> opponents of Israel have been pretty clear that they think the settlements violate article 49 of the fourth geneva convention

The 49th article of the fourth Geneva convention is the usual answer to that question, but it is wrong. Israel does not "deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies", every single Jew in the West Bank got up and returned to or moved to the West Bank of their own accord.

The Geneva conventions apply to states, not people. Furthermore, they protect people, not land, political entities, or political ambitions.

> Sometimes people also argue that the pipelining of Israeli law into settlements violates the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. I think the argument is that you can only distinguish between citizens and non-citizens on your own territory and thus the way Israeli law is applied in settlements but not outside them is a violation.

Israeli law applies to both Arab and Jewish Israeli citizens in the towns and cities in Area C. Yes, Arabs live in the cities in Area C. Not many, but they do exist and they have the exact same laws applied to them as do Jews.

  > They do point to laws and rules.

The UN doesn't, so the anti-Israel bodies try to see what they can shoehorn in. Sometimes (as in these cases you've presented) it's easy to show why they're wrong. Sometimes you need a lawyer. ))

But see, we are already past the "they don't ever say which rule" and on to, they do say which rule but their interpretation is incorrect (and hey i even agree with you on that part some of the time).

> The 49th article of the fourth Geneva convention is the usual answer to that question, but it is wrong. Israel does not "deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies", every single Jew in the West Bank got up and returned to or moved to the West Bank of their own accord.

While i agree it is not clear cut in the geneva convention, generally the argument is voluntary transfer is still a transfer. The prohibition is not just about preventing people from being moved against their will but also about preventing attempts to change the demographic composition of an area. See also what the red cross says about it https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule130

I'm not really here to argue these points, i don't necessarily even agree with all of them, i just think you're being a bit straw-many. Arguments are more powerful if you engage with the strongest form of the counter-argument, not the weakest.

  > Arguments are more powerful if you engage with the strongest form of the counter-argument, not the weakest.

Your are correct, thank you. I'll emphasize that there was no international concern expressed when Jordan changed the demographic composition of Jerusalem and the West Bank by expelling the Jews. Only when Jews moved back to Jerusalem and the West Bank, after 19 years of absence, is there suddenly concern the demographic composition of of the city.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Jerusal...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamization_of_Jerusalem#Isla...