The San Remo Treaty of April 1920 - some relevant terms

The San Remo Treaty of April 1920 - some relevant terms

In paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the Protocol of San Remo Treaty of 1920, we read: "No territory of Palestine - Israel will be sold or leased or held in any way under the control of the government of any foreign power." Or: "The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights of other parts of the population are not altered, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and encourage, in cooperation with the Jewish Agency; The dense settlement of Jews on the all the land of Palestine - Israel, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes. " 
Finally, the Palestine Mandate states: "the Administration of Palestine is responsible for the adoption of a law on nationality. Included in this law must be provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who acquire permanent residence in Palestine."  At that time, it must be remembered, Palestine is not just the west bank – Judea and Samaria. Rather, it also includes, most importantly the majority (approx. 70%) of the territory which is the east bank of the Jordan River, where today is located the new Arab/Palestinian State of Jordan.
Britain reneged on its promises and violated Treaties   
What happens next is related to internal political changes in Britain and the election of a government hostile to the creation of a Jewish homeland throughout all the territory of Palestine - Israel. Thus Britain, having clearly supported the conclusions of the San Remo Conference of April 1920, changes its mind in violation of the treaty and weaves very tenuous diplomatic ties with the Arab countries surrounding the area of Palestine - Israel and with several Arab leaders (to control natural resources, such as oil).
The creation of Transjordan on Jewish and                                           

It was after this diplomatic rapprochement that Transjordan was created illegally in 1922. Transjordan is a semi-autonomous state like Britain led by Abdullah Hussein, son of Sharif Hussein of Mecca Ibn Ali, and great-grandfather Abdullah, the current king of Jordan. However, in regard to the east bank of the Jordan river– currently controlled by Jordan, and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) nothing has changed. Per San Remo Treaty of April 1920 and all subsequent agreed to documents, of these regions are still part of the territories over which the Jewish national home has to be re-established.

According to many lawyers, including Prof. Dr. Cho'hatman with Talya Einhoren, and American lawyer Eugene Rostov, one of the drafters of the famous U.N. Resolution 242 which is the partition plan of November 29, 1947 (The U.N. cannot supersede previous international agreements), does not change the situation either. Indeed, having been adopted by the U.N. General Assembly and not by the Security Council, it cannot be considered legally binding. Legally, it is only a recommendation that obtains legal validity in case of endorsement by the parties in question: the Jews and the Arabs. This plan was rejected by the Arab powers, thus, its status remains protocol.  For other lawyers, the partition plan has transformed the status of the Judea and Samaria territories into one of dispute.  On one hand, the Territories were not part of the state of Israel created in 1948.  On the other hand they do not belong to Jordan which occupied those lands from 1948 to 1967. The War of 1967 liberated said Territories returning them to the rightful owners the Jewish state of Israel.
The Jordanian occupation
Did the Jewish people temporarily lose the rights to Judea and Samaria with the Jordanian occupation between 1948 and 1967? For many lawyers, the answer is no. Jordan proclaimed itself sovereign of the territories after the war of independence with the support of only two countries, Britain and Pakistan. Moreover, the same Jordan decided in 1988 to abandon its sovereignty in Judea and Samaria. Incidentally, the term West Bank formally is no longer needed. It should also be known that many Arabs in the West Bank also known as Judea and Samaria are citizens of Jordan.
The dissolution of the League of Nations
Does the dissolution of the League of Nations which was replaced by the UN, and the end of the British Mandate for Palestine – Israel cause any change in the rights of the Jewish people to their land? Again, the answer is no because, under section 80 of the UN Charter, "nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as affecting directly or indirectly in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the Organization may be parties." Clearly, this means that the UN committed in 1945 to protect the legitimacy of the Jewish land rights established by the League of Nations in 1922.
For Professor Eugene Rostov, mentioned above, this means that "the rights of the Jewish people to settle in the land of Israel has never been interrupted on all the territory west of the Jordan River, and since a peace agreement has not and will not be signed between Israel and its neighbors the status has not changed."  He later wrote that under all international treaties and agreements, "Israel has an undeniable right to establish settlements in the West Bank – Judea and Samaria."
No unilateral approaches 
Did the Oslo agreements affect the status of Judea and Samaria under international law? Again, the answer is to be found in the texts themselves. Indeed, it is stated in the preliminary agreement in 1993 that the final peace agreement will be signed by both parties "through negotiations." The agreement, called Oslo II and ratified in 1995, provides for its part that neither side "does not initiate or commence proceedings which can change the status of the West Bank – Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip to the end of negotiations on the final peace agreement." Any unilateral approach - such as the announcement in September by the Arab/Palestinians of an independent state - will therefore be in stark contrast not only with the Oslo agreements (which may be null and void) but also with resolution 242 of the UN that supports the right of each party to "live in peace within secure and recognized borders." The borders of a proclaimed Arab/Palestinian state are of course far from being "secure and recognized" in the view point Israel. Incidentally, Resolution 242 does not speak of, thus, does not apply to any such Palestine, rather, only to existing states, that is to say, Jordan, Egypt and Syria.
Do not just be right, but also know 
There are other arguments for the legitimacy of the Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria. For example, the fact that these territories cannot be considered ''busy'' since they do not belong, de facto, to an enemy state. Or inconsistency of the term ''1967 borders" which are not borders but the cease-fire line between Israeli and Jordanian armies at the end of the 1967 and 1948 War of Independence. Legally, Israel is therefore in a rather comfortable and sound position.

Yet these arguments are not raised. The reasons? There are many: Israel and the Israelis became convinced themselves that they were a colonial power and archives in the world will not be able to release this distorted image. Also in Jerusalem, it probably feels that right or not right, the world has already chosen sides. In the corridors of the Foreign Ministry, it is even said that under international law, "it is 99% perception, and 1% enactment of factual law." But in Israel, there is another expression that says it is not enough to be right, but you must also be smart. And now for the good of the State of Israel, "be smart" is to make the world know what is right. And Israel is in possession of the land and possession is nine tenths of the law.
The Jewish and Arab Refugee resolution     
Since the late 1940's the Arab States have forcefully expelled over a million Jewish families. They confiscated their assets, businesses, homes and Real Estate which is over 120,000 Sq, Km. (47,000 sq. miles, about 6 times the size of Israel) and is valued in the trillions of dollars. The State of Israel has resettled the majority of the million Jews (about 750,000 families) expelled from the Arab countries in Greater Israel (which now comprise of half the population). The Arabs claim that about 600,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes during the 1948 war. Most of the Arab population abandoned their homes at the request of the 5 Arab Armies who were sure to defeat the newly reconstituted Jewish State. About 300,000 Arabs out of the 600,000 stayed. Now the Arab and Jewish population have increased dramatically. Many new Arabs have moved into the area, and many new Jews from the Holocaust and other areas have immigrated to Israel. It is about time that the Arab countries those that expelled over a million Jewish families should resettle the Arab refugees in their vast lands. Utilize the funding which is given to the Arab refugees (instead of using it for weapons, terror and war) to relocate, build housing, schools, commerce and industry and resolve this tragedy once and for all. This will bring peace and tranquility to the region.