Under
international law as embodied in the Mandate for Palestine, Jews were
permitted and even encouraged to settle in every part of Palestine.
Therefore, your references to “illegal” Jewish
settlements in “East Jerusalem ”, Judea and Samaria are completely baseless, the accusation you make
thus lacking even a grain of truth. Further to this, there exists no legal
entity called “East Jerusalem ”. Jerusalem is a united city under Israeli sovereignty – just
as Berlin is a united city under German sovereignty – and you
should thus refrain from using a term that has no official existence.
The principal documents of international law that
established Jewish legal title to the entire Land of Israel or former Mandated Palestine – and not merely to
the State of Israel – are the following:
1. The Smuts Resolution of
January 30, 1919 adopted at the Paris Peace Conference designated “Palestine”
as one of six mandated territories to be created; the term
"Palestine" as used in 1919 was synonymous with the Jewish National
Home, as evidenced by the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917 and the
Feisal-Weizmann Agreement of January 3, 1919; the Smuts Resolution, named for
the South African statesman General Jan Christiaan Smuts, became Article 22 of
the Covenant of the League of Nations that created the Mandates System.
2. The 1920 San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920 adopted by the Principal Allied Powers –
Britain, France, Italy and Japan – set aside all of Palestine as the land
designated for the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home, based on the
historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine.
3. The Franco-British Boundary Convention of December 23, 1920 fixing the northern and northeastern boundary of Palestine with Syria-Lebanon made it clear beyond any doubt
that Judea , Samaria and Gaza were to be parts of the Jewish National Home.
4.
The Mandate for Palestine confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922
details all the Jewish rights to Palestine , in particular, the right of Jewish settlement in all
regions of the country with no restrictions.
The Mandate for P
5. The Anglo-American Convention Respecting the Mandate for
Palestine concluded on December 3,
1924 was proclaimed by U.S. President Calvin Coolidge on December 5, 1925, thus
becoming – under Article VI of the US Constitution – part of the supreme law of
the United States; under this Convention the United States recognized
an undivided Palestine as the Jewish National Home. The present
policy of the US Executive favoring a two-state solution and denying the right
of Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria is consequently in violation of US public law;
6. Article 70(1)(b) of the 1969 Vienna Convention
on the Law of Treaties continues in
force the legal rights of the Jewish People to
the Land of Israel derived from the Mandate which comes
under its purview. Article 70(1)(b) reads as follows:
Article 70
Consequences of the Termination of a Treaty
1. Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties
otherwise agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in
accordance with the present Convention:
a)…
b) does not affect any right, obligation or legal
situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to
its termination.
This provision of international law is in effect a
codification of a legal norm that existed long before the
Vienna Convention was concluded (1969). Hence all the legal rights and title
of de jure sovereignty that inhered in the Jewish People under
the Mandate continued unabated in full force in favor of the State of Israel
after the termination of the Mandate on midnight of May 14-15, 1948 –
specifically the right of Jewish
settlement.
7. Article 80 of the UN Charter is another provision of international law that has
a direct bearing on Jewish legal rights to the Land of Israel . It provides as follows:
Article 80
Except as may be agreed upon in individual trusteeship
agreements… placing each territory under the trusteeship system, and until such
agreements have been concluded, nothing [in Chapter XII of the UN Charter dealing
with the International Trusteeship System] shall be construed in or of itself
to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or
the terms of existing international instruments to which the Members of the
United Nations may respectively be parties…
The long and short of Article 80 of the UN Charter is
that it preserves all the legal rights of the Jewish People to the Land of
Israel under the Mandate for Palestine which was still in force when the UN
Charter was ratified as a treaty in 1945. Any alteration or amendment to the
Mandate before its termination in 1948 could only be made in a trusteeship
agreement by the states directly concerned. Since no such agreement was ever
made at the relevant time before the expiration of the Mandate, all the rights
of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel derived from the Mandate were
preserved intact, particularly the right of Jewish settlement in all regions of
Mandated Palestine, a right that you so ignorantly deny. Article 80 remains of
value as a sure-fire defense to block UN infringement of Jewish national rights
in the recovered possessions of eastern Jerusalem , Judea and Samaria .
What the European Former Leaders Group has done is to
simply ignore the aforesaid documents of international law and begin its
analysis or understanding of the situation in the Middle East from the time of
the outbreak of the June 1967 Six-Day War. By adopting the wrong departure-date
in order to assess the overall Arab conflict with Israel , you have, conveniently for yourselves, attempted to
erase from memory the entire legal and diplomatic history that followed in the
wake of the dissolution of the Ottoman
Empire in 1918. This then
enables you to purport to change the legal status of the Land of Israel to suit
your pro-Arab prejudices and thus disregard Jewish legal rights to all of the
Jewish National Home embodied in international law during the period between
1919 and 1925, rights which remain in force to this very day.
While Jewish title to theLand of Israel has been recognized in international law in the
above-cited legal documents, there is no binding document of international law
that recognizes any Arab (what you falsely call “Arab-Palestinian”) rights to this
land. Despite this irrefutable fact, which makes a mockery of all your
proposals and recommendations, you have chosen to detour around this barrier of
truth by inventing and giving credence to the so-called “Arab-Palestinian” Arab
rights to the Land of Israel that have absolutely no foundation in international
law and, moreover, are prohibited by the doctrine of estoppel which protects
the acquired legal rights of the Jewish People to its homeland, including that
which you inaccurately call “East Jerusalem” and the “West Bank”, as if the
Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan still occupied this territory. There is also the issue of an existing Arab-Palestinian State in Jordan which over three quarters of the Jewish land was taken away from The Jewish allocated territory in violation of International agreements and given to the Arabs as a new State of Jordan.
While Jewish title to the
If a new Arab state of “Arab-Palestine ” were to be established, as you propose, the State of
Israel would be restricted to what the late former Foreign Minister of Israel,
Abba Eban, once called “the Auschwitz borders”. Moreover, the establishment of another so-called “Arab-Palestinian state” in the heartland of the Jewish National Home will
engender Arab irredentism to claim for themselves the rest of Palestine in what is now the State of Israel. Arab mortars,
missiles and rockets will in such a scenario rain down on the Jewish population
centers in Israel and will lead inevitably to a new war and even to the
possible destruction of the Jewish State. By advocating an irredentist Arab
state in the Land of Israel, you are, consciously or unconsciously (you may
take your choice!), yearning for the extinction of the Jewish State which the
Arabs have consistently sought ever since the Jews started in the 1880's to
return under the impetus of the Zionist Movement to their ancestral homeland.
My client has instructed me to remind the former
President of Germany, Richard von Weizsäcker, that his father, when he headed
the Foreign Office of the Third Reich under Hitler and Foreign Minister von
Ribbentrop, worked assiduously to advance Hitler’s diabolical plan to
annihilate European Jewry, as revealed in the recent study carried out by an
international team of distinguished historians. In a report of over 900 pages,
mention is made of an order signed by Director-General von Weizsäcker to his
subordinates to implement the transfer of the Jews of France to the furnaces
of Auschwitz . Your Excellency, by adding your name and signature to
the evil letter composed by the European Former Leaders Group (EFLG), you make
yourself an accessory to the aiding and abetting of the destruction of the Jews
of Israel. Do you truly wish to repeat the crimes of your father and finish the
work of the Third Reich? If this is not the case, you must publicly withdraw
your name and signature from this evil letter within a period not exceeding
thirty day from receipt of this letter.
Indeed, my client demands that not only the former
President of Germany, but each and every one of the august members of the
European Former Leaders Group whose name and signature is affixed to the letter
addressed to the President of the European Council withdraw his or her name and
issue a public apology to the Jewish People, in particular to the almost six
million Jews of Israel for having supported so evil and illegal a scheme that is
tantamount to a criminal conspiracy against the Jewish People to deprive them
of their ancient homeland, a scheme that could result in a new Holocaust in the
21st century. If you do not fulfill my client’s demands within
the same thirty-day period, you are all hereby notified that legal proceedings
will be taken against you jointly and severally in a European court of law,
where appropriate damages will be demanded for advocating a plan for the
extinction of the State of Israel and denying Jewish legal rights to all areas
of the Jewish National Home in the Land of Israel, rights that were legally
recognized under international law by your own countries when they were members
of the League of Nations.
Yours truly,
Howard Grief,
Attorney
Copies: Herman van Rompuy,
President of the European Council
Lady Catherine Ashton,
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
Any Israeli appeasement and capitulations
to Arab demands will bring more violence as past history has proven.
Arab terror and
violence has nullified any agreements with Israel It is Israel responsibility
to give a 90 day notice to the UN and the world at large that it intends to
exercise its historical and international rights under international law
agreements and treaties of post WWI which are still in effect and have not been
superseded or abrogated. Under those treaties all of what is defined as Palestine aka The Land of Israel is in effect
belongs to Israel and the Jewish people. The Oslo Accords
are null and void as the Arab-Palestinian leader Mahmmoud Abbas (who incites
terror and violence) stated to the U.N. that he is not abiding by its terms and
never has.
The Arabs and some
of the international community deceptively believe that Israel is the occupier of its own historical
territory.
It is the Arabs
who are the occupiers of Jewish territory and commit a continuous terror and
violence.
It is the Arab
countries who terrorized and expelled over a million Jewish families and
confiscated all their assets, including personal items, businesses, homes and
over 46,000 sq. mi. of Jewish owned Real estate for over 2,600 years. Most of
the expelled Jewish families from Arab countries were resettled in Israel and today comprise over half the
population in Israel .
The Arabs received
over 6 million sq. mi. of territory after WWI with a wealth of oil reserves and
these territories are not questioned including Jordan which is Jewish territory. But the
Arabs/Muslims will not be satisfied until they take over the whole world, not
just Israel .
It is time to face
reality and stop deluding yourselves; we are dealing with Arabs/Muslims who for
centuries cannot make peace between themselves; they are killing each other by
the millions; and you expect them to make peace with Israel . After 70 years of efforts and concessions
by Israel , it is time to change direction and
reclaim what is justly and legally Jewish territory.
YJ Draiman
Zahir muhsein an Arab-Palestinian leader; we
are all one people
Zahir Muhsein told
the following to the Dutch newspaper Trouw in a 1977 interview:
The Arab-Palestinian people
do not exist. The creation of a Arab-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, Arab-Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only
for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a
Arab-Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the
existence of a distinct ‘Arab-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 Arab-Palestinian, I can
undoubtedly demand Haifa , Jaffa ,
Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem . However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine aka Israel , we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan .
The fact of the matter is
that Arab “Palestinian” is neither an ethnicity, nor a nationality. Palestine aka Israel was never an Arab-Muslim country, but merely a region
within the greater Ottoman
Empire .
The Arab-Palestinians are
the occupiers of Jewish land Tell the World they are delusional in thinking
that Arabs belong in Israel - There will never be an Arab/Palestinian State
together or adjacent to Eretz Israel aka The Land of Israel. There has never
been such a nation as the Arab/Palestinian People. The Arab/Muslim Koran
specifically states in The Qur'an 17:104 - states the land belongs to the
Jewish people If the historic documents, comments written by eyewitnesses and
declarations by the most authoritative Arab scholars are still not enough, let
us quote the most important source for Muslim Arabs: "And thereafter we
[Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land.
And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a
mingled crowd'.". Any sincere Muslim must recognize the Land they call
"Palestine " as the Jewish
Homeland, according to the book considered by Muslims to be the most sacred
word and Allah's ultimate revelation.
Any
construction and building of housing in The Greater Israel west of the Jordan River is the right, duty and
obligation of the Israeli government. There is no such a thing as occupied
territory. It is the land of Israel for over 4,000 years,
going back to the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Sequence
of historical events, agreements and a non-broken series of treaties,
agreements and resolutions, as laid out by the April 1920 San Remo Resolution which
incorporated the Balfour Declarationas international law, and the League of
Nations carried out part of those agreements and togethere with the United
Nations, recognized the Jewish People title to the city of Jerusalem and the
rest of Israel as mandated at the April 1920 San Remo which also allocated the
Arabs over 6 million sq. mi. of territory with a wealth of oil reserves. Let
the Arab nations take the Arab Palestinians and settle them in the Million plus
Jewish homes and the over 46,000 sq. mi. of Jewish owned Real estate in the
Arab countries for over 2,600 years that the Arabs terrorized and expelled over
a million Jewish families from their countries which were resettled in Israel, and
allow the Jewish nation to live in peace.
A
true peace in the Middle East will be an economic phenomenon that the world
has never seen. But this can only be accomplished when there is a real and true
peace.
The
Arabs must stop preaching and teaching hate and violence to their children and
the masses. Any liberal Israeli that is delusional about Arab intention and
wants to give any land in Israel to the Arabs should
leave Israel ; he does not belong in
Israel .
YJ
Draiman
How many holidays do the Arabs-Muslims
celebrate due to historical events in the land of ancient Israel and Jerusalem .
The
Jewish people celebrate most of their holidays and fast days in memory of Jerusalem and Israel .
The Jewish soul is attached to Jerusalem and the goal and
aspiration to return to Israel and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem – where it was
before it was destroyed and desecrated by the enemies of the Jews. Many of the
Jewish prayers for thousands of years recite the love of Israel and the Jewish
aspirations to return to their ancestral land and bring back its glory and
holiness.
At Jewish weddings they break a glass in
memory of Jerusalem and the aspiration
to return and build the Temple .
YJ Draiman
No Jew or Jewish government has the right to evict Jews from their historical land in Israel. “Israel, including Judea and Samaria, and the land east of the Jordan River has been the land of the Jewish people since time immemorial, over 30 centuries. Judea means Land of the Jews. Never in the history of the world has there been an autonomous state in the area that was not Jewish.” There has never been a Nation known as Arab Palestine. The Arabs received over six million sq. mi. – 13 million sq. km. of territory with a wealth of oil reserves, but that was not enough. Violating international law and treaty the British allocated over three quarters of Jewish allocated land to the Arabs as the new Arab Palestinian state of Jordan. Now the Arabs want more; they will not stop until they have all of Israel without the Jews. The Arab countries expelled over a million Jewish families and confiscated all their assets including personal valuables, businesses, homes and over 46,332 sq. mi. (about 120,000 sq. km. which is 6 times the size of Israel) of Jewish owned land for over 25 centuries. No Jews are allowed to live in Jordan or in the West Bank area controlled by the Arab Palestinian Authority – Now you see it is the Arabs who are committing ethnic cleansing, just like they cleansed over a million Jewish families from Arab countries and now they are cleansing the millions of Christians and others.
ReplyDeleteThe Oslo Accord is null and void as Abbas stated in the summer of 2015 at the U.N.
You; the Arabs have murdered the Jews and others and now you want to inherit them?
In view of past history of persecution; Israel and the Jews have an obsolete obligation to defend themselves at all costs. NEVER AGAIN. It must be in action not just words. No capitulation to the biased world.
YJ Draiman
The San Remo Resolution of April 1920 on Palestine became Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres in 1920 signed by all the Allied Powers and which was intended to end the war with Turkey, but though this treaty was never ratified by the Turkish National Government of Kemal Ataturk, the Resolution retained its validity as an independent act of international law when it was inserted into the Preamble of the Mandate for Palestine and confirmed by 52 states. The San Remo Resolution of April 1920 is the base document upon which the Mandate was constructed and to which it had to conform. It is therefore the pre-eminent foundation document of the State of Israel and the crowning achievement of pre-state Zionism. It has been accurately described as the Magna Carta of the Jewish people. It is the best proof that the whole country of Palestine and the Land of Israel belong exclusively to the Jewish people under international law.
ReplyDeleteThe Mandate for Palestine implemented both the 1917 Balfour Declaration and Article 22 of the League Covenant, i.e. the San Remo Resolution of April 1920. All four of these acts were building blocks in the legal structure that was created for the purpose of bringing about the re-establishment of an independent sovereign Jewish state. The Balfour Declaration of 1917; in essence stated the principle or object of a Jewish state. The San Remo Resolution of April 1920 gave it the stamp of international law. The Mandate furnished all the details and means for the realization of the sovereign Jewish state. As noted, Britain’s as trustee and chief obligation as Mandatory, Trustee and Tutor was the creation of the appropriate political, administrative and economic conditions to secure the sovereign Jewish state in all of Palestine. All 28 articles of the Mandate were directed to this objective, including those articles that did not specifically mention the Jewish National Home. The Mandate for Palestine created a right of return for the Jewish people to Palestine and the right to establish settlements and communities on the land throughout the territory of Palestine in order to create the envisaged Jewish state.
The San Remo Resolution of April 1920 on Palestine incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 as international treaty with Article 22 of the League Covenant. This meant that the general provisions of Article 22 applied to the Jewish people exclusively, who would set up their home and state in all of Palestine. There was no intention to apply Article 22 to the Arabs of the country, as was mistakenly concluded by the Palestine Royal Commission which relied on that article of the Covenant as the legal basis to justify the partition of Palestine, apart from the other reasons it gave. The proof of the applicability of Article 22 to the Jewish people, including not only those in Palestine at the time, but those who were expected to arrive in large numbers in the future, is found in the Smuts Resolution, which became Article 22 of the Covenant. It specifically names Palestine as one of the countries to which this article would apply. There was no doubt that when Palestine was named in the context of Article 22, it was linked exclusively to the Jewish National Home, as set down in the 1917 Balfour Declaration, a fact everyone was aware of at the time, including the representatives of the Arab national movement, as evidenced by the agreement between Emir Feisal and Dr. Chaim Weizmann dated January 3, 1919 as well as an important letter sent by the Emir to future US Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter dated March 3, 1919. In that letter, Feisal characterized as “moderate and proper” the Zionist proposals presented by Nahum Sokolow and Weizmann to the Council of Ten at the Paris Peace Conference on February 27, 1919, which called for the development of all of Palestine into a Jewish commonwealth with extensive boundaries. The argument later made by Arab leaders that the 1917 Balfour Declaration and the Mandate for Palestine were incompatible with Article 22 of the Covenant is totally undermined by the fact that the Smuts Resolution – the precursor of Article 22 – specifically included Palestine within its legal framework.
ReplyDeleteThe phrase “in Palestine”, another expression found in the Balfour Declaration that generated much controversy, referred to the whole country, including both Cisjordan and Transjordan. It was absurd to imagine that this phrase could be used to indicate that only a part of Palestine was reserved for the future Jewish National Home, since both were created simultaneously and used interchangeably, with the term “Palestine” pointing out the geographical location of the future independent Jewish state. Had “Palestine” meant a partitioned country with certain areas of it set aside for Jews and others for Arabs, that intention would have been stated explicitly at the time the Balfour Declaration was drafted and approved and later adopted by the Principal Allied Powers. No such allusion was ever made in the prolonged discussions that took place in fashioning the Declaration and ensuring it international approval.
ReplyDeleteThere is therefore no juridical or factual basis for asserting that the phrase "in Palestine" limited the establishment of the Jewish National Home to only a part of the country. On the contrary, Palestine and the Jewish National Home were synonymous terms, as is evidenced by the use of the same phrase in the second half of the Balfour Declaration which refers to the existing non-Jewish communities "in Palestine", clearly indicating the whole country. Similar evidence exists in the preamble and terms of the Mandate Charter.