US President Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on December 6 surprised the international community and triggered the wrath of Palestinians and many Arab states.
We do no have an absolute explanation at the moment why the president acted in this way, overthrowing traditional US policy and the international consensus on this issue, but at first sight it seems that internal calculations prevailed over other variables.
In any case, it has to be taken into account that there was a decision by the US Congress back in 1995 (the Jerusalem Embassy Act) requiring that the US Embassy to be transferred from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. However, that act has not been implemented, since all US presidents have used the deviation clause – a provision that allows them to postpone the decision – noting that the Jerusalem issue must be resolved in the context of a final negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians.
But why has Trump broken this consensus?
The special US-Israeli relationship
Before attempting to answer this question, we must focus on US-Israeli relations. Since the end of World War II, Israel has enjoyed a special relationship with the United States. Specifically, after the Six Day War in June 1967, Israel became for the US a “strategic asset” in the region, while Arab states such as Egypt and Syria were allied with Russia.
It is worth mentioning that Israel is the largest recipient of US aid in the world, amounting to US$3 billion every year. In addition, the US provides the Jewish state with unprecedented diplomatic support and billions of dollars’ worth of armaments. I would call this relationship the external variable.
Turning to history, the United States in 1947 supported the plan to partition Palestine, an unfair decision in violation of international law, and in particular the law of self-determination of the majority Palestinian nationality.
Specifically, at the end of the First World War in Palestine there were only 65,000 Jews among a total of 700,000 Arabs. In addition, despite the steady flow of Jewish settlers to Palestine in 1948 among a total of about 2 million Arabs, only one-third of the population were Jews, according to Malcolm Yapp in The Near East from the First World War: A History to 1995.
It must be said here that the Soviet Union also supported United Nations Resolution 181 because it wanted to eliminate the British influence in the region. Many Jewish settlers came from the Soviet Union and its satellite countries.
Let’s move to the so-called internal variable.
Internal variable in US-Israel relationship
It is well known that millions of Jews who live in the United States maintain important government positions, and they have remarkable economic influence. In order to demonstrate how important their presence is for domestic politics we may recall that in 1947, US president Harry Truman supported the Palestine partition plan because he wanted to secure Jewish support in the crucial mid-term congressional elections in November 1946.
Afterward, Jewish presence in the United States, especially in the northern states, forced Truman to recognize de facto the Jewish state because he wanted to safeguard their electoral influence in the presidential election 1948. When one of his foreign-policy advisers told him that doing so would affect US relations with the Arabs, Truman replied, “Unlike the American Jews, I do not have thousands of Arabs among my voters.”
The question raised here is whether Trump recognized Jerusalem because of internal calculations. Of course, there is a secondary question: Why did the previous presidents vote against this by using the deviation clause? It does not seem that Trump made this decision solely because of pressure from the Jewish lobby.
Additionally, we must note that in July 2016, the Republican Party approved a declaration in which there was no reference to a “two state” solution, overturning decades of tradition. That decision was welcomed and adopted by President Trump in February 2017.
What we should emphasize, however, is that the so-called evangelical or religious right, from which Trump drew many votes in the 2016 election, has long been in favor of Israeli interests. It should be noted that US Vice-President Mike Pence is a champion of these positions.
Evangelical Christians or Zionist Christians believe that unwavering support for the Jewish state and its decisions is a biblical imperative, regardless of Jewish refusal to accept the Christian faith. At the same time, they are ardent supporters of illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian areas. The paradox of the whole situation is that there are many anti-Semites among the Christian right. However, some of them support Israel for geopolitical reasons.
Jerusalem and the rational model
From any angle, Trump’s decision appears misguided and irrational and does not promote US national interests. From a narrow international perspective, it violates international law, as well as the international consensus reached in 1966 when it was decided that the final status of Jerusalem would result from a viable and comprehensive peace agreement between the parties.
Trump’s decision violates the so-called “rational choice” model, which teaches us that states base decisions on a cost-benefit analysis, that is, they are prevented from taking any action that could potentially harm their national interests.
Is Trump’s decision compatible with US national interests? According to our humble opinion, it is not. Specifically:
- It creates the conditions for greater tension and instability in the region.
- It casts doubt among the Palestinians as to whether the US is an honest mediator and undermines the resumption of the peace process that Trump’s son-in-law is supposed to restart.
- The decision insults the religious feelings of all Muslims, leading logically to a “clash of civilizations.”
- It creates the conditions for the resurgence of religious terrorism.
- Finally, Trump’s decision isolates the United States in the international community by demonstrating that the government of the strongest country in the world is prejudiced against one party to the conflict. In other words, Trump and his advisers do not seem to realize that America’s greatest strength is not the example of its power but the power of its example.
Some historical and demographic data
At this point we will briefly refer to some historical facts about Jerusalem. Israel’s political sovereignty is derived from Resolution 181 of 1947, whereby Palestine was divided into a Jewish and an Arab state. Jerusalem would be placed under an international regime, and therefore neither of the two newly born states would place it under sovereignty.
When the UN plan was rejected by the Arab side, conflict erupted between the Palestinians and Israelis, and subsequently the first Arab-Israeli War in May 1948.
The end of the war found Israel occupying West Jerusalem, and Jordan the east side. During the second Arab-Israeli War in June 1967, Israel occupied East Jerusalem and then annexed it. In 1980 it proclaimed Jerusalem as the “complete and united capital of Israel,” an act deemed illegal by the international community and in particular by UN Security Council Resolution 478.
Jerusalem is considered to be of great religious significance for both Arabs and Jews. The Palestinians, who want East Jerusalem to be the capital of their future state, consider Jerusalem the third most holy city for Islam after Mecca and Medina. They believe that the Prophet Muhammad was taken to heaven by Burak, a winged horse, on the “night journey” of Muslim tradition. The Israelis believe that the foundations of the temple of Solomon are there. Jerusalem symbolizes for them vindication after a prolonged period of hardship and exile.
In essence, Trump’s decision recognizes Jewish occupation of the city in violation of UN resolutions, which, like the Oslo Accord, provide that Jerusalem’s status will be clarified after negotiations between the two sides.
We must mention that in East Jerusalem reside 250,000 Palestinians and 200,000 Jewish settlers, while the West is purely Jewish. Also, one must take into account that apart from the city of Jerusalem there is also “Greater Jerusalem,” where Israel has established big settlements.
Further, we need to highlight another parameter. In 1967, when the second Arab-Israeli war broke out, 85% of the land of Jerusalem belonged to Palestinians, while today the proportion i only 13%. In addition, while the Israelis accounted for 10% of the population in 1967, now they make up 45%.
Saudi-Iranian rivalry
We may come back to our primary question of why the US president has made this controversial decision. In addition to the domestic reasons we have already set out in the article, apparently Trump had in mind that the confrontation of Shiite Iran with Saudi Arabia would act as a catalyst for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
How is this going to happen? Probably Trump wrongly believed that Saudi Arabia and other Arab states, embroiled in security competition with Tehran, would accept the Jewish position for Jerusalem in exchange for US aid to neutralize or weaken their Iranian rival. In other words, Trump sought in this way to exterminate the weak part of the conflict, the Palestinians in order to change the dynamic of the conflict by imposing already existing realities, thus the Jewish occupation of East Jerusalem.
Of course, what he succeeded in doing is quite the opposite, and possibly the Iranians could gain from this move, once again appearing as defenders of the Palestinians. But also the resurgence of a protracted conflict helps no one, since it affects the prospects of resolving the problem on the basis of a “two states solution,” the only realistic way, in our opinion, to solve the problem.
Thank you Art. It is not a question of "religion". It is an issue of FACTS. We all have opinions. We develop those opinions on the basis of what we read, hear, see, and believe. Diffferentiating between "fact’, and "opinion" when explaining and discussing issues with readers, or students, is essential if democracy is going to work, since it depends on an informed, educated electorate. And that is exactly the reason why some try so hard to twist and obfuscate the facts.
I don’t know Bill Bilek or the author, and I am not Jewish. I find Bill Bilek has made a very convincing case for his assertions.
Nick Panayiotides "I still have the opinion"
And you are certainly entitled to your opinion. But you cannot replace FAT, with "your opinion".
"242 UNSC does explicitly state that "West Bank is occupied and Israel is the occupatory power". "
Here is the complete text of UNSC 242:
The Security Council,
Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,
Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,
Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,
1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
2. Affirms further the necessity
(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;
3. Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;
4. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.
Adopted unanimously at the 1382nd meeting.
Please show where in 242 "the West Bank" is mentioned.
"the rule of self-determination should apply to the majority the Palestinians"
I know that is your opinion, but where is the law that stated that in 1922 when the Mandate for Palestine became international law?
" the General Assembly, of the UN, the so-called conciense of humanity "
That may be your opinion, but God help us if that is true.
"Are all these states antisemets?NO, they are not. "
That may be your opinion. I vehemently disagree with that opinion, and base my disagreement on the internationally accepted wortking definition of antisemitism.
"DOUBLE STANDARD FOR ISRAEL:
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation
Multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations
DELEGITIMIZE ISRAEL:
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist"
"that can only be promoted with the " Two State Solution"."
Two states already exist in historic Palestine – Jordan, and Israel. The Jews have agreed to the establishment of a 3rd state, if the safety and security of their nation state would be assured. The Arabs have refused, and continue to refuse this option.
" againt peace… So simple.."
There was no peace BEFORE there was a Jewish state. There was no peace when the Arabs held eastern Jerusalem and the "West Bank". Why would you believe there would be any more "peace" now?
Finally, I have asked you a multitude of questions, asked for concrete factual rebuttal from you to many points that I have raisaed, and you have not provided EVEN ONE such factual response. Why not?
Moreover, the General Assembly, of the UN, the so-called conciense of humanity – where THERE IS NO AMERICAN VETO – rejected panegyrically Trump’s unwise decision. Are all these states antisemets?NO, they are not. They are just in a favor of stability and peace, that can only be promoted with the " Two State Solution". Unfortunately your arguments run against the majority of the states of the International system. You against all these. So simple..
I wish you a happy New Year!
Bill, I still have the opinion that you refuted absolutely nothing! Even with this wording, 242 UNSC does explicitly state that "West Bank is occupied and Israel is the occupatory power".
"There was not a state called palestine"? And what by that? There was not a jewish state there either. There was just a Kingdom until 586 BC…..!!!!As it is well known the nation state is a by-product of modernity in the late 18-19 the century. And in this regard, the rule of self-determination should apply to the majority the Palestinians who could be self-governed. If you are unaware of International this is your problem…
Nick Panayiotides Part 5:
13) “But Palestine was not a “Land without people, for people without land” as wrongly many Jewish leaders asserted.. “
“"A land without a people for a people without a land" is a widely cited phrase associated with the movement to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine during the 19th and 20th centuries.
Although usually assumed to have been a Zionist slogan, the phrase was used as early as 1843 by a Christian Restorationist clergyman and it continued to be used for almost a century by Christian Restorationists.[1]
It is thought by some scholars that this phrase never came into widespread use among Jewish Zionists.[2][3]"
14) “Palestinians have also recognized the Jewish State (Oslo Accords)”
“Fatah has never recognized Israel’s right to exist and will never do so, according to Azzam al-Ahmed, a member of the Fatah Central Committee who is closely associated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.”
Letters of Mutual Recognition, Sept. 9, 1993.
“In view of the promise of a new era and the signing of the Declaration of Principles and based on Palestinian acceptance of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the PLO affirms that those articles of the Palestinian Covenant which deny Israel’s right to exist, and the provisions of the Covenant which are inconsistent with the commitments of this letter are now inoperative and no longer valid. Consequently, the PLO undertakes to submit to the Palestinian National Council for formal approval the necessary changes in regard to the Palestinian Covenant.”
The PNC has NEVER acted on this promise.
15) You never answered my very important question: When EXACTLY, and by what law or legal process did "Palestine" ever come into existence?
Sir, you have made innumerable claims of Israeli violations of non-existent laws. I have asked you to provide links to support your allegations. You have not done so. For instance, you never answered my very important question: When EXACTLY, and by what law or legal process did "Palestine" ever come into existence?
I have refuted your points, and allegations in your original article, and in your kind response, with incontrovertible FACT. In the interest of your readers and students, I invite you to do the same in your hoped for further reply.
ευτυχισμένο το νέο έτος
Nick Panayiotides Part 4:
11) “descendants of the Palestinians (Jebusites and Philistines)”
Post any concrete proof that you have to show that the “Palestinians” are descendants of the long-extinct Jebusites, Philistines, Canaanites, Edomites, Perrizites, Hittites, Amonites, etc., etc.
12) “until the late of the 19th century that the Jews started to make Aliya with British prompt and blessing.”
The British had nothing to do with the early immigration of the Jews into the Ottoman Empire:
“First Aliyah (1882–1903)
Main article: First Aliyah
Between 1882 and 1903, approximately 35,000 Jews immigrated to the southwestern area of Syria, then a province of the Ottoman Empire. The Jews immigrating arrived in groups that had been assembled, or recruited. Most of these groups had been arranged in the areas of Romania and Russia in the 1880s. The migration of Jews from Russia correlates with the end of the Russian pogroms, with about 3 percent of Jews emigrating from Europe to Palestine. The groups who arrived in Palestine around this time were called Hibbat Tysion, which is a Hebrew word meaning "fondness for Zion." they were also called Hovevei Tysion or "enthusiasts for Zion" by the members of the groups themselves. While these groups expressed interest and "fondness" for Palestine, they were not strong enough in number to encompass an entire mass movement as would appear later on in other waves of migration.[18] The majority, belonging to the Hovevei Zion and Bilu movements, came from the Russian Empire with a smaller number arriving from Yemen. The migration of Jews from Russia correlates with the end of the Russian pogroms, with about 3 percent of Jews emigrating from Europe to Palestine. Many established agricultural communities. Among the towns that these individuals established are Petah Tikva (already in 1878), Rishon LeZion, Rosh Pinna, and Zikhron Ya’akov. In 1882 the Yemenite Jews settled in the Arab village of Silwan located south-east of the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem on the slopes of the Mount of Olives.[19]
Second Aliyah (1904–1914)
Main article: Second Aliyah
Between 1904 and 1914, 40,000 Jews immigrated mainly from Russia to southwestern Syria following pogroms and outbreaks of anti-Semitism in that country. This group, greatly influenced by socialist ideals, established the first kibbutz, Degania Alef, in 1909 and formed self-defense organizations, such as Hashomer, to counter increasing Arab hostility and to help Jews to protect their communities from Arab marauders.[20] Ahuzat Bayit, a new suburb of Jaffa established in 1909, eventually grew to become the city of Tel Aviv. During this period, some of the underpinnings of an independent nation-state arose: Hebrew, the ancient national language, was revived as a spoken language; newspapers and literature written in Hebrew were published; political parties and workers organizations were established. The First World War effectively ended the period of the Second Aliyah.
Nick Panayiotides Part 3
“[The Arabs of Haifa] fled in spite of the fact that the Jewish authorities guaranteed their safety and rights as citizens of Israel.”
– Monsignor George Hakim, Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, according to Rev. Karl Baehr, Executive Secretary of the American Christian Palestine Committee, New York Herald Tribune, June 30, 1949
“Every effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives, to get their shops and businesses open and to be assured that their lives and interests will be safe. [However] …A large road convoy, escorted by [British] military . . . left Haifa for Beirut yesterday. . . . Evacuation by sea goes on steadily. …[Two days later, the Jews were] still making every effort to persuade the Arab populace to remain and to settle back into their normal lives in the towns… [as for the Arabs,] anotherconvoy left Tireh for Transjordan, and the evacuation by sea continues. The quays and harbor are still crowded with refugees and their household effects, all omitting no opportunity to get a place an one of the boats leaving Haifa.””
– Haifa District HQ of the British Police, April 26, 1948, quoted in Battleground by Samuel Katz
“the military and civil authorities and the Jewish representative expressed their profound regret at this grave decision [to evacuate]. The [Jewish] Mayor of Haifa made a passionate appeal to the delegation to reconsider its decision”
– The Arab National Committee of Haifa, told to the Arab League, quoted in The Refugee in the World, by Joseph B. Schechtman, 1963
“The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab leaders, such as Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled pro-Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem, and by the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine. They viewed the first wave of Arab setbacks as merely transitory. Let the Palestine Arabs flee into neighboring countries. It would serve to arouse the other Arab peoples to greater effort, and when the Arab invasion struck, the Palestinians could return to their homes and be compensated with the property of Jews driven into the sea.”
– Kenneth Bilby, in New Star in the Near East (New York, 1950), pp. 30-31
“We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.”
– Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said, quoted in Sir Am Nakbah (“The Secret Behind the Disaster”) by Nimr el Hawari, Nazareth, 1952
And much much more.
8) “ I do not believe that the majority of the Americans disagree with me, but with you.”
http://news.gallup.com/poll/189626/americans-views-toward-israel-remain-firmly-positive.aspx
9) “Jerusalem was put under international regime by the 181 resolution.”
The UN is not empowered, by its Charter, to “put” anything anywhere; nor to “create”; nor to “destroy”; nor to “recognize” anything!
UNGA 181 was a RECOMMENDATION (not “law” or legally binding). The recommendation was rejected by the Arabs who went to war to exterminate the Jewish state and its people (in violation of international law). When the Arabs lost their gamble of aggression, the UN did NOTHING to prevent the destruction and desecration of all Jewish holy sites in Jerusalem by the Jordanians, and did NOTHING to back up its lapsed recommendation.
10) “What you say about Jewish presence in the area is truth but is the half-truth. “
Not at all. Despite the forced expulsions of the Jewish People from Judea by the Babylonians and the Romans, there always remained a small number of Jews that continued to live in their homeland. THERE WAS NEVER ANY TIME IN HISTORY THAT THERE WERE NO JEWS LIVING IN THEIR LAND, FOR THE LAST 4000 YEARS. If you have concrete evidence to the contrary, please post it.
Nick Panayiotides Part 2:
7) “forced to evacuate the region in a condition of ethnic cleansing according to Israeli Historians Is (Ilan Pappe, Benny Morris.. and many others ).”
You can choose your “historians”, and I can choose mine. Which historian is actually telling the truth? I prefer to rely on contemporaneous media reports (before the era of “fake news”), that clearly report that the majority of the 750,000 refugees who left did so without ever seeing an Israeli soldier, at the behest of their leadership.
Research reported by the Arab-sponsored Institute for Palestine Studies in Beirut, stated “the majority of the Arab refugees in 1948 were not expelled, but that 68% left without seeing an Israeli soldier.”
“The Arab exodus from the villages was not caused by the actual battle, but by the exaggerated description spread by Arab leaders to incite them to fight the Jews”
– Yunes Ahmed Assad, refugee from the town of Deir Yassin, in Al Urdun, April 9, 1953
The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies.
– Falastin (Jordanian newspaper), February 19, 1949
“It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees’ flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa, and Jerusalem.”
– Near East Arabic Broadcasting Station, Cyprus, April 3, 1949
“Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees… while it is we who made them to leave… We brought disaster upon Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave… We have rendered them dispossessed… We have accustomed them to begging… We have participated in lowering their moral and social level… Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson, and throwing bombs upon… men, women and children – all this in service of political purposes…”
– Khaled al Azm, Syria’s Prime Minister after the 1948 war
“The refugees were confident that their absence would not last long and that they would return within a week or two. Their leaders had promised them that the Arab armies would crush the ‘Zionist gangs’ very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile.”
– Monsignor George Hakim, Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, in the Beirut newspaper Sada al Janub, August 16, 1948
“The Arabs did not want to submit to a truce they rather preferred to abandon their homes, their belongings and everything they possessed in the world and leave the town. This is in fact what they did.”
amal Husseini, Acting Chairman of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee, speaking to the United Nations Security Council. Quoted in the UNSC Official Records (N. 62), April 23,1948,p.14
“As early as the first months of 1948 the Arab League issued orders exhorting the [Arab Palestinian] people to seek a temporary refuge in neighboring countries, later to return to their abodes in the wake of the victorious Arab armies and obtain their share of abandoned Jewish property.” – bulletin of The Research Group for European Migration Problems, 1957
“This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of their country.”
– Edward Atiyah (then Secretary of the Arab League Office in London) in The Arabs (London, 1955), p. 183
“The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by order of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city…By withdrawing Arab workers, their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa.”.
– Time Magazine, May 3, 1948, p. 25
“The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the action of the Arab States in opposing Partition and the Jewish State. The Arab States agreed upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem,
– Emil Ghoury, Secretary of the Arab Higher Committee, the official leadership of the Palestinian Arabs, in the Beirut newspaper, Daily Telegraph, September 6, 1948
“The Arab governments told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in.”
– from the Jordan daily Ad Difaa, September 6, 1954
“The Arab civilians panicked and fled ignominiously. Villages were frequently abandoned before they were threatened by the progress of war.”
– General Glubb Pasha, in the London Daily Mail on August 12, 1948
Nick Panayiotides Part 1:
My respect to you, for responding. I deny, however, that my comments are “insulting”, “inflammatory” or rhetoric. I call out untruths where I find them, and back up my comments with irrefutable facts. I would be happy to see further responses from you in the same frame.
“Palestine”. There has never, in the history of earth, ever existed any sovereign state called “Palestine”.
“West Bank”. This is a term invented by the Jordanians when they illegally occupied and annexed the area which for 3000 years before, and since 1967 again, has been known as “Judea and Samaria.” As in UNGA 181: “The boundary of the hill country of Samaria and Judea starts on the Jordan River at the Wadi Malih south-east of Beisan and runs due west to meet the Beisan-Jericho road …”
“resolution 242 and 338 of the UNSC demand that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories.” Once again, this is a lie. The exact wording is: “(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;” This is linked to the second unambiguous clause calling for "termination of all claims or states of belligerency" and the recognition that "every State in the area" has the "right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.”
The article “the” is intentionally ommitted as clarified and explained by those who wrote that resolution. The Soviet delegate wanted the inclusion of those words and said that their exclusion meant "that part of these territories can remain in Israeli hands." The Arab states pushed for the word "all" to be included, but this was rejected. They nevertheless asserted that they would read the resolution as if it included the word "all." The British Ambassador who drafted the approved resolution, Lord Caradon, declared after the vote: "It is only the resolution that will bind us, and we regard its wording as clear.” When asked to explain the British position later, Lord Caradon said: "It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its positions of June 4, 1967, because those positions were undesirable and artificial.”
Similarly, Amb. Goldberg explained: "The notable omissions-which were not accidental-in regard to withdrawal are the words ‘the’ or ‘all’ and ‘the June 5, 1967 lines’….the resolution speaks of withdrawal from occupied territories without defining the extent of withdrawal.”
Regardless, None of the UN resolutions, including 242 and 338, are legally binding unless they are passed under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. And these were not.
4) “there was flagrant violation of International law and in particular of the rule of Self –Determination.”
Please provide a link to the international law on “self-determination” that existed in 1922.
5) “What was entitled to do was to prepare the mandate to be self-governed by the majority (The Palestinians).”
Please post a link to the part of the Mandate for Palestine that speaks to “self-government by the majority”. Also, please copy and paste ANY PART of the Mandate where “Palestinian Arabs" or “Palestinians” are mentioned.
No! Once again, I say that you are obfuscating. The mandate system was set up as international law, by the League of Nations, which was empowered to do so by its agreed Charter. Land held under a mandate was to be held under trusteeship. In the case of the Class A Mandate for Palestine, it was to be held in trust for “re-establishing the national home for the Jewish People in Palestine”. Not a word about any national or political rights for the Arabs in that 1% miniscule portion of the defeated Ottoman Empire lands. The Arabs were given those rights in the other 99% of the Ottoman territory.
6) “Let me remind you.. In 1882 there were only 65.000 Jews among 700.000 Arabs. In 1947 there were approximately 700.000 Jews among 2 million inhabitants, the majority of them Arabs. “
What is your point, exactly? Today there are approximately 13 million Jews in a world population of 7 BILLION, and….
6) As regards your allegations about Jerusalem are totally unfounded since Jerusalem was put under international regime by the 181 resolution. Israel’s annexation of Jerusalem violates resolution 476 and 478 of the UNSC.
7) What you say about Jewish presence in the area is truth but is the half-truth. Bear in mind that Jews lived in the region continuously from 1000 BC (The Year King David establish his Kingdom) until 586 BC. That year Nebuchadnezzar conquered the Jewish Kingdom in the South, while the Kingdom of Israel in the North was conquered by the Assyrians in 722 BC. After they were forced to emigrate. Finally those who stayed in Palestine in 66 A.D. were violently persecuted by the Romans and forced to emigrate for the final time.
8) Furthermore, you must take into consideration that this period the descendants of the Palestinians (Jebusites and Philistines) dwelled in Palestine until the late of the 19th century that the Jews started to make Aliya with British prompt and blessing. But Palestine was not a “Land without people, for people without land” as wrongly many Jewish leaders asserted.. Palestine was not EMPTY, PALESTINIAN-ARABS dwelled there. You may see Ilan Pape’s lecture if you want” History of Israel Stolen land of Palestine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT5oVogE0Pg
9) However this is history since the International community recognized and recognize the Jewish State. Palestinians have also recognized the Jewish State (Oslo Accords) and the demand a viable State of the own as retribution…Only “ The Two State Solution” can afford this!
10) Happy New Year!!!!
Dear friend, putting aside your insulting and inflammatory rhetoric, I must underline that you live in a total illusion: More specifically, bear in mind the following:
1) Palestine (West Bank) is occupied and resolution 242 and 338 of the UNSC demand that Israel withdraw from the occupied territories.
2) As regards the conflict, YES there was flagrant violation of International law and in particular of the rule of Self –Determination. Great Britain (he Mandatory Power) was not the owner of the land and therefore had no any legal right to promise the land to any foreigner. What was entitled to do was to prepare the mandate to be self-governed by the majority (The Palestinians). I have cited M. Yap about the demographic data before and during the mandatory period (1920-147). Do you question one of the greatest historians of the 21st century?
3) Let me remind you.. In 1882 there were only 65.000 Jews among 700.000 Arabs. In 1947 there were approximately 700.000 Jews among 2 million inhabitants, the majority of them Arabs.
4) The Jewish State was built on the debris of the Palestinian community. There are millions of refugees, the descendants of the 700.000 refugees of 1948. That were forced to evacuate the region in a condition of ethnic cleansing according to Israeli Historians Is (Ilan Pappe, Benny Morris.. and many others ).
5) I do not believe that the majority of the Americans disagree with me, but with you. I have many American friends and Jews alike (Journalist and Academics) that really recognize what happened in Mandatory Palestine…. They also recognize the power of the Jewish lobby…..
Totally untrue as you can read from my fact-based comments below.
Part 3
"When the UN plan was rejected by the Arab side, conflict erupted between the Palestinians and Israelis, and subsequently the first Arab-Israeli War in May 1948."
Total obfuscation! When the Arabs rejected UNGA 181 on November 29, 1947, they opened hostilities on Jewish civilian busses on Nov. 30 1947, the next day, killing 5 civilians! Within 10 minutes of Israel’s declaration of independence on May 14, 1948, 5 Arab armies along with thousands of irregular troops attacked the nascent state.
"During the second Arab-Israeli War in June 1967,"
A war of declared genocide against Israel and its population, which the Arabs initiated first by violating the terms of the 1949 and 1956 armistice, and then by Jordan attacking western Jerusalem.
"Jerusalem symbolizes for them vindication after a prolonged period of hardship and exile."
Complete idiocy! Jerusalem has been the heart and sould of the Jewish People, the Jewish Nation and the Jewish religion for 4000 years. It has been revered and prayed at and to by the Jewish People for that time as well. Jerusalem has only ever been the capital of a Jewish state EVER!! in history. Jerusalem had a majority Jewish population from the 1850’s, until it was ethnically cleansed by the Jordanians after the 1949 war. At the same time, between 1949 and 1967 the Arabs did not declare Jerusalem their capital of anything, and instead set about destroying and desecrating ALL the Jewish holy sites in the eastern part of Jerusalem under their control.
" the West is purely Jewish."
A lie! In 1967 there were 58,100 Muslims and 12,900 Christians in western Jerusalem. Their numbers only grew after that.
https://israelipalestinian.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000636
" 85% of the land of Jerusalem belonged to Palestinians,"
Another lie! The Arabs of Palestine, in very large part did not OWN the land – they lived on it as squatters or paying rent to landlords. Thios that have deeds to property have had their deeds honored by the Israeli Supreme Court when necessary. Most of the Arabs that lived in eastern Jerusalem had been placed in residences OWNED LEGALLY by Jews since the 19th century, by the occupying Jordanians.
"a “two states solution,” the only realistic way, in our opinion, to solve the problem."
Since the Arabs have refused their 2nd Arab state when offered repeatedly since at least 1936; since the Arabs refuse to accept a safe and secure Jewish state on any poart of its ancestral homeland; since the Arabs refuse to negotiate, one is led to wonder on what factual basis you form your opinion.
Part 2
"the United States in 1947 supported the plan to partition Palestine, an unfair decision in violation of international law, "
True, BUT NOT FOR THE REASON YOU SUGGEST!
International law, written in 1922 and valid in 1947 and today, destined Mandatory Palestine to become the national home for the Jewish People and Art. 5 of the Mandate prohibited such partition:
ART. 5.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for 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.
"Many Jewish settlers came from the Soviet Union and its satellite countries."
Actually, from 1919-1948, less than 300,000.
" in 1947, US president Harry Truman supported the Palestine partition plan because he wanted to secure Jewish support in the crucial mid-term congressional elections in November 1946."
Once again, nonsense!
http://www.mideastweb.org/us_supportforstate.htm
" illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian areas. "
When EXACTLY did any "areas" become "Palestinian"? By what law or legal process do you allege that happened? What international law does the Israeli "occupation" violate (Please cut and paste a link)?
"Trump’s decision appears misguided and irrational and does not promote US national interests.":
You are certainly entitled to your OPINION. The majority of Americans disagree with you.
" it violates international law,"
Which law does the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel violate, specifically?
"Israel’s political sovereignty is derived from Resolution 181 of 1947,"
Absolutely FALSE! ALL UN resolutions, including UNGA 181, not passed under Chapter VII of the UN Charter are NOT legally binding, and serve only as RECOMMENDASTIONS or expre4ssions of opinion. In this case, the UN recommended to the Mandatory government that it partition its mandate. The Arabs rejected the recommendation (and went to war, and lost.) Britain refused to enact the recommendation. IOsrael’s political sovereignty, as is that of all sovereign states , derives from its satisfaction of the Montivideo Convention, and the fact that it successfully defended its territory against Arab aggression. Its LEGAL legitimacy is entrenched in international law, written in 1922.
Part 1
So much misinformation, obfuscation, half-truths and lies, in one article.
"Since the end of World War II, Israel has enjoyed a special relationship with the United States."
Nonsense:
" Israeli leaders have pursued such relations since the establishment of the Jewish state in May 1948, but no special relationship existed before the mid-1970s…American public opinion recognized this affinity and assumed a moral responsibility toward the Jewish state, a responsibility attributable in great part to the Holocaust. Moreover, the religious orientation of many American Christians brought them to support modern Zionism. President Harry S. Truman supported the United Nations plan in 1947 for the partition of Palestine, thus over-riding the objections of the State Department and the Department of Defense and creating the basis for early recognition of the state of Israel. Yet, a general moral commitment brought the United States to provide neither a formal guarantee of its security nor arms to Israel. In fact, the United States imposed an arms embargo on the parties to the Arab-Israeli conflict that it maintained in near-complete fashion until the early 1960s….His administration gave Israel vague assurances that the United States would not allow its destruction. But the United States saw in Israel an impediment to a Middle East policy, the main objective of which was to achieve closer relations with the Arab states in order to bring them into a pro-Western alliance and ensure a steady supply of oil. This administration opposed Israel’s practice of severe retaliation in response to raids from Arab states, withheld diplomatic support when it viewed Israel’s use of force as excessive (as in 1953, during a dispute over the waters of the Jordan River), and planned, with Britain, to require Israeli territorial concessions in order to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. In early 1957, President Eisenhower threatened Israel with sanctions to force it to withdraw from Egyptian territory it had conquered during the 1956 Sinai campaign, and U.S.-Israeli relations during the second Eisenhower administration (1957 to 1961) remained cool."
http://www.encyclopedia.com/history/united-states-and-canada/us-history/relations-israel
"It is worth mentioning that Israel is the largest recipient of US aid in the world, amounting to US$3 billion every year."
Half-truth. The $3.5B is in the form of military grants which Israel must use to buy American equipment, which contributes greatly to the U.S. economy.
Furthermore: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/friends-with-benefits-why-the-u.s.-israeli-alliance-is-good-for-america
https://il.usembassy.gov/our-relationship/fact-sheet-u-s-israel-economic-relationship/
Please go and write on the illegal occupation of Northern Cyprus by Tuurky.
EXCELLENTLY WRITEN. SAVE ONE FACT .IN 1947-48 TRUMAN WAS PUT UNDER EXTREME PRESURE FROM THE ADL AND RABBI STEVEN WEISS. SO MUCH SO THEY WERE AT THE WHITE HOIUSE DAILY .TRUMAN PRIVATELY COMMENTED ABOUT IT. I W ILL NOT WRITE THAT HERE.OTHER THAN TO SAY THE U.S SUPPORT FOR THIS ZIONIST ENTITY HAS CAUSED THE WHOLE OF THE M.E SINCE 1946 TO BE EMBROILED IN WARS. THE RUSSIA S WERE THERE BECAUSE THEY SAW AN OPPORTUNITY TO GAIN A FOOTHOLD WITH ARABS AS IT WAS EVIDENT BY THAT TIME THE U.S WAS SOLEY A ZIONIST AGENT.
Déjà vu?
As, in the US having a blind eye/actually aid/, for Iraq, with the hope, the letter will serve US interests and finish off Iran…
The aftermath of which are horrendous,as we can see.:(
Very Good. A breath of fresh air here at ATIMES.