Re: “History doesn’t support giving Israel an ‘occupier’ label: HonestReporting,” (The Hill Times, Jan. 25, p. 8). Mike Fegelman wants to deny the existence of Israel’s occupation, and puts everything out in the open in his second paragraph when he asserts that “No UN resolution can distort these historical truths.” You almost have to admire Fegelman’s brazenness in throwing out the entire body of international law. It is an international legal consensus that Israel is indeed an occupying power over the Palestinian territories, including the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem, a position which has been repeatedly affirmed by the UN Security Council, the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention (2001). Even Israel’s own supreme court considers the West Bank to be under a regime of “belligerent occupation.” There is no serious debate on this matter. In the coming months, the legal implications of Israel’s occupation and annexation of Palestinian land are going to be centre stage. The ICJ has been asked to provide an advisory opinion on Israel’s “prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory”—in other words, on whether the occupation itself is now illegal. At the same time, Israel’s new far-right government is promising to extend “the application of sovereignty” (a euphemism for annexation) in the West Bank, a blatantly illegal act. Fegelman can choose to pretend that international law doesn’t exist, but the rest of us don’t have to take him seriously. Michael Bueckert Vice-president of Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East Montreal, Que.