> The International Labour Organization's (ILO) Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (ILO Convention No. 169), states that the convention covers:
>> peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonisation or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples
> Several states do not recognize indigenous ethnic minorities within their territories as being indigenous peoples, and simply refer to them as ethnic minorities. Many of these ethnic minorities are marginalized from the majority ethnic population in relative social, economic and political performance measures, and their indigenous rights are poorly protected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_on_the_Rights_of_I...
Note that Israel merely abstained from voting on the latter, rather then voting against like Canada, The US and Australia did (while 143 voted in favor).
The case here is pretty clear cut. By most measures which actually matter for the rights of indigenous people, Palestinians are indigenous to Palestine, while most Israelis are settlers, or close descendants of settlers who gained control over the lands through conquest and colonization.
It is in fact very reasonable to dismiss the (European) Jewish people’s claim to the land if we are talking about legal claims to indigenous peoples. Even though no clear definition has been widely adopted (perhaps for the better) most of the umbrella terms capture Palestinians, and hardly any captures Israelis. Denying the Palestinian claims to their indigenous lands is very much the behavior that the Decleration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples sought to stop.