http://wp.me/pDB7k-1fU
According to the Israeli narrative “Jordan illegally occupied Judea and Samaria” after the 1948 war.
Fact is, on the 3rd of April 1949 Israel signed an Armistice Agreement with the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom leaving Jordan legally in military control of what was official renamed the West Bank.
The Israeli narrative also tells us “Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank was illegal”.
The West Bank was legally annexed to Jordan by request of representatives of the majority of the legitimate inhabitants of the West Bank, in keeping with International Law concerning self determination
Unlike the unilateral annexation by Israel of East Jerusalem, which was condemned by the UNSC, there was no UNSC condemnation of the bilateral annexation of the West Bank by Jordan
The other Arab states demanded Jordan annex the West Bank as a trustee only (Session: 12-II Date: May 1950) in keeping with the UN Charter Chapter XI
By 1967 Jordan, including the West Bank, was a UN Member State and had ratified Geneva Convention IV. In other words, it was a High Contracting Power
UNSC res 228 tells us the West Bank was “the territory of Jordan“
UNSC res 476 tells us Geneva Convention IV is applicable http://wp.me/pDB7k-W8
By the UNSC resolutions, reaffirming and emphasizing binding Law/UN Charter/etc, the Israeli narrative is simply bullsh*t!
Further reading re-recognition of the annexation of the West Bank by Jordan thanks to D G Fincham:
First, find out what isn't true... 
https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/article/other/5fldpj.htm
Comment by mig — October 28, 2016 @ 3:31 am
First off, was Resolution 476 taken under Chapter VII of the UN Charter? That’s what makes UNSC resolutions legally binding.
Secondly, just because the UNSC fails to condemn something, doesn’t mean it isn’t illegal. Also, what is the legal relevance of other Arab states in determining the fate of Jerusalem?
Comment by David — September 9, 2016 @ 11:49 am
You’re digging a deeper cat hole pal.
First off, International Law is binding on all states who proclaim their obligations to it. Israel did May 15th 1948. http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf
The UN Charter is binding in its entirety on all UN Member States.
Ratified conventions are binding on the ratifying states.
Chapter VI resolutions remind the parties of their binding legal obligations as UN Member states.
The Laws, UN Charter and GC’s re-affirmed and emphasized in any UN/UNSC resolution are as a matter of course binding.
UNSC 476 is one of EIGHT UNSC solutions reminding the State of Israel of UNSC res 252 and Israel’s legal obligations as a UN Member State
UNSC res 228 tells us Hebron of the West Bank was Jordanian territory in 1966.
“Also, what is the legal relevance of other Arab states in determining the fate of Jerusalem?”
Uh? They didn’t determine the fate of Jerusalem.
1) Israel did not proclaim Jerusalem as Israeli http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf
2) Jerusalem was never recognized as Israeli
3) the proposed corpus separatum was never implemented
4) No country has recognized Jerusalem as Israeli. Legally it is still a part of whatever remained of Palestine after Israel proclaimed itself as “an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947… ” (ibid)
5) Take your Hasbara Ziopuke somewhere else. You have absolutely no argument that justifies what Israel has done and continues to do in territories “outside the State of Israel” … “in Palestine”
Comment by talknic — September 9, 2016 @ 5:32 pm
Hi talknic.,
How sure are you that the Palestinian delegation was in fact representative, and on what basis? The link you give transfers to the home page of the domain jcpa.org, not to the specified page on jcpa.org.il, so this is not helpful. A better link is [ http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1948v05p2.p1138&id=FRUS.FRUS1948v05p2&isize=M ]
It is worth mentioning that the annexation was formally recognized by Britain, was accepted by the US government [ http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1950v05.p0943&id=FRUS.FRUS1950v05&isize=M ], accepted by the PLO in Article 24 of the 1964 Charter ( refers to the West Bank IN the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan) , and accepted by the UN in Resolution 228 (Israeli military action on the territory of Jordan).
Comment by dgfincham — September 8, 2016 @ 2:20 pm
Hi David
Thanks for your astute observations. Much appreciated. I’ve updated the JCPA link and; included your suggestions.
Am also working on an update re-the recognition of Israel’s (’67) borders in the current political climate. No one, including Hostage et al at MW, has really given an understandable explanation … soon
Go well
Comment by talknic — September 8, 2016 @ 8:02 pm