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.
8) The Jews resorted to armed violence against the Mandatory Power demanding no less than a state. The mandatory power created the biggest conflict of the Century.!!!And unable to confront realities in Palestine resorted to the newly established organization the United Nations. Chapter XII of the UN Charter created the international trustsheep system.
9) Article 77 (1) provided that the League mandate system should be placed under the UN trust sheep system by means of an agreement between the mandatory power and the UN General Assembly.
10) British government never concluded the agreement and simply decided to turn the entire problem to the UN General Assembly, which resulted in its adoption of the Partition Resolution in 1947 (181)
11) Nevertheless in the Case of Palestine – and South West Africa article 80 (1) of the UN Charter made it clear that the terms of these Mandates remained in effect pending their placement under the UN trusteeship system
In sum, the principle of Self-Determination was violated in Palestine. Restiution to this international injustice against them means a STATE OF THEIR OWN, Democratic and Viable!! The TWO STATE SOLUTION Biil Billek will provide this. Otherwise the whole region will remain trapped to insecurity and conflict……….
And i will REFUTE also your your unfounded, unhistorical claim that there was no violation of the principle of self-determination in Palestine.!!!
1) Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations established the Mandatory System for many regions with Class A, Class B and C Mandates.
2) Palestine was recognized as Class A mandate. In particular, Article 22 (4) of the League of Covenant provided that certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire “ Have reached a state of development were their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized”
3) By contrast, South West Africa became a Class C mandate.
4) Therefore paragraph 4 of article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant recognized the people of Palestine as “provisionally independent nation”. One can easily detect that this particular phraseology went further and paved the way for the application of the rule of Self-Determination to Palestinian indigenous people by the establishment of an Independent Palestinian State.
5) In 1948, the majority of the people in Palestine were the 1,4440 Muslim and Christian Palestinian Arabs. They were the indigenous inhabitants of the country whose existence as a provisionally independent nation was recognized by article 22 of the League of Nations.
6) There was also in Palestine a Jewish minority of 718,700 (26% of the population) people of whom many were alien immigrants that came in Palestine, fulfilling the provision of “ Balfour Declaration of 1917”, in violation of international law and with the support of Britain the Mandatory Power.
7) But Britain pledged for a National Home not a State……. But as the historical record showed Briton’s passing from its mandates or colonies was a MESS UP ( The Cyprus Case is illustrative also!!!)
Bill Bilek 1) Jordan is another state do not forget this! Do not disorientate!
2) Abbas comments came amid Trump’s – and his advisors- unwise decision. It should be seen i the context of legal defense against Trump decision to dictate than honestly propose on the conflict!
3) International law is generally difficult to apply. Very few decisions in International Politics come under chapter VII of the Chapter that authorise the use of force? For example the intervention in Libya in 2011. Whad did you expect to use force against the Jewish state to accept the refugees back? Do not forget the "special relationship" between Israel and USA.
4) I recommend you read again vey carefully my article!
5) As regards your opinion about occupation i respect it! We live in democratic political systems that respect other’s opinion.
6) What i must underline though is that the majority of Democratic States agree with my opinion-that there is occupation- there and violation of basic human rights.
Nick Panayiotides "Israel occupies foreign land"
OK. Who do you allege is the legal sovereign of that land? By what law or legal process did that happen exactly? When??
WHY WON’T YOU ANSWER THIS QUESTION?
" It violates International Law by transferring settlers in the occupies territories "
Not one person was TRANSFERRED anywhere, (which is why no international law was violated). Thousands of Jews CHOSE to move to the unowned, disputed territories of Judea and Samaria, and build their homes on unowned land. Don’t forget, “ Scripta manent, verba volent” .
"tell them that the Palestinians deluded you!!!"
Once again, not me. I provided you with the words of Fatah leadership itself.
"The PLO recognized Israel! "
Show me where the PLO Charter has been changed to clearly express that. (You can’t, because they didn’t chjange it".
"Israel did not recognize a Palestinian State"
That requirement was not part of Oslo, nor any other agreement.
"Bill Bilek You chose imperialism and expansionism. "
No. I choose the rule of law. Please demonstrate concrete examples of Israeli "imperialism and expansionism".
"I chose peaceful coexistence of people. "
I applaud your choice. Unfortunately, the Arabs are not yet fready to emulate you.
"If you think that is in Israel’s interest to perpetuate occupation. This is your problem."
Israel did not set out to "occupy" anything, and took all possible steps to avoid conflict with Jordan in 1967. Since the Arabs lost their gamble of aggression, they have been, and continue to be, unwilling to negotiate a mutually agreed peace, hoping people like you in the "international community" will force Israel to surrender.
"Yes they refused to accept an unfair desision! "
"Unfair" is a very subjective description. Regardless, it was based on international law.
" According to the 181 resolution, the Jews would be a minority in a state where the majority would be Palestinians."
Actually, the (unworkable) borders recommended by UNGA 181 were drawn so that the majority in the Jewish areas would be Jewish.
"At the same time, the Palestinian State was given much less portion of land.. Do not forget this!! "
Only if you do not forget that the "Palestinians" were given 80% of the land of historic Palestine, now called "Jordan", in 1920, where the population is still 75% "Palestinian".
"And the truth is.. that the Jews wanted all Historical Palestine for them."
And yet they accepted a tiny portion in 1939, (the Arabs refused); and they accepted the partition of UNGA 181, (the Arabs refused), and the evacuated all of Gaza, (and the Arabs have been murdering Jews from there ever since.)
"Do not forget this!! And the truth is.. that the Jews wanted all Historical Palestine for them.. Furthermore there was a consenus from the Knesset ( All the Political Parties) that the refugess should not be allowd to return… In contrast to 194 resolution of General Assembly of the UN. I know you do not like resolutions.. You prefer force."
It is not what I "like" or not. It is the legality of the UN Charter. UNGA 194 is a RECOMMENDATION, not legally binding. Furthermore, perhaps you could explain how there can still be Palestinian "refugees" in "Palestine" under the P.A.
"Only the " Two State Solution" can solve the problem.."
You still have not addressed all the questions that I repeated for you, including the question of how you would see a "2 state solution" given what Abbas said in the last few days.
Nick Panayiotides "You try to disorientate again! You are citing just a brief…mention from a book. I cited 3 Books!!"
Which FACTS that I posted do you allege are false?
"You are lying again, you are trying to disconnect Palestinians with their land and their national identity."
Not me. The ARABS themselves say so:
Let us hear what other Arabs have said:
“There is no such country as Palestine. ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria. ‘Palestine’ is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it”. (Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, Syrian Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937)
“There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not”. (Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian, 1946)
“It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria”. (Representative of Saudi Arabia at the United Nations, 1956)
Concerning the Holy Land, the chairman of the Syrian Delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919 stated: “The only Arab domination since the Conquest in 635 AD hardly lasted, as such, 22 years.”
""The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a
Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle
against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality
today there is no difference between Jordanians,
Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and
tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of
a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand
that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian
people’ to oppose Zionism.
"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state
with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa.
While as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa,
Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we
reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even
a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."
(PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, in a 1977
interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw.)
and:
http://en.mida.org.il/2017/11/09/arab-historian-admits-no-palestinian-people/
and:
"You avoid to comment on the ιncontrovertible demographic data. "
Not at all. I agree that there were more Arabs than Jews in the Ottoman Empire. There are more everything, practically, than Jews, for the last 2000 years. But that doesn’t change the fact that the Jewish People have the same rights to national identity as any other People, and this is now underwritten by valid international law, since 1922.
After WW1, the Arabs got 99% of the land area, divided into several Arab states, including theinvented Trans-Jordan, which was given 80% of the original Mandate for Palestine that was supposed to be where the nation state of the Jewish People was to be established. That left 20% for the Jews, less than 1% of the total Arab areas. Is that still too much? Is that what you call "unfair"?
Bill Bilek Yes they refused to accept an unfair desision! They were the overhelming majority and could not accept the division of their land. According to the 181 resolution, the Jews would be a minority in a state where the majority would be Palestinians. At the same time, the Palestinian State was given much less portion of land.. Do not forget this!! And the truth is.. that the Jews wanted all Historical Palestine for them.. Furthermore there was a consenus from the Knesset ( All the Political Parties) that the refugess should not be allowd to return… In contrast to 194 resolution of General Assembly of the UN. I know you do not like resolutions.. You prefer force. But bear in mind that according to Thukididis, power relations change over time.. The strong become weak and the weak become strong…. Only the " Two State Solution" can solve the problem..
Bill Bilek You chose imperialism and expansionism. I chose peaceful coexistence of people. If you think that is in Israel’s interest to perpetuate occupation. This is your problem. Occupations creates insecurity to ordinary citizens, Jews and Arabs alike
Bill Bilek A OK you are genious!!!! You must go to the Israeli leadership and tell them that the Palestinians deluded you!!! The PLO recognized Israel! Israel did not recognize a Palestinian State and soon it has to do so!!! The demand that PLO recognise the Jewish State as a " Jewish State" is another matter
Bill Bilek A this is the problem..? that the West Bank is not mentioned! The thing is that Israel occupies foreign land and subjectw miilion of people under occupation. It violates International Law by transerring settlers in the occupies territories ( The Geneva Convention in particular). Note the same happens here in Cyprus with Turkey!
Bill Bilek You are lying again, you are trying to disconnect Palestinians with their land and their national identity..You avoid to comment on the ιncontrovertible demographic data. The Jews started their settlement experience in the late 19th century!!! For 2000 years there were only few Jews in the era!!! The settlement experiment provoked their insecurity…Do not forget Palestine was " not a Land without People for People without Land". It was not empty! Despite settlement only 600.000 Jews went to Palestine among 2 miliion Palestinians. And they had only the 6 per cent of the land. What do you suppose ? They would open their houses and say welcome…
Bill Bilek You try to disorientate again! You are citing just a brief…mention from a book. I cited 3 Books!!
Nick Panayiotides Part 6:
10) “Again, West Bank is occupied”
How exactly, did that come to be?
11) “What Lord Caradon said later is insignificant!!!”
That is IDIOCY! Lord Carradon WROTE UNSC 242!!!! As you note, the wording is: “(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;””
Not “all the territories”. Not “the” territories. And those articles were omitted purposely, as was noted AT THE TIME that 242 was passed. Israeli withdrawal from Sinai FULLY satisfies the LEGAL WORDING of the resolution.
12) “Don not forget that the JewishState was also born because of this recommendation of the General Assembly and not of the Security Council!!!”
More idiotic nonsense. The Jewish state was born because the Jewish People declared their independence and then successfully defended their territory The UN had NOTHING to do with it (all the more so since it refused to Stand by its recommendation, and averted its eyes as 5 Arab armies tried to exterminate the nascent state, and then refused to abide by their commitments made under UN auspices for the next 19 years!!
13) “The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9, 1948”
“See also Ilan Pappe a tremendous research on the issue”
“Those critical of his work include Benny Morris (who described some of Pappe’s writing as "complete fabrication" and accused him of being either sloppy or dishonest in his work),[28][29][30] Efraim Karsh,[31][32][33][34] Herbert London and Steven Plaut,[35] as well as professors Daniel Gutwein[36] and Yossi Ben-Artzi[37] from Haifa University. Pappé has replied to this criticism, condemning Morris for holding "abominable racist views about the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular."[19][20][38][39][40]
In 2012, the Journal of Palestine Studies (JPS) translated and published the 1937 Ben-Gurion letter after the pro-Israel media monitoring group CAMERA reported an error in an article that Pappé wrote for the JPS after CAMERA informed them that a quote in the article had been incorrectly attributed to Ben-Gurion.[41][42] Nonetheless, the JPS stated that the translated letter confirmed that, regardless of Pappé’s citation errors, the underlying interpretation of the letter provided by Pappé’s article and book was sound.[43] CAMERA countered by providing the original, handwritten letter by Ben-Gurion, and charged not only that the pertinent phrase had been incorrectly translated, but that the article also incorrectly interpreted the context of the letter.”
I will “see” your Ilan Pappe, and raise you Professor Eugene Kontorovich:
https://www.law.uchicago.edu/recordings/eugene-kontorovich-disputing-occupation-israels-borders-international-law-0
14) “What I support is the application of the “ Two State Solution””
Read this week’s antisemitic diatribe by Mahmoud Abbas, and talk to all of us some more about a “Two state solution”!
Nick Panayiotides Part 5:
“The Arab streets are curiously deserted and, ardently following the poor example of the more moneyed class there has been an exodus from Jerusalem too, though not to the same extent as in Jaffa and Haifa.”�- London Times, May 5, 1948
“Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the -Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit.. . . It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.”�- The London weekly Economist, October 2, 1948”
And more:
8) “The demographic data is the ROOT of the Conflict.”
NO! The root of the conflicts is the absolute Arab refusal to accept a (dhimmi) nation state of the Jewish People in ANY part of its ancestral homeland.
9)_ “Would you accept some foreigners to come in your region and say “ Ah it’s a good region, lets make a s state here and expel the natives? “
Nothing of the sort happened. The League of Nations, by unanimous vote, provided for a national home for the Jewish People in Palestine based on history. And that became, and continues to be, valid international law.
Nick Panayiotides Part 4:
“…the Jewish hagana asked (using loudspeakers) Arabs to remain at their homes but the most of the Arab population followed their leaders who asked them to leave the country.”�The TIMES of London, reporting events of 22.4.48
“The existence of these refugees is a direct result of the Arab States’ opposition to the partition plan and the reconstitution of the State of Israel. The Arab states adopted this policy unanimously and the responsibility of its results, therefore is theirs.”�…The flight of Arabs from the territory allotted by the UN for the Jewish state began immediately after the General Assembly decision at the end of November 1947. This wave of emigration, which lasted several weeks, comprised some thirty thousand people, chiefly well-to-do-families.”�- Emil Ghory, secretary of the Arab High Council, Lebanese daily Al-Telegraph, 6 Sept 1948
“One morning in April 1948, Dr. Jamal woke us to say that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC), led by the Husseinis, had warned Arab residents of Talbieh to leave immediately. The understanding was that the residents would be able to return as conquerors as soon as the Arab forces had thrown the Jews out. Dr. Jamal made the point repeatedly that he was leaving because of the AHC’s threats, not because of the Jews, and that he and his frail wife had no alternative but to go.”
“The Arab streets are curiously deserted and, ardently following the poor example of the more moneyed class there has been an exodus from Jerusalem too, though not to the same extent as in Jaffa and Haifa.”�- London Times, May 5, 1948
“Even amidst the violent attacks launched against us for months past, we call upon the sons of the Arab people dwelling in Israel to keep the peace and to play their part in building the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its institutions, provisional and permanent.�“We extend the hand of peace and good-neighborliness to all the States around us and to their people, and we call upon them to cooperate in mutual helpfulness with the independent Jewish nation in its Land. The State of Israel is prepared to make its contribution in a concerted effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.”�- David Ben-Gurion, in Israel’s Proclamation of Independence, read on May 14, 1948, moments before the 6 surrounding Arab armies, trained and armed by the British, invaded the day-old Jewish micro-state, with the stated goal of extermination.
“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, THEY ABANDONED THEM, FORCED THEM TO EMIGRATE AND TO LEAVE THEIR HOMELAND, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe, as if we were condemmed to change places with them; they moved out of their ghettos and we occupied similar ones. The Arab States succeeded in scattering the Palestinian people and in destroying their unity. They did not recognize them as a unified people until the States of the world did so, and this is regrettable”.�- by Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), from the article titled: “What We Have Learned and What We Should Do”, published in Falastin el Thawra, the official journal of the PLO, of Beirut, in March 1976
“The first group of our fifth column consists of those who abandon their houses and businesses and go to live elsewhere. . . . At the first sign of trouble they take to their heels to escape sharing the burden of struggle.”�
– Ash Shalab (Jaffa newspaper), January 30, 1948
Nick Panayiotides Part 3:
6) “Whose descendants were those Arabs who were expelled “
I am not sure what your question here is asking.
7) “ according with your argument left voluntarily (SIC) ???” “
Not “MY” argument. I provided you with reams of contemporaneous news reports showing that most left at the behest of their leaders, never even having seen an Israeli soldier.
Here is more:
““The Secretary General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine and of Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade… He pointed out that they were already on the frontiers and that all the millions the Jews had spent on land and economic development would be easy booty, for it would be a simple matter to throw Jews into the Mediterranean. . . Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes, and property and to stay temporarily in neighboring fraternal states, lest the guns of the invading Arab armies mow them down.”�- Habib Issa, Secretary General of the Arab League (Azzam Pasha’s successor), in the newspaper Al Hoda, June 8, 1951
“Some of the Arab leaders and their ministers in Arab capitals . . . declared that they welcomed the immigration of Palestinian Arabs into the Arab countries until they saved Palestine. Many of the Palestinian Arabs were misled by their declarations…. It was natural for those Palestinian Arabs who felt impelled to leave their country to take refuge in Arab lands . . . and to stay in such adjacent places in order to maintain contact with their country so that to return to it would be easy when, according to the promises of many of those responsible in the Arab countries (promises which were given wastefully), the time was ripe. Many were of the opinion that such an opportunity would come in the hours between sunset and sunrise.”�- Arab Higher Committee, in a memorandum to the Arab League, Cairo, 1952, quoted in The Refugee in the World, by Joseph B. Schechtman, 1963
“…our city flourished and developed for the good of both Jewish and Arab residents … Do not destroy your homes with your own hands; do not bring tragedy upon yourselves by unnecessary evacuation and self-imposed burdens. By moving out you will be overtaken by poverty and humiliation. But in this city, yours and ours, Haifa, the gates are open for work, for life, and for peace, for you and your families.”�The Haifa Workers’ Council bulletin, 28 April 1948
Nick Panayiotides Part 5:
I am going to list many of the questions that I have raised in response to your comments, but which you have not addressed, in the hope that you either have factual answers, or accept to re-examine your ideological positions:
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)
" it violates international law,"
Which law does the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel violate, specifically?
Please provide a link to the international law on “self-determination” that existed in 1922.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
242 UNSC does explicitly state that "West Bank is occupied and Israel is the occupatory power".
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?
" 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?
Nick Panayiotides Part 4:
8) “The demographic data is the ROOT of the Conflict.”
NO! The root of the conflicts is the absolute Arab refusal to accept a (dhimmi) nation state of the Jewish People in ANY part of its ancestral homeland.
9)_ “Would you accept some foreigners to come in your region and say “ Ah it’s a good region, lets make a s state here and expel the natives? “
Nothing of the sort happened. The League of Nations, by unanimous vote, provided for a national home for the Jewish People in Palestine based on history. And that became, and continues to be, valid international law.
10) “Again, West Bank is occupied”
How exactly, did that come to be?
11) “What Lord Caradon said later is insignificant!!!”
That is IDIOCY! Lord Carradon WROTE UNSC 242!!!! As you note, the wording is: “(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;””
Not “all the territories”. Not “the” territories. And those articles were omitted purposely, as was noted AT THE TIME that 242 was passed. Israeli withdrawal from Sinai FULLY satisfies the LEGAL WORDING of the resolution.
12) “Don not forget that the JewishState was also born because of this recommendation of the General Assembly and not of the Security Council!!!”
More idiotic nonsense. The Jewish state was born because the Jewish People declared their independence and then successfully defended their territory The UN had NOTHING to do with it (all the more so since it refused to Stand by its recommendation, and averted its eyes as 5 Arab armies tried to exterminate the nascent state, and then refused to abide by their commitments made under UN auspices for the next 19 years!!
13) “The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9, 1948”
“See also Ilan Pappe a tremendous research on the issue”
“Those critical of his work include Benny Morris (who described some of Pappe’s writing as "complete fabrication" and accused him of being either sloppy or dishonest in his work),[28][29][30] Efraim Karsh,[31][32][33][34] Herbert London and Steven Plaut,[35] as well as professors Daniel Gutwein[36] and Yossi Ben-Artzi[37] from Haifa University. Pappé has replied to this criticism, condemning Morris for holding "abominable racist views about the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular."[19][20][38][39][40]
In 2012, the Journal of Palestine Studies (JPS) translated and published the 1937 Ben-Gurion letter after the pro-Israel media monitoring group CAMERA reported an error in an article that Pappé wrote for the JPS after CAMERA informed them that a quote in the article had been incorrectly attributed to Ben-Gurion.[41][42] Nonetheless, the JPS stated that the translated letter confirmed that, regardless of Pappé’s citation errors, the underlying interpretation of the letter provided by Pappé’s article and book was sound.[43] CAMERA countered by providing the original, handwritten letter by Ben-Gurion, and charged not only that the pertinent phrase had been incorrectly translated, but that the article also incorrectly interpreted the context of the letter.”
I will “see” your Ilan Pappe, and raise you Professor Eugene Kontorovich:
https://www.law.uchicago.edu/recordings/eugene-kontorovich-disputing-occupation-israels-borders-international-law-0
14) “What I support is the application of the “ Two State Solution””
Read this week’s antisemitic diatribe by Mahmoud Abbas, and talk to all of us some more about a “Two state solution”!
Nick Panayiotides Part 3:
“Even amidst the violent attacks launched against us for months past, we call upon the sons of the Arab people dwelling in Israel to keep the peace and to play their part in building the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its institutions, provisional and permanent.�“We extend the hand of peace and good-neighborliness to all the States around us and to their people, and we call upon them to cooperate in mutual helpfulness with the independent Jewish nation in its Land. The State of Israel is prepared to make its contribution in a concerted effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.”�- David Ben-Gurion, in Israel’s Proclamation of Independence, read on May 14, 1948, moments before the 6 surrounding Arab armies, trained and armed by the British, invaded the day-old Jewish micro-state, with the stated goal of extermination.
“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, THEY ABANDONED THEM, FORCED THEM TO EMIGRATE AND TO LEAVE THEIR HOMELAND, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe, as if we were condemmed to change places with them; they moved out of their ghettos and we occupied similar ones. The Arab States succeeded in scattering the Palestinian people and in destroying their unity. They did not recognize them as a unified people until the States of the world did so, and this is regrettable”.�- by Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), from the article titled: “What We Have Learned and What We Should Do”, published in Falastin el Thawra, the official journal of the PLO, of Beirut, in March 1976
“The first group of our fifth column consists of those who abandon their houses and businesses and go to live elsewhere. . . . At the first sign of trouble they take to their heels to escape sharing the burden of struggle.”�- Ash Shalab (Jaffa newspaper), January 30, 1948
“The Arab streets are curiously deserted and, ardently following the poor example of the more moneyed class there has been an exodus from Jerusalem too, though not to the same extent as in Jaffa and Haifa.”�- London Times, May 5, 1948
“Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the -Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit.. . . It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.”�- The London weekly Economist, October 2, 1948”
And more:
Nick Panayiotides Part 1 (b)
2) “you are a lying, Jerusalem Post http://www.jpost.com/…/Palestinian-Central-Council…"
According to the PLO Charter, it is the PNC that must vote to change anything in the Charter. It never did, so nothing was changed, and there is nothing to “suspend”. This PNC “call” is smoke and mirrors for public non-Arab consumption.
3) “Bill this Happened through force There have been Jews in the Holy Land continuously for 4000 years. The Jewish People are indigenous to the land. More Jews started returning to the area in the mid-19th century, as the Ottoman Empire opened up to the West, law and order was returned somewhat to the area, and modes of transportation improved. At the time, the Ottomans introduced the land reform laws of the Tanzimat. This laws invited the Arabs (fellaheen) living on state land to register the land they were working as serfs, and become owners. Most of the Arabs refused, because becoming legal landowners entailed paying taxes, and being available for the draft into the Ottoman Army. Most of the land was then “bought” and distributed to rich Arabs, many friends of the Sultan, and they managed their lands from distant Istanbul, Cairo, and Beirut. They also sold much of their land to immigrating Jews. The Jews have legal deeds. The Arabs for the most part, do not. (Those that do, have their deeds respected, and have access to the Israeli courts if they feel they have lost their rights.)
4) “and the usurpation of the human rights of the Palestinians”
Firstly, no Arab identified himself as “Palestinian” before 1964. Secondly. What “human rights” do you allege that Arabs were deprived of by Jews legally buying land in the Ottoman Empire?
5) “The other belonged to the Palestinians.” “ continue falsely to disconnect the Palestinians with their land”
Show me the deeds!
Nick Panayiotides Apparently most of my follow up response did not post. I will try again:
Part 1:
You claim that PLO did not recognize Israel during the OSLO Accords. A total lie!!!!
Please show (cut and paste) exactly where in the Oslo Accords that the PLO “recognized Israel”.
In fact, “Israel–Palestine Liberation Organization letters of recognition (or Israel-PLO Recognition or Letters of Mutual Recognition) were a series of official letters of recognition between the government of Israel and its Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Chairman Yasser Arafat dated September 9, 1993. The letters set the stage for, and were in reality the "preamble" to, the Oslo Accords “
The context of Arafat’s letter is as follows:
“September 9, 1993
Yitzhak Rabin
Prime Minister of Israel
Mr. Prime Minister,
The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era…I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments: The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security. The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. The PLO commits itself…to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations…the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators…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.
Sincerely,
Yasser Arafat.
Chairman: The Palestine Liberation Organization.”
This was never done! The PNC never changed the PLO Charter. It remains as was, calling for the destruction of Israel. If you believe that I am mistaken, please provide a link to the amended PLO Charter that was amended by the PNC to show “recognition of Israel”.
And furthermore: