The New Israel aka Palestine - 120,440 sq. km. or 75,000 sq. mi.
The New Israel
How did the present day Israel come about and why was it granted to the Jews? And is it actually occupied land?
Kingdoms around old Land of Israel ca. 830 B.C. Long before the existence or birth of Islam. The Jewish presence in the Land of Israel reaches back more than 3,000 years. The Philistines of the past have nothing to do with the present day “palestinians” who are illegal Arab settler from surrounding Arab countries.
Let’s start with Israel’s size and creation on Palestinian land in the present century.
Israel’s very size at creation was a result of losing land. The first map below shows the land promised to Israel as the Jewish National Home in Palestine as demarcated in the December 1920 Franco-British Boundary Convention. The second map shows the borders of the Jewish National Home in Palestine after the British cut off the eastern 77% of the demarcated borders to form Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan, later Jordan, is the Palestinian homeland, just as Israel is the Jewish homeland.
The land promised to Israel as the Jewish National Home in Palestine as demarcated in the December 1920 Franco-British Boundary Convention.
The borders of the Jewish National Home in Palestine after the British cut off the eastern 77% of the demarcated borders to form Trans-Jordan. Trans-Jordan, later Jordan, is the Palestinian homeland
Note that the territory, although 77% reduced, includes Gaza for the Jewish palestine which is currently occupied by (illegal) Arab immigrants that were later made into “palestinians” for political argumentation.
The truth about Jordan is that it is the Palestinian State. It was set-up in 1929 on part of the land promised by the 1917 Balfour declaration for the ‘establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people’. Here’s another map of the Palestinian Mandate, see how it divides between what is now Israel and what is now Jordan?
So in 1946, Transjordan became an independent state under Hashemite rule. In November 1947, the United Nations proposed to partition the remaining 22 per cent of Palestine. The territory between the Jordan River and the sea was divided into a Jewish and an Arab part.The Jewish representatives accepted the UN partition plan, but the Arab representatives refused. In an attempt to “drive all the Jews into the sea,” they began the 1948 war and lost.
The Arabs Have Initiated All Arguments
The losing side did not sit back and lick their wounds, they took their revenge on the Jews in East Jerusalem and the rest of Cisjordan — the ancient provinces of Judea and Samaria — now held by Muslim forces. This entire region was ethnically cleansed of all Jews. Even the name of Judea and Samaria were wiped off the map and replaced by the term “West Bank.”
Israel, including Judea and Samaria, has been the land of the Jews since time immemorial. Judea means Land of the Jews. Never has there been an autonomous state in the area that was not Jewish. The Diaspora of the Jews, which began after their defeat by the Romans in AD 70, did not lead to the departure of all the Jews from their ancient homeland. Jews had been living in the Jordan Valley for centuries until the Arab invaders drove them out in 1948, when the provinces of Judea and Samaria were occupied by the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan, which abbreviated its name to Jordan in 1950.
Note that until 1967, when Israel regained the ancient Jewish heartland of Judea and Samaria, no-one, not a single Islamic scholar or Western politician, ever demanded that there be an independent Palestinian state in the so-called West Bank.
Who Are The Present Day Palestinian People?
But what of the Palestinian people; who are they? I could quote any number of historians and politicians but lest they be tarnished by being called Zionist scum, as I have been for making this point before, let’s listen to a senior Palestinian:
On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organisation executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here’s what he said:
“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.”
The present day Palestinian people originate from illegal Arab settlers from Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.
Where was this “Palestinian people” ?
In 1835 Alphonse de Lamartine wrote: “Outside the city of Jerusalem, we saw no living object, heard no living sound. . .a complete eternal silence reigns in the town, in the highways, in the country.”
In 1844, William Thackeray writes about the road from Jaffa to Jerusalem: “Now the district is quite deserted, and you ride among what seem to be so many petrified waterfalls. We saw no animals moving among the stony brakes; scarcely even a dozen little birds in the whole course of the ride.”
In 1857, the British consul in Palestine, James Finn, reported: “The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is that of a body of population.”
In 1866, W.M. Thomson writes: “How melancholy is this utter desolation. Not a house, not a trace of inhabitants, not even shepherds, to relieve the dull monotony … Much of the country through which we have been rambling for a week appears never to have been inhabited, or even cultivated; and there are other parts, you say, still more barren.”
In 1867, Mark Twain – Samuel Clemens, the famous author of “Huckleberry Finn” and “Tom Sawyer”, toured the Holy Land. This is how he described the land: “There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent – not for thirty miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Bedouin tents, but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride ten miles, hereabouts, and not see ten human beings.”
In 1874, Reverend Samuel Manning wrote: “But where were the inhabitants? This fertile plain, which might support an immense population, is almost a solitude…. Day by day we were to learn afresh the lesson now forced upon us, that the denunciations of ancient prophecy have been fulfilled to the very letter — “the land is left void and desolate and without inhabitants.” (Jeremiah, ch.44 v.22)
The Illegal Arab Immigrant Invasion :
The British Hope-Simpson Commission recommended, in 1930, “Prevention of illicit immigration” to stop the illegal Arab immigration from neighboring Arab countries.
The British Governor of the Sinai (1922-36) reported in the Palestine Royal Commission Report: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria.”
The governor of the Syrian district of Hauran, Tewfik Bey El Hurani, admitted in 1934 that in a single period of only a few months over 30,000 Syrians from Houran had moved to Palestine.
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill noted the Arab influx. Churchill, a veteran of the early years of the British mandate in the Holy Land, noted in 1939 that “far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied till their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population.”
Jordan Is The Actual New Palestine
Take a look back in time, until the late 1980s, Jordan’s Hashemite rulers did not deny that their country was Palestine. They said so on numerous occasions. In 1965, King Hussein said: “Those organisations which seek to differentiate between Palestinians and Jordanians are traitors.” As late as 1981, Hussein repeated “Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan.”
So why is the entire Arab world not rising up against Jordan? Why are the Palestinians not fighting wars with Jordan? The answer is simple: Because Jordan is not a Jewish land. The entire purpose behind the conflict is to exterminate Jews.
In March 1971, The Palestine National Council, too, stated that “what links Jordan to Palestine is a national bond […] formed, since time immemorial, by history and culture. The establishment of one political entity in Transjordan and another in Palestine is illegal.”
In 1988, as the first Intifada raged, Jordan officially renounced any claim of sovereignty to the so-called West Bank. In recent years, the Jordanian authorities have stripped thousands of Palestinians of their Jordanian citizenship. They do so for two reasons.
First, because the alien Hashemite rulers fear that the Palestinians might one day take over their own country. And second, because stripping Palestinians of their Jordanian citizenship supports the falsehood that Jordan is not a part of Palestine. And that, consequently, the Palestinians must attack Israel if they want a place of their own.
The other claim that I have made to me is that the Palestinians only want to live in peace alongside Israel and that a return to the pre-1967 borders is all that they want. Leaving aside the fact that the armies of six surrounding Arab nations tried to wipe Israel off of the map in 1948 before Israel won another defensive war in 1967, the enemies of Israel make no secret of what they want and how they intend to achieve it.
Do remember that on the same day Yasser Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.”
The Conflict Is About Jew Hatred – Not The Occupation Of Land
The removal of East Jerusalem from Israel and a general return to the 1967 borders is not the aim of Hamas, Fatah/PLO/PA or the rest of the Muslim Middle East, it is but a staging post on the way to the eventual destruction of Israel.
The following are comments made by Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya on his visit to Tunisia in early January 2012. The comments were all recorded and broadcast on Al-Aqsa TV:
“I say to you now, in the capital of south Tunisia: We will never ever recognize Israel.”
“The land of Palestine, oh brothers and sisters, is an Islamic, as decreed by the second caliph, Omar ibn Al-Khattab. We shall not relinquish the Islamic waqf on the land of Palestine, and Jerusalem shall not be divided into Western and Eastern Jerusalem. Jerusalem is a single united [city], and Palestine stretches from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and from Naqoura [Rosh Ha-Niqra] to Umm Al-Rashrash [Eilat] in the south.”
This is Hamas’s leader in the Gaza Strip, Ismail Haniyeh, saying on 14 December that whilst Hamas may work for the “interim objective of liberation of Gaza, the West Bank, or Jerusalem,” this in an “interim objective” and “reconciliation” with Fatah will not change Hamas’ long-term “strategic” goal of eliminating all of Israel. Ismail Haniyeh also said this:
“The armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the invaders and usurpers [Israel]… We won’t relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine.”
From the sea to the river, now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, remember that every time someone chants “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” they are calling for the destruction of Israel, the ending of the Jewish state. The river is the Jordan, the sea is the Mediterranean; from the river to the sea is not calling for a two state solution, it is calling for the destruction of Israel.
Two days after Ismail Haniyeh’s speech, the Palestinian Authority’s Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said that Hamas leader abroad Khaled Mashaal had agreed that:
“There will be no military resistance.” “The permanent solution is on the ’67 borders.”
According to Mahmoud Abbas, Hamas had agreed to a permanent solution based on the 1967 borders. However, Haniyeh said that Hamas agrees to a temporary solution on the 1967 borders as a first stage only.
Who to believe?
Before you say Mahmoud Abbas, remember that for many years, the PLO itself promoted a “stages plan” that would first create a Palestinian state on the 1949 – 1967 armistice lines, and then work from that position to destroy Israel. Indeed senior Fatah official Abbas Zaki recently stated that this remains the goal for Fatah as well, but that “you can’t say it to the world. You can say it to yourself.”…
The west listens to and believes what Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas say about wanting a two state solution and a return to 1967 borders because that fits in with their world view of an evil Jewish state stealing land from poor Palestinians. The truth is some way from this narrative but the western media, especially the BBC, just don’t care; facts will not be allowed to intrude into this narrative.
So the next time you hear a Palestinian spokesman saying they want to live in peace with Israel or a BBC Middle East ‘expert’ explaining how Hamas and the PLO have changed and really do want peace with Israel, remember that it’s all lies. Hamas and Fatah/PLO want to destroy Israel, they claim all of the land that Israel stands on and the return to 1967 borders is but the first step on the path to destroying Israel and killing all Jews.
Another question that springs to mind when people say that the Palestinians want their land back is what was the case between 1948 and 1967. In 1948 Jordan ‘occupied’ the ‘West Bank’ whilst Egypt ‘occupied’ the Gaza Strip. Were there any protests by ‘Palestinians’ against these foreign occupations? I suppose an alternative question would be why was no Palestinian state formed in the West Bank and Gaza in 1949? Could it be that Zahir Muhsein was telling the truth?
Jerusalem And The Myth About Palestinian Refugees
A line that many push is that the Jews are immigrants to a previously Muslim Palestine. Let’s examine that claim and start with Jerusalem
Jerusalem was the capital of a Jewish state from around 1000BC until the Jews were expelled one, two or more times. When the State of Israel was created in 1948, it was alongside Jerusalem as a ‘corpus separatum under the administration of the UN.’ aka an international city. This regime was to remain in force for a period of ten years, whereupon a referendum was to be held in which the residents were to decide the future ownership of their city. This plan was superseded by the 1948 war when the armies of four or more Muslim states tried to wipe Israel off the map and drive all the Jews, who could not be killed, into the sea. The Arab Legion attacked Western Jerusalem and at the end of the 1948 war Israel controlled the newer western part of Jerusalem and Jordan the older east, including the main religious sites.
From 1948 until 1967 the Jordanians expelled Jews from Jerusalem, destroyed many synagogues and some churches and refused access to religious sites to most Jews and many Christians.
By way of contrast since 1967 Israel has not restricted access for Muslims to the Dome of the Rock or the Al-Aqsa Mosque despite them being partly built on top of the site of ‘the Temple’; what would be the holiest site in Judaism had it not been destroyed. Indeed the Western (‘Wailing’) Wall is all that remains of the Second Temple.
Let’s look back to the time when Israel was finally formed in the aftermath of the Second World War. This was a time of great population transfers in Eastern Europe, between India & Pakistan and elsewhere; yet only in Israel/Palestine are the displaced still considered refugees. In 1948 over a million Hindus fled Pakistan and a similar number of Muslims left India for Pakistan. Both populations were absorbed by their new countries. In the same region, large population transfers happened when Bangladesh was created. Likewise ethnic Germans were expelled from Central & Eastern Europe and so had to assimilate into Germany. Meanwhile Hungarian refugees from Czechoslovakia and other places found sanctuary in Hungary, Ukrainians who were expelled from Poland found sanctuary in Ukraine, and so on.
Meanwhile In the Middle East 750,000 Jews were expelled form their homes in Arab countries and were absorbed into Israel. Why were the ‘Palestinians’ not absorbed into Jordan, Syria, Egypt & The Lebanon? The Palestinians talk about the ‘right of return’ and their right to live in their ancestral homes again. Does the same right exist for the Jews forced to flee Iraq, Egypt, Syria and other Arab countries? The value of the assets these Jews left behind has been valued at today’s prices at around $300 billion. A US based organization has decades-old property deeds of Jews from Arab countries on a total area of 100,000 sq.km. – which is five times the size of the State of Israel.
So why did the Arab countries not absorb the Palestinian refugees? In 1959, the Arab League passed Resolution 1457, which stated thus:
‘The Arab countries will not grant citizenship to applicants of Palestinian origin in order to prevent their assimilation into the host countries.’
So the Palestinian refugees are not permanent refugees because of Israel’s actions but because of a decision taken by the Arab League. Thus the accepted narrative that heaps blame on Israel because it expelled the refugees is actually not true.
Remember that I started this post by explaining that Israel lost around 77% of what was promised to the Jewish people for a homeland and now exists on a sliver of land surrounded by far larger Muslim countries why should Israel be further reduced in size? Do you realise how small Israel is? Why should the Jews not be allowed to keep one small portion of the land they were promised in the Balfour Declaration? If you listen to the BBC and The Guardian you would think Israel occupied (pun intended) an enormous part of the Middle East; here’s a map to illustrate the truth; can you spot Israel amongst it’s Muslim neighbours?
Let’s take another quick look at the claim that the Palestinians only want a return to the pre-1967 borders, a claim that Barack Obama and others seem happy to swallow.
“Palestinians only want a return to the pre-1967 borders”. Really?
I’ll begin with a reminder of the words of the then Fatah leader, Yasser Arafat on the same day that he signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus “Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.”
A return to 1967 borders for Israel is not the aim of Hamas, Fatah and the rest, it is a staging post on the way to the destruction of Israel.
The surrounding Arab countries attacked the new born state of Israel in 1948 declaring that they would drive all Jews into the sea. They failed and for that any sane person would give thanks but why did they attack were they demanding a return to the pre-1967 borders? In 1967 the same neighbours of Israel mustered forces ready to attack and destroy Israel again, once again they failed and in defeating the aggressors, Israel captured various territory. Why did the Arab countries attack Israel, were they demanding a return to the borders of 1967? Land captured in a defensive war is normally kept not surrendered back to the aggressors but in Israel’s case this seems not be the case.
In 1973, on the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, the Muslim countries attacked Israel again and were defeated again, Israel captured more land from Egypt and Syria in another defensive war. Were the Arab countries in 1973 calling for a return to 1967 borders?
So despite the evidence of three wars started by Muslim countries to destroy Israel we are expected to believe that now the Palestinians just want peace so long as Israel returns to its pre-1967 borders. We are meant to ignore the words of Yasser Arafat in the past as quoted above but also of current Hamas leaders like Nizar Rayan, Hamas religious and military leader, who said on 1 Jan 2009
“Regarding the Jews, our business with them is only through bombs and guns… the prophet [Muhammad] promised that we will fight you, with Allah’s help, until the tree and stone say: “Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.”
How about Fatah’s 1968 Charter:
‘– In the Palestinian state only Jews who lived in Palestine before 1917 will be recognized as citizens [Article 6]: – Only the Palestinian Arabs possess the right of self-determination, and the entire country belongs to them [Articles 3 and 21]. – Any solution that does not involve total liberation of the country is rejected. This aim cannot be achieved politically; it can only be accomplished militarily [Articles 9 & 21]. – Warfare against Israel is legal, whereas Israel’s self-defence is illegal [Article 18].’
That 1968 Charter does not call for Israel to return to 1967 borders it calls for ‘the entire country’ to return to Palestinian control.
Barack Obama should know this history but maybe his upbringing as a child in Indonesia and then as a knowing adult in the church of Jeremiah Wright may have affected him. In case he or you need reminding here are some facts about the state of Israel and Palestine.
If after all this you still believe that Hamas and Fatah just want Israel to return to 1967 borders then here is a question for you: if this is the case then why do Fatah and Hamas incessantly show maps (in schools, on TV, on logos, in government literature) that contain no mention of Israel just Palestine occupying the whole area of Israel and the Palestinian territories? If Fatah and Hamas want a return to 1967 orders then why do they not recognise those borders in their own literature and propaganda?
Here is an example
Maybe you’d like instead to read the lyrics of a song played regularly on PA TV that runs:
“Jaffa, Acre, Haifa, and Nazareth are ours. [I] Muhammad sing about the Galilee and the Golan (Heights). Jaffa, Acre, Haifa and Nazareth are ours. [I] Kabha sing about the Galilee and the Golan (Heights). From Bethlehem to Jenin is Palestinian, Ramle, Lod and Sakhnin are Palestinian. Nowhere is more beautiful than Jerusalem; no matter how much we travel From Safed to Al-Badhan (near Nablus) is Palestinian; Tiberias and Ashkelon are Palestinian.”
You can see the song being sung here. Not much interest in a return to 1967 borders there is there?
Over and over again Hamas, Fatah and others have stated that they want Israel destroyed, Jews killed and one Palestinian state in its place. Yet still we are expected to believe that a return to 1967 borders is all that is wanted.
Many apologists for Palestinain terrorists claim that Hamas and their ilk have no problem with (or hatred of Jews) just with Israel and Zionists. Let’s examine the evidence:
Influential Islamic scholars Muhammad Tantawi, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar in Cairo, the most prestigious centre of Muslim learning, call Jews “enemies of Allah.” Tantawi was generally considered a moderate by the Western media and policy makers. But how did this “moderate” address a delegation of Palestinian Muslims who visited him in 2002?
He urged them to intensify suicide attacks against Israelis, stating that every so-called “martyrdom operation” against “any Israeli, including children, women, and teenagers, is a legitimate act according to [Islamic] religious law, and an Islamic commandment, until the people of Palestine regain their land.”
Here are some excerpts from a Friday sermon in Al-Bireh, the Palestinian West Bank, which aired on Palestinian Authority TV on January 6, 2012.
‘Preacher: “Oh servants of Allah, every evil and catastrophe on the land of Palestine – moreover, in the whole world – is caused by the Jews.
“They generate civil strife with their clandestine handiwork, their despicable texts, their bitter hearts, and their abominable intentions.
“Allah said: ‘Whenever they kindle the fire of war, Allah extinguishes it, but they strive to do mischief on earth. Allah loves not those who do mischief.’ This is the history of the Jews.’
Excerpts from footage of Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya’s visit to Tunisia, which aired on Al-Aqsa TV was posted on the Internet on January 5-10, 2012. This is a transcript:
‘Crowd: “The people want the liberation of Palestine.
“The people want the liberation of Palestine.”
Crowd member: “Killing the Jews…”
Crowd: “…is a duty.”
Crowd member: “Killing the Jews…”
Crowd: “…is a duty.”
Crowd member: “Driving out the Jews…”
Crowd: “…is a duty.”
Crowd member: “Driving out the Jews…”
Crowd: “…is a duty.”
Crowd member: “Crushing the Jews…”
Crowd: “…is a duty.”
Crowd member: “Crushing the Jews…”
Crowd: “…is a duty.” […] ‘
So do the preacher and the crowd hate Israel or Jews?
As promised, a different sort of posting here: legal and historical background that is essential to understanding Jewish rights in the land.
This review will be succinct, with links to informational sites for those who wish to know more.
It is important to save and share this material, as it provides data critical for properly defending Israel. Emphasis has been added to certain key phrases.
As always, I welcome serious questions.
With the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, the Second Jewish Commonwealth came to an end.From then until modern times, what had been Judah, and was renamed Palestina by the Romans, was only an appendage to one empire or another, never an independent country.
~~~~~~~~~~ San Remo
Jewish legal rights in the land in modern times began with the San Remo Conference and resultant San Remo resolution, which has been called the Jewish Magna Carta.
For centuries, Palestine had been part of the (Turkish, Muslim) Ottoman Empire. With the end of WWI, the land of that Empire was taken by the Allies. Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan, with the US as observer, met in San Remo, Italy, to decide how it would be divided: Palestine was put under British Mandatory rule.
At San Remo it was decided to incorporate the Balfour Declaration into Britain’s mandate. The Declaration, in the form of a letter, was an endorsement by the British government of the establishment of a Jewish home in Palestine. Written in 1917 by the British Foreign Secretary Lord Balfour, and sent to Lord Rothschild, it stated:
“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object.”
In June 1922, Winston Churchill, who was then British Secretary of State for the Colonies, wrote in a policy paper that:
“…in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”
In July 1922, the League of Nations, predecessor to the UN, formally adopted the British Mandate for Palestine — a legally binding document that was approved by all 51 members of the League of Nations.
It agreed that:
“the Mandatory [Britain] should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917 [Balfour Declaration], by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people…”
And it gave recognition to:
“the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”
The term “reconstituting” gave acknowledgement to the fact that there had been a Jewish nation in Palestine at an earlier time.
The mandatory system of the League of Nations was based on the principle of Allied administration of Mandate territories until such time as they were able to stand alone. That is, it was understood at the beginning that the British would ultimately withdraw, leaving an established Jewish homeland.
The original area of Palestine, for which the British Mandate was assigned, included Transjordan (what is today Jordan, on the eastern side of the Jordan River).
In September 1922, very soon after the League of Nations had adopted the Mandate resolution, Britain assigned TransJordan to Hashemite Arabs from Saudi Arabia. The Jewish part of the Mandate was thus reduced by over 70%.
Jews then had the right to settle anywhere in a 10,000 sq.mi. area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
~~~~~~~~~~ Mandate Transfer to UN
With the formal demise of the League of Nations in 1946, the United Nations was established to succeed it. The UN assumed obligations of the League: Territories under Mandate were to have a “trusteeship system” applied — this was a continuation of the Mandate system of the League.
Article 80 of the UN declared that “nothing in the [UN] Charter shall be construed…to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or peoples or the terms of existing international instruments.” This preserved the Jewish right to settle in Palestine.
From the time of the establishment of the Mandate for Palestine, Arab challenges to it were considerable, and were often expressed violently. This was in spite of the fact at that the same that the Mandate for Palestine was established for the Jewish homeland, Mandates for Syria, Lebanon and Iraq were established, all for Arab populations. Arabs were, and still are, offended by the presence of a Jewish state.
Perhaps most grievous of all was the Hebron massacre of 1929: for three days Arabs went on a murderous rampage in the city, killing 67 Jews and destroying property. In the aftermath, the second holiest city of the Jews was left bereft of Jews for the first time in hundreds of years. (Ultimately the British prevented Jews from living in the city because they said they couldn’t protect them.)
In 1947, the British, who no longer wished to contend with the situation, declared intention to pull out by mid-1948, and turned the Mandate back to the United Nations. A UN Commission considered the matter and recommended a partition of Palestine into one state for the Jews and one for the Arabs, with Jerusalem to be internationalized at first.
This recommendation was placed before the General Assembly as Resolution 181, which was adopted on November 29, 1947 by a vote of 33 to 12, with 10 abstentions. The Arab nations voted as a bloc against.
It is imperative to note that General Assembly Resolutions carry no weight in international law. This resolution was only a recommendation — it was not binding and it did not supersede the Mandate for Palestine in international law.
There is no way for Arabs today to re-instate this resolution or to claim that Jews have a right to only what was defined as a Jewish state by this aborted resolution.
~~~~~~~~~~ Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel
On May 14, 1948 (Hebrew date: 5th of Iyar 5708), the Jewish People’s Council gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum, and approved a proclamation, declaring the establishment of the State of Israel.
It asserted the natural right of the Jewish people to be like all other peoples, exercising self-determination in its sovereign state and proclaimed the establishment of a Jewish state named “the State of Israel.”
It is important to note that Israel’s legal legitimacy did not derive from the aborted partition plan — even though the state was founded on that portion of Palestine that Resolution 181 had allocated for a Jewish state.
It was established according to international norms: based on a declaration of independence by its people and on the establishment of an orderly government within territory under its stable control.
The portion of Palestine on which Israel was not established became unclaimed Mandate land. Nothing in international law had superseded the status of this land as Mandate land.
~~~~~~~~~~ War of Independence
Within a day of the establishment of the State of Israel, it was attacked by the states of the Arab League, with clear, openly stated, intention of destroying the new state.
When the war ended in 1949, Israel controlled more territory than it had when independence was declared. Egypt controlled Gaza, and Jordan controlled Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Western Jerusalem was in Israel’s hands, and eastern Jerusalem in Jordan’s hands.
Armistice agreements were signed between Israel and the Arab states with which it had been at war. Armistice lines — temporary ceasefire lines — were defined by these agreements. They are often referred to as the Green Line.
These armistice demarcation lines did not define a permanent border for Israel. The agreement between Israel and Jordan includes this phrase:
“The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined…in this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines…”
This is exceedingly important because the PLO/PA claims that this line is Israel’s “real” border and the line to which it must withdraw. This is simply not the case.
~~~~~~~~~~ Six Day War
From June 5 to June 10, 1967, Israel fought a defensive war against Arab forces from Egypt, Syria and Jordan.
When it was over, Israel had control of all of Jerusalem, which was united under Israeli sovereignty; the Golan Heights, to which Israeli civil law was applied; the Sinai, which was surrendered as part of the 1979 peace treaty with Egypt; Gaza, which was surrendered in the 2005 disengagement; and Judea and Samaria.
In November 1967, the Security Council adopted Resolution 242, which addressed the situation.
This resolution did not require Israel to withdraw to the Green Line. Instead it acknowledged the right of every state in the area “to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.”
Implicit here was the understanding that the Green Line did not represent a secure boundary. Israel suffered from a lack of strategic depth within the Green Line — at its narrowest only nine miles wide — which invited attack and made defense in war time difficult. (This is why Israeli statesman Abba Eban referred to the Green Line as the “Auschwitz borders.”)
Thus this resolution called for Israel to withdraw from “territories occupied in the recent conflict.” “Territories,” not “the territories” or “all territories,” meaning, withdrawal from some but not all of the area of Judea and Samaria. There is a legal history of long debate over this wording, because of its significance. Not full withdrawal because that would not leave Israel with a secure boundary.
Once again, then, we see that the claim of the PLO/PA that Israel “must” withdraw to the Green Line is not supported by the facts.
Lastly, the resolution called for “a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution.” That is, it called for negotiations to determine the final border of Israel.
There was no requirement that Israel withdraw prior to negotiations. And those negotiations have never been held. At the time of this resolution, it was assumed that negotiations would be with Jordan. Today the situation has changed.
 There are strong legal precedents for the claim that a war fought defensively permits retention of the land secured in that war.
Wrote Steven Schwiebel, former judge of the International Court of Justice:
“…the Israeli conquest of Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive conquest.
“…it follows that modifications of the 1949 armistice lines.. are lawful…whether those modifications are, in Secretary Rogers’s words, ‘insubstantial alterations required for mutual security’ or more substantial alterations – such as recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the whole of Jerusalem.” (Emphasis added)
 With all of the above, it should not be forgotten that areas over the Green Line, in eastern Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, represent the very heart of Jewish heritage: From the Temple Mount; to Hevron and the Cave of Machpelah, where the matriarch and patriarchs are buried; to Shilo, where the Tabernacle was brought. How can Jews be “occupiers” in their own ancient land?
~~~~~~~~~~ International Law
People have the impression that “international law” is a firmly defined body of law. In point of fact, while some international law is established in formal documents, others aspects are very fluid. Just as is the case with “occupation,” there is a tendency to politicize this term, so that Israel is forever accused of “violating international law.” Be most cautious when hearing this.
There are, as well, instances in which “international law” is interpreted to mean one thing for Israel and another for other countries.
One fascinating example has to do with the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 49(6), which says “the Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” You may have heard accusations that Israel is in defiance of this Article because of the “settlers.”
There are two obvious retorts to this: First, that Israel is not an occupier, and second, that Israel is not deporting or transferring parts of its own civilian population — the people go of their own volition.
Eugene Kontorovich, however, is currently doing research for a paper and has discovered something else: There are many instances of movement of civilian population into occupied territory. However, while international lawyers claim that Israel must actively oppose civilian migration, refuse to provide services to settlers, etc., in these other instances the reaction is much more tempered. That is, the presumed requirements of “international law” are applied selectively to Israel.
The Oslo Accords, promoted originally by Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin and others, was founded on the assumption, which proved to be seriously and dangerously erroneous, that peace might be achieved between Israel and the PLO, considered the official representative of the Palestinian Arab people. On September 13, 1993, the Declaration of Principles was signed between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO.
The PLO never properly ratified these Accords, although there was pretense of having done so. Even more significantly, the PLO was committed to changing clauses in its Charter that call for Israel’s destruction. Again, there was pretense — a committee to effect the changes was formed — but it never happened. The PLO Charter of 1968, which calls for Israel’s destruction, is still in place.
It says that Palestine as defined by the Mandate is indivisible and that “armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.”
On May 4, 1994, the first agreement was signed, spelling out a limited pullback of Israeli forces in Gaza and Jericho, with the PLO moving into those areas. At this time the Palestinian Authority was founded as an interim administrative authority for a period of five years.
On September 28, 1995, the Interim Agreement (called Oslo II) was signed. This called for a more extensive pullback from major Arab population centers, with the PA assuming responsibility. Three areas were defined: (A) in which the PA has total control, (B) in which the PA has civil control and Israel retains responsibility for security, and (C), in which Israel has total control.
All Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria are in Area (C). There is nothing in this Interim Agreement that prohibits or restricts the establishment or expansion of Jewish communities in that area.
According to Oslo agreements, so called “final status issues” must be resolved via negotiations: Borders of Israel, potential division of Jerusalem, the nature of the Palestinian Arab entity, etc.
Unilateral actions that achieve a change in the basic situation are said to be a violation of the Accords, which require negotiations.
PLEASE NOTE: The Oslo Accords do not specifically call for the formation of a full Palestinian State, although that is the working assumption today. The goal, as stated in the Declaration of Principles is “negotiations…leading to a permanent settlement based on Security Council resolutions 242…” (From 1967, discussed above.) These were supposed to be the negotiations that would finally determine Israel’s border to the east. Until his death, PM Yitzhak Rabin spoke of an autonomy for the Palestinian Arabs that was short of full statehood. With these negotiations was to come peace.
Put simply, this is a Muslim propensity for falsehoods or deception in certain circumstances. This behavior is not only approved but sometimes mandated by Sharia (Islamic) law if it benefits Islam or protects Muslims.
The fact that Palestinian Arabs practice taqiyya — which Islamic scholar Raymond Ibrihim says is mainstream in Islam, and…very prevalent in Islamic politics — makes it more difficult for Israel to make its case.
Palestinian Arabs, for example, claim that they are the indigenous population in Palestine, descended from the Canaanites or other ancient peoples, while the Jews have no history in the land.
The reality is that those who today call themselves “Palestinians,” until a few decades ago identified simply as part of the Arab nation. In fact, before the founding of the modern state of Israel, it was the Jews who were referred to as Palestinians, not the Arabs.
Similarly, Palestinian Arabs say that the Jews are on “their” land and must give it back.
The reality is that there has never been a Palestinian state, on this land or anywhere. There is no case to be made for calling it “their” land.
As well, the Palestinian Arabs say they want a “two-state solution” and will live in peace next to Israel, if Israel will only return to it’s Green Line “borders.”
The reality is that the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) was founded in 1964, before Israel had secured Judea, Samaria and Gaza. What the PLO wanted to “liberate” was Israel inside the Green Line.