The
U.S. Administration, the European Union, the United Nations, and
Russia's decision to rewrite history by labeling the Territories
'Occupied Territories,' the Settlements as an 'Obstacle to Peace' and
'Not Legitimate,' thus endowing them with an aura of bogus statehood and
a false history. The use of these dishonest loaded terms, empowers
terrorism and incites Palestinian Arabs with the right to use all
measures to expel Israel.
The Jewish People's Right to the Land of Israel
The "Mandate for Palestine" & the Law of War
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, United States President Barack Obama,
and the European Union Foreign Affairs Chief Catherine Ashton became
victims to the 'Occupation' mantra their own organization has repeated
over and over in their propaganda campaign to legitimize the Arab
position.
Continuous
pressure by the "Quartet" (U.S., the European Union, the UN and Russia)
to surrender parts of the Land of Israel are contrary to international
law as stated in the "Mandate for Palestine" document, that in article 6
firmly call to "encourage ... close settlement by Jews on the land,
including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."
It also requires, under Article 5 of the Mandate to "seeing that no
Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed
under the control of the government of any foreign power."
Any
attempt by the World Leaders to negate the Jewish people's right to
Palestine - Eretz-Israel, and to deny them access and control in the
area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations, is a
serious infringement of international law, and as such - illegitimate.
International Law - The "Mandate for Palestine"
The
"Mandate for Palestine" an historical League of Nations document, laid
down the Jewish legal right under international law to settle anywhere
in western Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the
Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law.
Fifty-one member countries - the entire League of Nations - unanimously
declared on July 24, 1922:
"Whereas recognition has
been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with
Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in
that country."
On
June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the
United States unanimously endorsed the "Mandate for Palestine":
"Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled.
That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine
of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood
that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and
religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in
Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in
Palestine shall be adequately protected." [italics in the original]
Law of War - Arab Unlawful Acts of Aggression in 1948
Six
months before the War of Independence in 1948, Palestinian Arabs
launched a series of riots, pillaging, and bloodletting. Then came the
invasion of seven Arab armies from neighboring states attempting to
prevent the establishment of a Jewish state in accordance with the UN's
1947 recommendation to Partition Palestine, a plan the Arabs rejected.
The
Jewish state not only survived, it came into possession of territories -
land from which its adversaries launched their first attempt to destroy
the newly created State of Israel.
Israel's
citizens understood that defeat meant the end of their Jewish state
before it could even get off the ground. In the first critical weeks of
battle, and against all odds, Israel prevailed on several fronts.
The metaphor of Israel having her back to the sea
reflected the image crafted by Arab political and religious leaders'
rhetoric and incitement. Already in 1948 several car bombs had killed
Jews, and massacres of Jewish civilians underscored Arab determination
to wipe out the Jews and their state.
6,000
Israelis died as a result of that war, in a population of 600,000. One
percent of the Jewish population was gone. In American terms, the
equivalent is 3 million American civilians and soldiers killed over an
18-month period.
Israel's
War of Independence in 1948 was considered lawful and in self-defence
as may be reflected in UN resolutions naming Israel a "peace loving
State" when it applied for membership at the United Nations. Both the
Security Council (4 March, 1949, S/RES/69) and the UN General Assembly
(11 May, 1949, (A/RES/273 (III)) declared:
"[Security
Council] Decides in its judgment that Israel is a peace-loving State
and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the
Charter ..."
Arab Unlawful Acts of Aggression in 1967
In
June 1967, the combined armies of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan attacked
Israel with the clear purpose expressed by Egypt's President:
"Destruction of Israel." At the end of what is now known as the Six-Day
War, Israel, against all odds, was victorious and in possession of the
territories of Judea and Samaria [E.H., The West Bank], Sinai and the
Golan Heights.
International
law makes a clear distinction between defensive wars and wars of
aggression. More than half a century after the 1948 War, and more than
four decades since the 1967 Six-Day War, it is hard to imagine the dire
circumstances Israel faced and the price it paid to fend off its
neighbors' attacks.
Who Starts Wars Does Matter
Professor, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, past President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) states the following facts:
"The facts of the June
1967 'Six Day War' demonstrate that Israel reacted defensively against
the threat and use of force against her by her Arab neighbors. This is
indicated by the fact that Israel responded to Egypt's prior closure of
the Straits of Tiran, its proclamation of a blockade of the Israeli port
of Eilat, and the manifest threat of the UAR's [The state formed by the
union of the republics of Egypt and Syria in 1958] use of force
inherent in its massing of troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of
UNEF.
"It
is indicated by the fact that, upon Israeli responsive action against
the UAR, Jordan initiated hostilities against Israel. It is suggested as
well by the fact that, despite the most intense efforts by the Arab
States and their supporters, led by the Premier of the Soviet Union, to
gain condemnation of Israel as an aggressor by the hospitable organs of
the United Nations, those efforts were decisively defeated.
"The
conclusion to which these facts lead is that the Israeli conquest of
Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive
conquest."
Judge Sir Elihu Lauterpacht wrote in 1968, one year after the 1967 Six-Day War:
"On
5th June, 1967, Jordan deliberately overthrew the Armistice Agreement
by attacking the Israeli-held part of Jerusalem. There was no question
of this Jordanian action being a reaction to any Israeli attack. It took
place notwithstanding explicit Israeli assurances, conveyed to King
Hussein through the U.N. Commander, that if Jordan did not attack
Israel, Israel would not attack Jordan.
"Although
the charge of aggression is freely made against Israel in relation to
the Six-Days War the fact remains that the two attempts made in the
General Assembly in June-July 1967 to secure the condemnation of Israel
as an aggressor failed. A clear and striking majority of the members of
the U.N. voted against the proposition that Israel was an aggressor."
Israel Has the Better Title to the Territory of Palestine, Including the Whole of Jerusalem
International law makes it clear: All of Israel's wars with its Arab neighbors were in self-defence.
Professor, Judge Schwebel, wrote in What Weight to Conquest:
"(a)
a state [Israel] acting in lawful exercise of its right of self-defense
may seize and occupy foreign territory as long as such seizure and
occupation are necessary to its self-defense;
"(b) as a condition of its withdrawal from such territory, that State may require the institution of security measures reasonably designed to ensure that that territory shall not again be used to mount a threat or use of force against it of such a nature as to justify exercise of self-defense;
"(c) Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.
"... as between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt."
"(b) as a condition of its withdrawal from such territory, that State may require the institution of security measures reasonably designed to ensure that that territory shall not again be used to mount a threat or use of force against it of such a nature as to justify exercise of self-defense;
"(c) Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.
"... as between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt."
"No legal Right Shall Spring from a Wrong"
Professor Schwebel explains that the principle of "acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible" must be read together with other principles:
"...
namely, that no legal right shall spring from a wrong, and the Charter
principle that the Members of the United Nations shall refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of any State."
Simply
stated: Arab illegal aggression against the territorial integrity and
political independence of Israel, cannot and should not be rewarded.
Professor Julius Stone, a leading authority on the Law of Nations, stated:
"Territorial
Rights Under International Law.... By their [Arab countries] armed
attacks against the State of Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973, and by
various acts of belligerency throughout this period, these Arab states
flouted their basic obligations as United Nations members to refrain
from threat or use of force against Israel's territorial integrity and
political independence. These acts were in flagrant violation inter alia of Article 2(4) and paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of the same article."
Thus,
under international law Israel acted lawfully by exercising its right
to self-defence when it redeemed and legally reoccupied Judea and
Samaria, known also as the West Bank.
|
Legalities
aside, before 1967 there were no Jewish settlements in the West Bank,
and for the first ten years of so-called occupation there were almost no
Jewish settlers in the West Bank. And still there was no peace with the
Palestinians. The notion that Jewish communities pose an obstacle to
peace is a red herring designed to blame Israel for lack of progress in
the 'Peace Process' and enable Palestinian leadership to continue to
reject any form of compromise and reconciliation with Israel as a Jewish
state.
To read this article online please Click Here. |
No comments:
Post a Comment