Gaza legally remains part of Israeli sovereign territory. Unsurprisingly as the ‘Palestinians’ did not exist during the Jordanian occupation the Jordanians never offered an independent state of Palestine. In 1967 the geographical area was liberated from an occupying nation, Jordan, and rightfully returned to the legal possession of the State of Israel.
Indeed, many Muslims sought, still seek and take refuge in Israel such as the Bahia community and Sudanese and Bosnian Muslims all persecuted for their political or views or Islamic differences in their home countries. How many synagogues and Jews in Gaza? None. And one million Jews have been ethnically cleansed from Muslim countries in the last eighty years. The only nations guilty of Apartheid are those nations where Islam is the predominant religion and Jews, Christians and indigenous non-Muslim Africans persecuted minorities.
Even today the Islamic country of Mauritania practices apartheid against its indigenous black African, non-Muslim population – this passes unnoticed by the UN. Slavery against indigenous black Africans by Islamic dominated North African countries and atrocities committed against the same victims by the same perpetrators goes unnoticed by the UN and the EU. It is only the Jewish State of Israel, guilty of neither apartheid nor slavery which is unbelievably singled out for political and economic sanction. Antisemitism is alive and kicking among the political elite.
Under International Law the West Bank and Gaza fall within Israel’s borders. The former was occupied by Jordan during the period 1948 to 1967 but won back by Israel during the defensive war of 1967. Thus, Jordan for that period were the occupying power. Israel, in order to achieve peace, latterly decided to leave Gaza but nevertheless under International Law, Gaza legally remains part of Israeli sovereign territory. Unsurprisingly as the ‘Palestinians’ did not exist during the Jordanian occupation the Jordanians never offered an independent state of Palestine. In 1967 the geographical area was liberated from an occupying nation, Jordan, and rightfully returned to the legal possession of the State of Israel.
Unpalatable as this may be to Israel’s enemies and the ignorant, these are the facts. The internationally binding, legal facts.
For those of you with the will to persevere with the legal intricacies, there are basically five, just five main legal factors to consider when challenging those who continue using the false narrative regarding Israel’s ‘occupation’ of ‘Palestinian’ territory.
Two are established legal Treaties that to this day define the borders of Israel under International Law – the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 which incorporates the Mandate System including the Mandate for Palestine, and the UN Charter of 1945 specifically Article 80. Both legally binding, establishing and endorsing International Law, contain, codify, endorse, ratify, verify and validate that the borders of Israel include Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza.
The Mandate for Palestine incorporated within the League of Nations Covenant of 1922 survived the demise of the League itself with the formation of the United Nations whereby Article 80 of the UN Charter recognized the Mandate for Palestine of the League of Nations. This Mandate granted the Jewish people the irrevocable legal rights to live anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – a right that remains unaltered in International Law and cannot be amended. As an aside the International Court of Justice in three separate instances reaffirmed and upheld this principle, in 1950 ,1971 and 2004 when considering and judging on similar but different cases. Neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily amend the status of any party as defined within the Mandate for Palestine.
Three other legally binding principles known as Acquired Rights, Estoppel and Uti Possidetis Juris endorse and codify within international law the two documents noted above for time immemorial and it must be reiterated that no UN Resolution has the power to amend, reduce or reconstitute that which has previously been established. It is that simple.
Acquired Rights simply ensures that legal rights once given cannot be taken away and Estoppel establishes that those giving the rights cannot thereafter take those rights away nor amend them. Uti Possidetis Juris simply defines borders of new sovereign states on the basis of their previous administrative frontiers, in this case Israel as the legal documents were originally defined. These five factors legally determine and constitute Israel’s geography and borders and include the West Bank and Gaza for time immemorial.
Other terminology within the current narrative used to delegitimize Israel’s rightful legal claims over all the territory supposedly under illegal Israeli control is that:
- Israel is in breach of UN resolution 181 of the 1947 Partition Plan and
- The Hague Regulations of 1907 and
- The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.
Again, these can easily be debunked and effectively discredited as they have no direct application or relevance to the legal status or to any of the geography under Israel’s legal control, including any ‘settlements’ or the West Bank or indeed Gaza should Israel decide to retake control.
UN Resolution 181 was rejected by the Arabs and thus never implemented and is now an irrelevance. Regarding the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention, while both are genuine codes within International Law, paradoxically and perversely they would only apply to any Arab (Palestinian) occupation of Israeli territory such as that which occurred during the 1948-1967 period of Jordanian control. The Hague Regulations are designed to protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of an occupation – the Palestinians have never been a sovereign and even if they were the previous legally binding documents and principles would dismiss such claims. The Geneva Convention often used to delegitimize Israel’s rights, refer to a sovereign forcibly transferring its civilian population into those occupied territories. Israel has never forcibly transferred any of its civilians to any territory.
The attempts to use UN Resolution 181, the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Convention to support Palestinian claims are utterly absurd and though seemingly impressive when used by Israel’s enemies in debate, all as explained are irrelevant. However, even if they were relevant, the established principles and legally binding Treaties referred to above take precedence.
In summary this false narrative that has morphed into facts relating to the legal aspects of the conflict and regularly to delegitimize the Jewish State’s right to its legally defined geography must be continuously challenged.
Dear readers, Blitz is neither an Israeli State nor Jewish owned or sponsored publication. It is an independent journal which has been publishing the truth under extreme adversities since 2003 – Peter Baum
Next Installment: Nations calling for ‘Palestinian statehood’ contravene UN charter
