According to International law and agreements Palestine is Jewish Land - YJ Draiman

According to International law and agreements Palestine is Jewish Land

Extensive research establishes the following facts. If you read the 1917 Balfour Declaration (Which emulated Napoleons 1799 letter to the Jewish community in Palestine promising that The National Home for The Jewish people will be reestablished in Palestine, as the Jews are the rightful owners). Nowhere does it state an Arab entity west of The Jordan Rive. The San Remo Conference of 1920 does not state an Arab entity west of The Jordan River (which was confirmed by the August 1920 Treaty of Sevres Article 95). The Mandate for Palestine terms does not state an Arab entity west of the Jordan River. It specifically states a Jewish National Home in Palestine without limiting the Jewish territory in Palestine. It also states that the British should work with the Jewish Agency as the official representative of the Jews in Palestine to implement the National Home of the Jewish people in Palestine. I stress again; nowhere does it state that an Arab entity should be implemented west of the Jordan River.
As a matter of historical record, The British reallocated over 77% of Jewish Palestine to the Arab-Palestinians in 1922 with specific borders and Jordan took over additional territory like the Gulf of Aqaba which was not part of the allocation to Jordan.

No where in any of the above stated agreements or resolutions does it provides or states for an Arab entity west of the Jordan River. It specifically states political right to the Jewish people. The U.N. resolutions are non-binding with no legal standing. The Oslo Accords are null and voisd
YJ Draiman

And here’s something modern history has conveniently forgotten: “Arabs welcome Jews home”

The Emir Hussein of the Hejaz replied “with an expression of goodwill towards a kindred Semitic race”, when the Balfour Declaration was communicated to him in 1918, and his son Feisal, acting officially for the Arab movement, wrote on March 3, 1919:

Throughout Arabia, the chiefs were for the most part, distinctly pro-Zionist, as were the Palestinian peasantry, who were delighted at the benefits that Jewish immigration was bringing them. The Muslim religious leader, the Mufti, was openly friendly, even taking a prominent part in the ceremony of laying the foundation stone of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

And what of “Arab nationalism”? At that time, no one had heard of a “Palestine Arab people”; the term was not invented until after 1964, entirely for political reasons. The British Peace Handbook No. 60, published in 1918, declared that “the people west of the Jordan are not Arabs, but only Arab speaking… In the Gaza district they are mostly of Egyptian origin; elsewhere they are of the most mixed race…they (the Arabs of Palestine) have little if any national sentiment…they hide their weapons at the call of patriotism.”

The idea that Palestine should be Arab was never even contemplated. On the contrary, the attitude of the Arabs to the Jewish National Movement was one of almost unanimous approval. In 1906, Farid Kassab, a famous Syrian author, expressed the view uniformly held by the Arabs: “The Jews of the Orient are at home. This land is their only fatherland. They don’t know any other.” A year later, Dr. Moses Gaster reported that he had “held conversations with some of the leading sheiks, and they all expressed pleasure at the advent of the Jews, for they considered that with them had come ‘barakat’ – blessing, since the rain came in due season.”

The Emir Hussein of the Hejaz replied “with an expression of goodwill towards a kindred Semitic race”, when the Balfour Declaration was communicated to him in 1918, and his son Feisal, acting officially for the Arab movement, wrote on March 3, 1919:XX

“We Arabs look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement. Our deputation in Paris is fully acquainted with the proposals submitted yesterday by the Zionist Organization to the Peace Conference and we regard them as moderate and proper. We will do our best, insofar as we are concerned, to help them through. We will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home.” 

Make no mistake about it. Israel is morally and legally entitled by International Law and post WWI agreements to occupy the entire territory of the original Balfour Declaration, including all of what is now the country of Jordan.

.

Let us have no more stupid talk about the creation of a Two-State solution. The “Two-State Solution” currently exists; there are two sovereign nations now occupying “the national home for the Jewish people”—Israel and Jordan. And let us have no more stupid talk about “the West Bank” aka Judea and Samaria or “the occupied territories.” Those geographical areas are Israel, period!

.

Those areas are no more “occupied territories” than is the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or the State of Texas. If there is an “Occupied Territory” in the Middle East, it is Jordan who is unlawfully occupying over 75% of Israel’s homeland and the self-proclaimed “Arab-Palestinians” who are unlawfully occupying an additional 10-15% of Israel’s homeland. 

San Remo Peace Conference 1920 – Israel’s Magna Carta

On Sunday, April 25, 1920, after hectic deliberation, the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers (Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan and the U.S. acting as an observer) adopted the 1920 San Remo Resolution -- a 500 word document which defined the future political landscape of the Middle East out of the defunct Ottoman Empire.

This Resolution led to the granting of three Mandates, as defined in Article 22 of the 1919 Covenant of the League of Nations. The future states of Syria-Lebanon and Iraq emerged from two of these Mandates and became exclusively Arab countries. But in the third Mandate, the Supreme Council recognized the “historical connection of the Jewish people to Palestine and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country” with no restrictions on boundary, while safeguarding the “civil and religious rights” of the non-Jewish population. (Nowhere in any of the documents does it state an autonomy for the Arab-Palestinians west of the River Jordan),

Subsequently, the British violated the agreement and limited the Jewish Homeland in Palestine to the area only west of the Jordan River and allowed eastern Palestine to be gradually administered by the Hashemites. The territorial expansion to the east eventually gave birth to the new Arab Kingdom of Transjordan, later renamed Jordan in 1950.

The importance of the San Remo Conference with regard to Palestine aka The Land of Israel cannot be overstated:

·     For the first time in history, Palestine became a legal and political entity;

·     The Jewish people were exclusively recognized as the national beneficiary of the trust granted to Britain as trustee in Palestine for the duration of the Mandate -- a “sacred trust of civilization” as per the League Covenant;

·     The Balfour Declaration of 1917 -- which “viewed with favour” the establishment of a Jewish National Home in Palestine -- was now to be “put into effect” and thus became a binding act of international law;

·     The de jure sovereignty of Palestine with no limitation of territory was vested only in the Jewish people, though it was kept in abeyance until the Mandate expired in 1948;

·     The terms of the 1920 San Remo Resolution were included in the Treaty of Sèvres article 95 and remained unchanged in the finally ratified Treaty of Lausanne of 1923.

·     The Arabs received equivalent national rights in all the remaining parts of the Middle East -- over 96% of the total area of over 13 million sq. km. with a wealth of oil reserves which was formerly governed by the Ottoman Turks).

The 1920 San Remo Conference and the resulting internationally recognized legal international resolutions was hailed as a major historical milestone. Celebrations were held throughout the world with tens of thousands of people marching in London, New York and Toronto. But the Arabs of Palestine, led by the Mufti of Jerusalem, were strongly opposed to any form of National Jewish homeland: the first anti-Jewish riots erupted in Jaffa just before the 1920 San Remo Conference convened -- a harbinger of the violent Arab rejectionist stance that continues to threaten the existence of Israel to this day.

While the Middle East peace process which the Arabs continually violate has been going on for over two decades, it is astonishing that the 1920 San Remo and the ensuing Mandate for Palestine have hardly been mentioned. Is it deliberate? Is it a mere omission? How could there be peace and reconciliation without acknowledging these fundamental historical and legal facts?

Middle-East diplomacy has often relied on “constructive ambiguity”, a concept earlier introduced by Henry Kissinger to keep the dialogue open and avoid discussing core issues deemed problematic. In the ongoing peace process, the ambiguity of language did not produce constructive results. On the contrary, layer upon layer of distortions and gross falsehoods piled up over the initial ambiguity of “land for peace.” Which only aggravated the situation and brought about more terror and violence.

When the notion of “occupation” not liberation as it should be, took root, it soon turned into an illusion of “illegal occupation”, then “brutal oppression” and, finally, “apartheid” which is a crime against humanity in international law. Once corrupted language describes an indistinct reality and the distortion spreads, thought becomes corrupt and any resulting action is bound to fail.

Commemorating the 1920 San Remo Conference should be more than a mere remembrance. It enjoins us to consider the legal reach of the binding decisions made in 1920 by the Supreme Allied Powers and to ensure that we do not entertain incompatible positions when political expediency clashes with unassailable rights enshrined in a valid international law, namely the guaranteed acquired rights of the Jewish people in their ancestral land.

No wonder the Arab Palestinian Authority -- intent on eliminating the “Zionist entity,” as spelled out in the PLO Charter -- abhors the provisions of the 1920 San Remo Resolution, which they view as the root of a catastrophe engineered by “Zionist gangs.” But ignore the catastrophe of the over a million Jewish families forcefully expelled from Arab countries and all their assets confiscated; all the while they were mostly resettled in The Land of Israel.

In reality, the 1920 San Remo Resolution and the ensuing clauses of the Mandate for Palestine are akin to a treaty entered into and executed by each and every one of the 52 member states of the League of Nations, in addition to the United States which is bound by a separate treaty with Great Britain, ratified in 1925 and by a vote of The U.S. Congress and signed by the President of the United States.

So next time you hear about the “occupation of the West Bank” and its supposedly “illegal settlements” -- an almost daily occurrence in the discourse of the Arab-Palestinians and their supporters -- you should remember that this territory, as the rest of Israel, was lawfully restored to the Jewish people in 1920 and its legal title has been internationally guaranteed and never revoked ever since, thus, it cannot be revoked legally. Any negotiation toward achieving a lasting peace should be based on these premise.

Last but not least, the 1920 San Remo resolutions marks the end of the longest colonization period in history.

After 1,850 years of foreign occupation, oppression and banishment by a succession of foreign powers (Romans, Byzantines, Sassanid Persians, Muslims/Arabs, Crusaders, Mameluks and Ottoman Turks), the Nation of Israel was reborn in April 1920, thus paving the way for the official proclamation of the State of Israel 28 years later. 

This liberation from foreign rule should normally be celebrated by all the progressive elites who have traditionally supported every national freedom movement. But it isn’t so, for reasons that defy reason.

What took place in San Remo in 1920 made Israel’s right to exist into an international legally binding and unavoidable documented fact. Connect with our history and share the pride!

Most people are not aware of the 1920 San Remo Conference which took place on April 19, 1920, by the Supreme Allied Powers, lasted for seven days and published its resolutions on April 25, 1920. These seven days laid the political foundation for the creation of the 22 Arab League States with over 13 million sq. km. and the one and only reconstituted Jewish State of Israel in Palestine with no restrictions on boundaries. The full text of the Balfour Declaration became an integral part of the 1920 San Remo resolution and the British Mandate for Palestine, thereby transforming it from a letter of intent into a legally-binding foundational document under international law. It was also accepted as part of the treaty of Sevres in September 1920 as Article 95.

At the 1920 San Remo, Chaim Weizmann proclaimed: This is the most momentous political event in the history of our movement and in the history of our people since our exile from our homeland."