Return Order to Where? - Is it possible that an Israeli court could order a child returned to a country that he was not abducted from, or that it is not his country of habitual residence?

Yes! This point was discussed by the Supreme Court in August 2007 when it granted a mother leave to appeal against a Beersheva District court judgment that upheld the family court's Hague Return order. In this particular case it held that the child could be returned to Belgium, and not France, from where he was abducted and which had been his place of habitual residence, following a foreign appeal ruling switching physical custody from the mother in France, to the father in Belgium. The 8 year old child had been ordered to return to Belgium, to his father's physical custody, although the mother had abducted him to Israel from France. The child had been living in France in his mother's lawful custody for over two years, having gained permission to relocate from a Belgium court. Shortly before the abduction, a Belgium appeal had overruled the earlier judgment, and ordered a switch in physical custody from the mother in France, to the father in Belgium. In reaching its decision on this point, the Supreme Court noted that the Belgium appeal court judgment switching physical custody of the child to the father had been recognized in France. Furthermore it referred to the Perez-Vera explanatory report that accompanies the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspect of Child Abduction. While the convention itself was silent on the matter, the court held that the report gave backing for returning an abducted minor to the country where the left-behind parent lived, even if this was not the minor's country of habitual residence prior to the abduction, or the country from which he was abducted. As to the final outcome, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the district court, for a further report on the child.
Abduction To Israel