According to international law, publicly-owned areas in the West Bank also belong to the Palestinian population that resides within them. The West Bank was never annexed to Israel's sovereign territory (such a unilateral annexation would be illegal); it is under Israeli military rule. Military rule means that the state holds the territory only as a trustee. International law clearly determines that Israel can use the territory only to provide for the needs of the local population or to serve its military and security-related needs. Building permanent communities that are populated by Israeli civilians, the advancement of Israeli industrial and tourism projects, exploiting the area's resources (including water) – all of these are forbidden. These resources must be used to serve the needs of the Palestinian population alone.
But there is this in international law:-
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.
Is that a contradiction or is Ms. Leedor not quite knowledgeable enough or is she ignoring something?