It is a great relief to realize that Israel no longer has to endure being bullied on matters of life and death by its American ally, as has happened in the past, especially during the administrations of distinctly unfriendly presidents, including Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama. At last we have an administration that recognizes Israel’s need for strategic depth in the West Bank, and also understands that Israel has the historic, legal, and moral right, should it wish, to annex the entire West Bank.
Here, as reported by Reuters, is Secretary Pompeo’s most recent restatement of this recognition:
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday it was up to Israel whether to annex parts of the West Bank and said that Washington would offer its views privately to Israel’s new government, drawing a warning from Palestinians who vowed not to “stand handcuffed” if Israel formally took their land.
“As for the annexation of the West Bank, the Israelis will ultimately make those decisions,” Pompeo told reporters. “That’s an Israeli decision. And we will work closely with them to share with them our views of this in (a) private setting.”
Secretary Pompeo knows that there are two independent bases for Israel’s claim to Judea and Samaria (which the Jordanians renamed the “West Bank” in order to efface, toponymically, the Jewish connection to the land). The first is the Mandate for Palestine itself. That Mandate was created by the League of Nations for the sole purpose of establishing the Jewish National Home. A review of the system of mandates should prove useful, given how many now overlook the Mandate for Palestine’s intent. When the League of Nations established the Mandates system, following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, several mandates were created exclusively for the Arabs. France held the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon, Great Britain held the Mandate for Iraq. Those European powers were responsible for guiding the local populations to achieve independence. In the end, as we all know, the Arabs have managed to acquire 22 separate states, far more than any other people, states where they treat non-Arab Muslims – Kurds, Berbers, black Africans – with contumely or worse. And in many of those Arab states, non-Muslims are often humiliated, persecuted, and sometimes killed.
The territory reserved for the Mandate for Palestine originally extended from the Golan in the north to the Gulf of Aqaba in the south, and from an area east of the Jordan River “out into the desert” to the Mediterranean. The British then unilaterally decided that all the territory east of the Jordan — 78% of the original territory of the Mandate – would be closed to Jewish immigration, so that it would become part of the newly-created Emirate of Transjordan (later the Kingdom of Jordan). What was left in the Palestine Mandate for the Jews was 22% of the territory that was originally to have been included. This was the sliver of land that went from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, and from the Golan to the Gulf of Aqaba. That Mandatory territory, that was to have formed part of the future Jewish state, included all of what became known as the West Bank.
What did the Mandate itself say about its purpose? Look at the Preamble to the Mandate:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
The declaration of November 2, 1917, which is referred to in the preamble, is the Balfour Declaration, which declared British support for the establishment of the Jewish National Home.
Note the phrase, too, about how “nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.” The drafters quite deliberately left out any mention of “political rights” because, of course, a Jewish National Home, leading to the establishment of a Jewish state, would necessarily impinge on the political rights of local Arabs.
Article 4 of the Mandate makes clear that it is to lead to the creation of a single Jewish National Home, and not to the creation of two states, Jewish and Arab, in the territory west of the Jordan that was ultimately assigned to the Mandate:
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.
The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty’s Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.
Article 6 of the Mandate calls on the mandatory authority to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and “encourage…close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands”:
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.
So to repeat yet again – and it deserves this constant repetition — the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) was always supposed to constitute part of the Jewish National Home. Thus it was intended by the Mandates Commission, headed by the Swiss law professor William Rappard, who was greatly distressed when the British unilaterally ended Jewish immigration east of the Jordan. Had the Jews managed to hold onto the West Bank in the 1948-49 war, it would have become, as the Mandate always intended it to be, part of Israel, every bit as much as Tel Aviv or Haifa or Ashdod. When the Jordanian army seized and held territory west of the Jordan in the 1948-49 war, Jordan emulated the Romans, who had renamed “Judea” as “Syria Palaestina” or “Palestine” to efface the Jewish connection to the land. The Jordanians renamed the parts of Judea and Samaria it now controlled as “the West Bank.”
Jordan was the illegal “occupier” of the West Bank from 1948 to 1967; its only claim was that of military possession. The juridical situation was quite different for Israel, its claim was based on the Mandate for Palestine itself. But, someone might object, hadn’t the Mandates system expired when the League of Nations, which had created the system of mandates, ceased to operate in 1946 and was soon replaced by the United Nations?
No, because by its own charter, the United Nations recognized the continued relevance of the Mandates system. The UN Charter, and specifically Article 80 of that Charter, implicitly recognize the “Mandate for Palestine” of the League of Nations. This Mandate granted Jews the irrevocable right to settle in the area of Palestine, anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Professor Eugene Rostow, then the Dean of Yale Law School, explained the significance of Article 80:
This right [of settlement by the Jews] is protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. The Mandates of the League of Nations have a special status in international law, considered to be trusts, indeed ‘sacred trusts.’
Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab ‘people’ of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a substantial claim to the sovereign possession of the occupied territories.
To sum up: the Jewish claim to the “West Bank” is based clearly on the Palestine Mandate of the League of Nations, which gave Jews the right to settle anywhere between the Jordan and the Mediterranean. That right was not extinguished when the League of Nations came to an end. Article 80 of the U.N. Charter recognized the continuing relevance of the Mandate’s provisions. The West Bank always formed part of the territory assigned to the Jewish National Home, where the British were to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and to “encourage close settlement by Jews on the land.” Jordan was an “illegal occupier” of the West Bank from 1948 to 1967. In 1967, through its military victory, Israel at last became able to enforce the claim it had never relinquished. Even though the British had closed off the territory immediately to the east of the Jordan to Jewish settlement, effectively taking it out of the Mandate, the territory from the Jordan River westward to the Mediterranean (and from the Golan in the north to the Gulf of Aqaba in the south) remained, without further alteration, as the territory which was assigned to become the Jewish National Home. That is why Pompeo knows that it is up to Israel alone to decide how much of the West Bank it will annex.
owensgate says
Annex ALL of the “Promised Land” NOW. Never mind what the World thinks – it’s none of their business.
mortimer says
og: this is not a religious matter, it is a political matter, based on established legal provisions from 100 years ago that have not yet been fully carried out.
mortimer says
Do and be done with it. Nothing will happen as a result, but stability in the region. The Muslim countries will squawk and then go back to sleep. They have too many internal problems of their own.
END THIS PSYCHODRAMA. Make it official. Go for it. Now is the perfect time. Wait until after Ramadan.
gravenimage says
Yes–the US moved their Embassy to Jerusalem, and Muslims huffed and puffed, but did nothing.
mortimer says
Dean Eugene Rostow’s comment is all Israel needs:
“This right [of settlement by the Jews] is protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. The Mandates of the League of Nations have a special status in international law, considered to be trusts, indeed ‘sacred trusts.’
Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab ‘people’ of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a substantial claim to the sovereign possession of the occupied territories.”
Go for it. If the Pallies don’t like Israel, they will be welcomed into Jordan.
Frank Anderson says
I wonder what would be the various arguments concerning all of the territory of the United States? How was it acquired? Anybody want to dispute title?
somehistory says
The Almighty God and Creator of mankind and the earth (which He owns) upon which everyone lives, gave the Land to the descendants of Abraham…to Isaac’s son, Israel and his twelve sons (and at least one daughter benefited from this “Divine gift.”) These sons and their offspring were to live on and cultivate the land and take care of it.
There was no “provision” then for other nations to come in and have a special share of the land, dividing it up and making rules about where the sons of Israel could dwell and build houses.
It seems that the British didn’t fulfill the “mandate” as they were supposed to do and the Jews have had to live with this illegal/immoral decision for all of these years.
The moslims…arabs…are never satisfied, so why not just do what Israel needs to do, what they were supposed to be allowed to do and be done with it?
It is impossible to satisfy moslims. They don’t even agree among themselves, so they never will agree with anyone, person or State, that is not bowing to their demands and converting to the filth of islam.
Even if God had never given Israel the land…that came to be called the “Land of Israel”… the human “mandate” did set out the “land” that was to be a home for the Jews. This should be honored. It should have been oh-so-many years ago. Let the moslims learn to live with it. They never “learn,” but that shouldn’t be the fate of Israelis to suffer indefinitely.
Many, countless, moslims have stated their goal is to see Israel’s Jews completely wiped out. So, if they continue to have what is not legally and morally theirs, they will continue to terrorize the Jews. If they don’t continue to have what is not theirs, they will continue to terrorize the Jews, but will not have so much control of where they do this.
Charlie in NY says
Very concise statement of the legal argument for Israel’s superior right to sovereignty. Whenever anyone (or any state) blithely states that Israel would violate international law should it extend its jurisdiction to any part of Area C, the only response should be “show me your legal argument.” International law is not a population contest. The narrow legal issue at this point is which group has the superior claim, the Jewish people or the Palestinian people. And the reasoning can only be based on existing legal doctrines of international law. Special rules only applicable to Israel would be neither international nor law. But if that is the basis for an anti-Israel position, the proponent should at least have the courage of his convictions to admit it.
Charlie in NY says
Typo: not “population” but “popularity”
tgusa says
If the US government can import muslims in to American cities, effectively annexing and creating islamic settlements, without consulting the local population, in places such as Minneapolis I see no reason why they could be rightfully opposed to Jewish settlements or the annexation of the West Bank. And no, as a result of US government actions and applying the same criteria the Israelis do not have to ask permission.
OLD GUY says
Israel needs to defend its self against the islamic states. America needs to stand with Israel in this fight and also needs to stop the migration of muslims/islamic persons into America. Islam is not a “religion” it is a political movement by muslim countries that want nothing short of world domination using the same strategies that Hitler tried in the 40s.
Unfortunately we have allowed thousands of muslim/islamic followers and supporters into our country through open immigration laws. If we continue this migration they will not need to bring an army over here to defeat us, they will already be here and will have infiltrated our government at all levels. I fear our grandchildren and great grandchildren will have to bow to the east, if we do not stop this migration.
gravenimage says
Secretary of State Pompeo: West Bank Annexation is Israel’s Decision (Part 1)
……………..
*Good*.