Area C (bahasa Ibrani: שטח C; bahasa Arab: منطقة ج) adalah sebuah divisi administratif Oslo II di Tepi Barat, yang diartikan senbagai "wilayah Tepi Barat di luar Area A dan B". Area C meliputi sekitar 61 persen teritorial Tepi Barat. Wilayah tersebut dihimpun pada 1995 melalui Perjanjian Oslo II untuk "secara bertahap dialihkan ke yurisdiksi Palestina", namun peralihan semacam itu tidak terjadi.[1]:vii
^Roberts, Adam (1990). "Prolonged Military Occupation: The Israeli-Occupied Territories Since 1967". The American Journal of International Law. American Society of International Law. 84 (1): 85–86. doi:10.2307/2203016. JSTOR2203016. The international community has taken a critical view of both deportations and settlements as being contrary to international law. General Assembly resolutions have condemned the deportations since 1969, and have done so by overwhelming majorities in recent years. Likewise, they have consistently deplored the establishment of settlements, and have done so by overwhelming majorities throughout the period (since the end of 1976) of the rapid expansion in their numbers. The Security Council has also been critical of deportations and settlements; and other bodies have viewed them as an obstacle to peace, and illegal under international law.
^Pertile, Marco (2005). "'Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory': A Missed Opportunity for International Humanitarian Law?". Dalam Conforti, Benedetto; Bravo, Luigi. The Italian Yearbook of International Law. 14. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. hlm. 141. ISBN978-90-04-15027-0. the establishment of the Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has been considered illegal by the international community and by the majority of legal scholars.
^Barak-Erez, Daphne (2006). "Israel: The security barrier—between international law, constitutional law, and domestic judicial review". International Journal of Constitutional Law. Oxford University Press. 4 (3): 548. doi:10.1093/icon/mol021. The real controversy hovering over all the litigation on the security barrier concerns the fate of the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Since 1967, Israel has allowed and even encouraged its citizens to live in the new settlements established in the territories, motivated by religious and national sentiments attached to the history of the Jewish nation in the land of Israel. This policy has also been justified in terms of security interests, taking into consideration the dangerous geographic circumstances of Israel before 1967 (where Israeli areas on the Mediterranean coast were potentially threatened by Jordanian control of the West Bank ridge). The international community, for its part, has viewed this policy as patently illegal, based on the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention that prohibit moving populations to or from territories under occupation.
^Drew, Catriona (1997). "Self-determination and population transfer". Dalam Bowen, Stephen. Human rights, self-determination and political change in the occupied Palestinian Hkterritories. International studies in human rights. 52. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. hlm. 151–152. ISBN978-90-411-0502-8. It can thus clearly be concluded that the transfer of Israeli settlers into the occupied territories violates not only the laws of belligerent occupation but the Palestinian right of self-determination under international law. The question remains, however, whether this is of any practical value. In other words, given the view of the international community that the Israeli settlements are illegal under the law if belligerent occupation...
^International Labour Organization (2005). "The situation of workers of the occupied Arab territories"(PDF). hlm. 14. The international community considers Israeli settlements within the occupied territories illegal and in breach of, inter alia, United Nations Security Council resolution 465 of 1 March 1980 calling on Israel "to dismantle the existing settlements and in particular to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem".
^Civilian and military presence as strategies of territorial control: The Arab-Israel conflict, David Newman, Political Geography Quarterly Volume 8, Issue 3, July 1989, Pages 215–227
^"What next for Gaza and West Bank?". BBC. 30 August 2005. Diakses tanggal 5 January 2010. Most Israelis support the pullout, but some feel the government has given in to Palestinian militant groups, and worry that further withdrawals will follow. Palestinian critics point out that Gaza will remain under Israeli control, and that they are being denied a political say in the disengagement process.
^Yearbook of the United Nations 2005. United Nations Publications. 2007. hlm. 514. ISBN9789211009675. The Israeli Government was preparing to implement an unprecedented initiative: the disengagement of all Israeli civilians and forces from the Gaza Strip and the dismantling of four settlements in the northern West Bank.
^Yael Yishai (1987). Land Or Peace. Hoover Press. hlm. 58. ISBN9780817985233. During 1982 Israel's government stuck to its territorial policy in word and deed. All the settlements in Sinai were evacuated in accordance with the Camp David Accords, but settlement activity in the other territories continued uninterrupted. A few days after the final withdrawal from Sinai had been completed, Begin announced that he would introduce a resolution barring future governments from dismantling settlements, even as a result of peace negotiations.
