages with Ardi Imseis’s article ‘Negotiating the Illegal: On the United Nations and the Illegal Occupation of Palestine, 1967–2020’. In reply, I contemplate whether an occupation’s legal status can or should affect the requirement that an occupying power must withdraw from the territory that it controls. I consider Imseis’s claim that it is necessary to declare that an occupation has become illegal to move beyond the tension that exists between the requirements of state responsibility and a political preference for negotiations. I question the effectiveness of Imseis’s proposed approach, argue that the duty to terminate an occupation is a positive legal duty that exists regardless of an occupation’s legal status and suggest that the negotiation process cannot be completely uncoupled from the withdrawal requirement. In conclusion, I suggest that grounding calls to terminate occupation in the principle of temporality and the international consensus prohibiting the acquisition of territory by force better reflects international law’s capacity to contribute to an occupation’s termination.

中文翻译：

---

战术，非法占领与法律能力的界限：对Ardi Imseis的回复

该贡献与Ardi Imseis的文章“谈判非法：关于联合国和巴勒斯坦的非法占领，1967-2020年”有关。作为答复，我考虑占领的法律地位是否能够或应当影响占领国必须从其控制的领土撤出的要求。我认为伊姆塞斯（Imseis）的主张是，有必要宣布一项占领已成为非法，以摆脱国家责任要求与政治偏好谈判之间存在的紧张关系。我质疑Imseis提出的方法的有效性，认为终止职业的义务是一项积极的法律义务，无论职业的法律地位如何，这种义务都存在，并建议谈判过程不能与退出要求完全脱钩。