Batı Şeria’da Airbnb Meselesi: Gazze’de Uluslararası Hukukun Çöküşünün Habercisi

Öz

Bu makale, şirketlerin işgal altındaki topraklarda yürüttüğü faaliyetlere ilişkin uluslararası hukuk kurallarının seçici biçimde uygulanmasını, Airbnb’nin Batı Şeria’daki hukuksuz İsrail yerleşimlerindeki faaliyetleri vakası üzerinden incelemektedir. Uluslararası insancıl hukuk ve uluslararası insan hakları hukuku, kuvvet kullanımı yoluyla toprak edinimini açıkça yasaklamakta ve hukuksuz yerleşimlere destek veren uygulamaları sınırlamaktadır. Buna rağmen ekonomik aktörler bu bölgelerde sınırlı hukuki sonuçlarla faaliyet göstermeye devam etmektedir. Airbnb’nin bu yöndeki degişken politikası (yerleşimlerdeki ilanlara önce izin vermesi, ardından kaldırması ve daha sonra yeniden yayımlaması) şirket davranışlarının uluslararası hukuk standartlarından ziyade siyasi ve ekonomik baskılar tarafından şekillendiğini göstermektedir. Makale, bu tutarsızlığın uluslararası iş ve insan hakları hukukundaki yapısal eksikliklerden kaynaklandığını belirtmektedir. Birleşmiş Milletler İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları Rehber İlkeleri’nin bağlayıcı olmaması, muğlak terminolojisi ve düzensiz uygulanması, yorum ve kaçınma için geniş bir alan bırakmakta ve bu ilkelerin pratik etkisini zayıflatmaktadır. Daha temelde ise, bu yumuşak ve belirsiz çerçevelerin tasarımın kendisi, çifte standartları sınırlamak yerine mümkün kılmaktadır. Bu nedenle benzer davranışlar bazı çatışmalarda kınanırken diğerlerinde tolere edilebilmektedir. Bu bağlamda Airbnb vakası, daha derin bir sorunun küçük bir yansıması niteliğindedir: uluslararası hukukun seçici biçimde uygulanmasının giderek daha görünür hâle gelmesi ve buna paralel olarak otoritesi ile güvenilirliğinin aşınması. Batı Şeria’daki şirket faaliyetlerine yönelik müsamahakâr ortam, uluslararası hukuk düzeninin bu yapısal zaaflarının adeta habercisi olmuş; söz konusu zaaflar Gazze’de artık inkâr edilemeyecek ölçüde görünür hâle gelmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uluslararası Hukuk
• İş Dünyası ve İnsan Hakları
• Filistin

Airbnb Saga in the West Bank: Foreshadowing the Collapse of International Law in Gaza

Öz

This article examines the selective application of international law to corporate activities in occupied territories through the case study of Airbnb’s operations in the Israeli settlements in the Occupied West Bank. Although international humanitarian law and international human rights law clearly prohibit the acquisition of territory by force and restrict practices that sustain unlawful settlements, economic actors continue to operate in these areas with limited legal consequences. Airbnb’s fluctuating policy (first permitting, then removing, and later reinstating listings in the settlements) illustrates how corporate conduct is shaped less by international legal standards than by domestic political and economic pressures. The article argues that this inconsistency reflects structural shortcomings within international business and human rights law. The soft-law character, vague terminology, and uneven implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights create significant room for interpretation and avoidance, weakening their practical effect. More fundamentally, the very design of these soft and indeterminate frameworks enables double standards rather than constraining them. Similar conduct may therefore be condemned in some conflicts while tolerated in others. The Airbnb episode therefore serves as a microcosm of a deeper problem: the gradual exposure of the selective application of international law and the corresponding erosion of its authority and credibility. The permissive environment surrounding corporate activity in the West Bank foreshadowed these systemic failures of the international legal order, which have become unmistakably visible in Gaza.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• International Law
• Business and Human Rights
• Palestine

Kaynakça

1. Ackerman, Spencer. “Gaza Shows the Difference Between International Law and the ‘Rules-Based International Order’.” The Nation, 17 Nov. 2023, www.thenation.com/article/world/rules-based-international-order-israel-gaza/. (Accessed 8.02.2026). “Airbnb Reverses Ban on West Bank Settlement Listings.” BBC, 10 Apr. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-47881163. (Accessed 8.02.2026). Airbnb. “Listings in Disputed Regions.” Airbnb News, 19 Nov. 2018, www.news.airbnb.com/listings- in-disputed-regions. (Accessed 8.02.2026). Amnesty International. “Israel’s Occupation: 50 Years of Dispossession.” 7 June 2017, www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/06/israel-occupation-50-years-of-dispossession/ (Accessed 8.02.2026).
2. Augenstein, Daniel. “Negotiating the Hard/Soft Law Divide in Business and Human Rights: The Implementation of the UNGPs in the European Union.” Global Policy, vol. 9, no. 2, 2018, p.254.
3. Bickerton, John. The Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Guide for the Perplexed, Bloomsbury Academic & Professional 2012.
4. “Blinken Evades Answering if Biden Administration Endorses Trump's Recognition of Golan Heights” i24NEWS, www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/americas/1612843063-blinken-evades-answering-if-biden-administration-recognizes-israeli-sovereignty-over-golan-heights. (Accessed 8.02.2026).
5. Bonomi, Andrea. “Business and Human Rights: Issues of Private International Law.” Business and Human Rights: Emerging Challenges, Issues, and Trends, Brill/Nijhoff, 2025, pp. 291–313.
6. Dempsey, Samuel. “EU rewrites its sustainability rulebook before it even takes effect: Omnibus I is here.” EU Perspectives, 18 March 2026, https://euperspectives.eu/2026/03/omnibus-i-is-here/ (Accessed 02.05.2026).
7. Deva, Surya. “Treating Human Rights Lightly: A Critique of the Consensus Rhetoric and the Language Employed by the Guiding Principles.” Human Rights Obligations of Business: Beyond the Corporate Responsibility to Respect?, edited by Surya Deva and David Bilchitz, Cambridge University Press, 2013.
8. Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859, OJ L, 2024/1760, 5.7.2024, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj (Accessed 02.05.2026).

9. Dugard, John SC. “The Choice before Us: International Law or a ‘Rules-Based International Order’?’ Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 33, 2023.
10. Gokmen, Berk Kutay. “ICC chief prosecutor says he is ‘exonerated’ in alleged misconduct probe.” Anadolu Agency, 30 April 2026, https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/icc-chief-prosecutor-says-he-is-exonerated-in-alleged-misconduct-probe/3923157 (Accessed 02.05.2026). Hague Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, art. 43, 18 Oct. 1907 (Hague Regulations). Folger, Jean. “How Airbnb Works.” Investopedia, 23 September 2023, www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/032814/pros-and-cons-using-airbnb.asp (Accessed 8.02.2026). Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, art. 49, 12 Aug. 1949, 75 U.N.T.S. 287 (Fourth Geneva Convention).
11. International Court of Justice. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136. (Wall Advisory Opinion).
12. Liebermann, Oren. “What You Need to Know About the Israeli Settlements.” CNN, 3 Feb. 2017, edition.cnn.com/2017/02/01/middleeast/settlements-explainer/index.html. (Accessed 8.02.2026).
13. Macchi, Chiara, Claire Bright. “Chapter 10 Hardening Soft Law: the Implementation of Human Rights Due Diligence Requirements in Domestic Legislation.” Legal Sources in Business and Human Rights Evolving Dynamics in International and European Law, edited by Martin Buscemi et al., Brill Nijhoff 2020. Macchi, Chiara, Tara Van Ho, and Luis Felipe Yanes, Investor Obligations in Occupied Territories: A Report on the Norwegian Government Pension Fund – Global. University of Essex, Human Rights Centre, 2019. MacFarquhar, Neil. “Developing World Sees Double Standard in West’s Actions in Gaza and Ukraine.” New York Times, 23 Oct. 2023, www.nytimes.com/2023/10/23/us/ukraine-gaza-global-south-hypocrisy.html. (Accessed 8.02.2026).
14. Rasche, Andreas, and Sandra Waddock. “The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility Research.” Business and Human Rights Journal, vol.6, no. 2, 2021.
15. Ruggie, John. Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises. UN Human Rights Council, Seventeenth Session, Special Item 3, United Nations, www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf. (Accessed 8.02.2026).
16. “Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Virtual Panel Session on ‘A Just and Lasting Peace in Ukraine’.” U.S. Department of State, www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-virtual-panel-session-on-a-just-and-lasting-peace-in-ukraine/ (Accessed 8.02.2026).
17. Talmon, Stephen. “Rules-Based Order v International Law?”, German Practice in International Law, 20 Jan. 2019, www.gpil.jura.uni-bonn.de/2019/01/rules-based-order-v-international-law (Accessed 8.02.2026).
18. United Nations General Assembly. Resolution 31/20, 24 Nov. 1976;
19. United Nations General Assembly. Resolution A/ES-10/11, 22 Apr. 1997.
20. United Nations General Assembly. Resolution ES-7/2, 29 July 1980.
21. United Nations Security Council. Resolution 242 (1967), 22 Nov. 1967.
22. UN Human Rights Council. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework, UN Doc A/HRC/17/31, 16 June 2011.
23. Van Ho, Tara. “Defining the Relationships: "Cause, Contribute, and Directly Linked to’ in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights”, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 4, 2021.