Israel's Legal Right to Settle in the West
Bank - Judea and Samaria and Gaza, Golan Heights
The forgoing timeline summarizes the recent turbulent history of Palestine-Israel. What happened is often misinterpreted, and the charge is frequently made that Israeli settlements on theWest Bank - Judea and Samaria are illegal and that Israel is illegally occupying the West Bank - Judea and Samaria . The legal case for such a statement is
weak. When you read the terms of the San Remo Conference which adopted the
Balfour Declaration of 1917 and The Mandate for Palestine which implemented the San Remo terms was signed by all 52 members of the League of Nations . Israel is within its legal rights.
§ International-law arguments against the settlements have rested primarily upon two sources. The first of these, the 1907 Hague Regulations, protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of a short-term occupation. Article 43 of the Regulations calls for the occupant to "respect .... the laws in force in the country" and Article 46 bars an occupying power from confiscating private property.
Settlements are also opposed through the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 49(6) states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into territories it occupies". Both these legal arguments rely upon the concept of "occupation of a legally owned land". The following points neutralize this concept.
§ First, we should note that the 1949 armistice borders were not recognized by Arab states, which continued to refuse to recognizeIsrael . So it is contradictory for Arab states to
later state that these are 'legal' borders; the 1949 Armistice Green Line is
not Israel 's Legal Border!
§ Secondly,Jordan occupied both East Jerusalem and the West Bank - Judea and Samaria during the 1948-49 war and only gained
these areas via war and the Green Line of the UN armistice. These areas had
never formally been allocated to Jordan and so were strictly un-allocated
Palestine Mandate territory. Later, between 1949 and 1967 Jordan simply attempted illegal annexation of
this newly gained territory, but then in 1988 Jordan formally renounced any claim to the West Bank - Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem . Eminent legal scholars, such as Prof.
Eugene Rostow therefore maintain that Israeli settlers have as much right to
live in the West
Bank as non-Jews.
He states:
"Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab 'people' of theWest Bank - Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip have a substantial
claim to the sovereign possession of the occupied liberated territories.
TheWest Bank - Judea and Samaria should be considered 'un-allocated
territory'".
§ The Israeli Government follows this argument and denies that the occupation - liberation of theWest
Bank - Judea and Samaria is illegal on the grounds that the land
was not previously occupied lawfully by any other state. This view is supported
by Prof. Judge Schwebel (former President of the International Court of
Justice) who states:
"The armistice agreements of 1949 expressly preserved the territorial claims of all parties and did not purport to establish definitive boundaries between them."
This of course agrees with those who drafted UN Resolution 242.
§ In June 2011, Dr. Jaques Gauthier, an international human rights lawyer fromToronto addressed the European Parliament in Brussels on the legal issues regarding Jerusalem and Israel . Referring to the 1922 British Mandate for
Palestine and to Article 80 of the UN Charter he said:
"For anyone who is interested in justice, these are issues which we have to study carefully ... the rights vested in the Jewish people stand on very solid legal ground and are valid to this day."
Under Article 80 and the 1922 Mandate he maintained that Jerusalem cannot be divided and that Jews still have the legal right to settle anywhere in Mandated land.
So since there is no legal ownership ofJudea and Samaria , these areas cannot be regarded as
"occupied territory". The armistice borders never received
international recognition. All of western Palestine - Israel , from the Jordan to the Mediterranean , including Gaza and all of Jerusalem (as in Fig.3) remains legally open to
Jewish settlement under the original British Mandate. International lawyers
maintain that this right of settlement is protected by Article 80 of the UN
Charter which recognizes the Trust (British Mandate) handed to it by the League of Nations . (The British violated the terms of the
Mandate numerous times, including restricting Jewish immigration, which caused
violence and death to many Jewish people).
It appears that the world prefers to 'believe a lie' and still cry "occupied territory"!
Under theOttoman
Empire law in Palestine , records of land registration show that
over 90% of the land in Palestine was owned by the government. The balance
was owned by wealthy Arabs from Lebanon and some of the Leaders that were living
in Palestine . Very little land was owned by the local
working people. The Jews purchased much of their land from the wealthy absentee
Arab landlords at premium prices (see: the Mufti of Jerusalem's testimony in
front of the British Peel Commission in 1937).
After WWI theOttoman
Empire
relinquished its ownership of all the conquered territories, which covered a
good part of the Middle
East , to the
Allied powers. It was then assigned by the Allied powers to Arab countries and Palestine was assigned to the Jewish people to
reconstitute their homeland of Israel .
The Arabs persecuted and expelled over a million Jewish families from Arab countries where Jews had lived for over 2400 years. The Arabs confiscated from the Jews their assets, businesses, homes and Real estate (120,440 sq. km. which is 5-6 times the size ofIsrael ) valued in the trillions of dollars. Due
to these expulsions many died from starvation and hardship. About two thirds of
the Jews expelled from Arab countries resettled in Greater Israel. Today, the
Jewish population that was expelled from Arab countries numbers over four
million in Greater Israel alone, plus another few million in other parts of the
world.
The forgoing timeline summarizes the recent turbulent history of Palestine-Israel. What happened is often misinterpreted, and the charge is frequently made that Israeli settlements on the
§ International-law arguments against the settlements have rested primarily upon two sources. The first of these, the 1907 Hague Regulations, protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of a short-term occupation. Article 43 of the Regulations calls for the occupant to "respect .... the laws in force in the country" and Article 46 bars an occupying power from confiscating private property.
Settlements are also opposed through the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 49(6) states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into territories it occupies". Both these legal arguments rely upon the concept of "occupation of a legally owned land". The following points neutralize this concept.
§ First, we should note that the 1949 armistice borders were not recognized by Arab states, which continued to refuse to recognize
§ Secondly,
"Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab 'people' of the
The
§ The Israeli Government follows this argument and denies that the occupation - liberation of the
"The armistice agreements of 1949 expressly preserved the territorial claims of all parties and did not purport to establish definitive boundaries between them."
This of course agrees with those who drafted UN Resolution 242.
§ In June 2011, Dr. Jaques Gauthier, an international human rights lawyer from
"For anyone who is interested in justice, these are issues which we have to study carefully ... the rights vested in the Jewish people stand on very solid legal ground and are valid to this day."
Under Article 80 and the 1922 Mandate he maintained that Jerusalem cannot be divided and that Jews still have the legal right to settle anywhere in Mandated land.
So since there is no legal ownership of
It appears that the world prefers to 'believe a lie' and still cry "occupied territory"!
Under the
After WWI the
The Arabs persecuted and expelled over a million Jewish families from Arab countries where Jews had lived for over 2400 years. The Arabs confiscated from the Jews their assets, businesses, homes and Real estate (120,440 sq. km. which is 5-6 times the size of
Any Israeli leader promoting the uprooting of Jewish Towns, Villages or Settlements is a traitor to the people of Israel. Any Jewish leader authorizing the uprooting Jews from their homes in Greater Israel should be prosecuted for crimes against the Jewish people and ejected from office permanently.
ReplyDeleteUnder all the Treaties and agreements after WWI and the 1920's. It states: Jewish people have the right to settle and live anywhere in the Mandate for Palestine.
Throughout history, Jewish people have been persecuted and uprooted from their homes and lands in the world at large.
Now that the Jewish people have returned to their ancestral lands and are resettling it. Thus it is the ultimate crime against the Jewish people to uproot them from their own homes in the Jewish homeland by a Jewish government.
YJ Draiman.