Israel vs Palestine. Occupation is a position of TRUST. There is an OBLIGATION and a DUTY to PROTECT the occupied, their property and their territory.

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s the territory of what remains of Palestine since Jordan and Israel declared their Sovereign Independence from Palestine in 1946 & 1948.

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Gb

Jerusalem Declared Israel Occupied City by Israeli Government Proclamation12 Aug 1948

Israel has never legally annexed any of this territories or any other territory it captured in the 1948/49 war.

The Occupying Power cannot legally annex without agreement with the civilian population of the territory being annexed, sans the citizens of the Occupying Power.

And Israel’s illegal annexation of east Jerusalem and the Golan, captured in the ’67 war were condemned by the UNSC.

Today Israel still occupies Palestinian territories, according to UNSC Res 1860 Jan 2009

CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES
Article 73“Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end etc etc “

——
First, read the UN Charter, care fully. It is actually a fine document with noble aspirations. Perfect? No. Nothing is perfect. However nothing, by it’s very nature, simply doesn’t exist.

What does exist is a set of rules for when parties cannot, do not or refuse to resolve their conflicts. Many of the rules exist because of the fate of the millions who suffered the horrors brought on by the Nazis. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees exists in large part because of the dispossession and deaths of European Jews and countless millions of other innocent people.

The rules have been accepted by all UN Members, without reservation. A UN Member State cannot opt out of ANY of the UN Charter which BTW reminds UN Members of their obligations to International Law and conventions already ratified by the majority (passing into Customary International Law) before Israel became a member.

Under the UN Charter there is an obligation and a duty for the UN/UNSC and/or Regional Powers after having stated their intentions to the UNSC, to intervene when a UN Member state acts illegally outside the extent of it’s sovereignty. They’re the rules Israel unconditionally accepted in order to become a United Nations Member.

Under the UN Charter (Chapt XI) non-selfigoverned territories are to be afforded protection by UN Member States. Occupation is a position of TRUST. There is an obligation and a duty to protect the occupied, their property and their territory. There is an obligation to assist the occupied in achieving statehood with all their rights, in all of their rightfull territories.

Israel is doing exactly the opposite while the world stands by, terrified of being called Antisemitic if they dare criticize, even though justifiable criticism is founded in the very laws Israel swore to uphold. Influenced by the Hasbara provided by the squeakiest door in the building. Fearfull of what the little Red Heifer in the Middle East might do to the china shop if held to account.

Israel’s founders at the time of declaration were well aware of the legal implications of declaring sovereignty. Well aware of the UN Charter, Laws of War & Geneva Conventions, before committing to them. Israel’s legal advisers were not naive. They were aware of every word, every punctuation mark, every exacting detail. They know full well that as long as a resolution or the writing of a resolution is being disputed, no action can be taken. None more obvious than the delaying tactic of arguing over the word ‘the’ in UNSC Res 242.

Unless the Zionist Federation were idiots, and we know they weren’t, when Plan Dalet was launched they must have known Israel could not be held to account by the UN until it joined the UN. The UN cannot censure non-members. However, the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, says “it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. “

A search of the UNSC resolutions on the conflict from 14th May 1948 till admission to the UN reveals no direct demand or censure on Israel. After admittance May 11, 1949, we see the UN directly censuring Israel.

Israel’s narrative now is “The UN is biased against Israel, why doesn’t the UN censure the Palestinians, Hamas?”. Well, unless idiots are running the country, it’s BLOODY OBVIOUS!!

YouTube removes videos showing Israeli atrocities. Silwan Palestine “territories occupied” – ILLEGAL Israeli settler veers to wrong side of the road and drives into Palestinian children, allegedly to save himself AFTER his car had been stoned.

Israel informed the world of the extent of it’s sovereignty on May 14th 1948. Israel confirmed it’s borders with the UNSC on May 22nd 1948 and on June 15th 1948
Logic. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel, it’s what remains of Palestine.

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Du

The video has been removed from YouTube along with this notification

Search for gratuitous+violence+definition

There are hundreds of copies of the video available across the internet, at least thirty on YouTube.
It is odd that one analyzing the event without prejudice is removed, while those trying to justify a illegal settler, Elad head, David Be’eri , driving on the wrong side of the road, are not removed.

——-
Silwan is in occupied Palestine – An ILLEGAL Israeli settler veers to wrong side of the road and drives into Palestinian children,
allegedly to save himself AFTER his car had been stoned. Would you accept the word of an illegal settler who’s career is intentionally breaking International Law?

The GC’s are there to protect all civilians. The occupied have a right to armed resistance against the occupier’s military. Only an IDIOT would purposefully move his family into “territories occupied” in order to advance the notion of a Greater Israel knowingly breaking International Law.

Youths who have spent their entire lives under occupation, born to parents who have spent their entire lives under occupation, are very likely to pay scant regard for the Laws of War, not that the Laws of War actually cover them throwing rocks at illegal settlers.

It is quite un-believable anyone serving on any Committee on the Rights of the Child would advocate that children be shot. Yet Israeli MK Ben Ari of the Israeli Committee on the Rights of the Child said “Even a child, if he is endangering someone’s life, should be shot at,”

There is something seriously wrong when a person on a Committee on the Rights of the Child, advocates the shooting of children who have lived their entire lives under occupation. How can Israeli MK Ben Ari have a position on such a committee? His callousness is quite sickening.

Images from the video
This is an animated ‘gif’ file, give it time to load

If Israel legally annexes territories after this round of negotiations, it will tell us two major realities.

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…

…ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-Bg

Perhaps the most ironic outcome would be were Israel to legally annex ANY territories in a negotiated outcome.

It would

A) Quite clearly show that all along those territories were NEVER actually sovereign to Israel, thereby dispelling the twaddle peddled by those who say it is already Israeli territory.

B) Quite clearly show the generosity of the Palestinian people by forgoing the right to all their territory in order to have peace and perhaps, if they wish, declare a state or independent sovereignty.

Meanwhile., no one can force a people to accept a deal that is less than their rights. Nor can they be forced to declare statehood with anything less that their rightful territories. It’s up to the OCCUPYING Power, as a TRUSTee, to recognize those rights.

In the end the only way the Palestinians can have a state, is when occupation ends.

The declaration of the State of Israel ONLY came into effect AFTER the British Mandate (occupation as a TRUSTee) ENDED . INDEPENDENCE. Look it up. …

The recognition of Israel. De jure? De facto? The Jewish State?

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…

ShortLink http://wp.me/pDB7k-lA

There is no legal basis in the demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel or Israel as the Jewish State. No other country in the world gave recognition to Israel as the “Jewish State” . They recognized Israel as the “State of Israel” as per the Declaration of the Establishment of “the State of Israel”

de jure and de facto recognition are recognitions of the legal status of States and/or Governments. Governments administer the State. Governments can change.

It is not within the mandate of the UN to recognize states. Already recognized states are admitted to the UN after they have been recommended by the UNSC, they must have been recognized as states before they can be recommended by the UNSC.

Recognition of statehood is not mandatory. ” ..in the view of the United States, International Law does not require a state to recognize another state; it is a matter for the judgment of each state whether an entity merits recognition as a state. In reaching this judgment, the United States has traditionally looked of the establishment of certain facts. The United States has also taken into account whether the entity in question has attracted the recognition of the International community of states.” There are numerous UN Member states who do not recognize other UN Member States.

What is required of states is the respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force. This is reflected in UNSC res 242

Territories:
Sovereign Territories belong to Independent Sovereign States, regardless of which Government is in power. A sovereign has complete control over all it’s territories and what happens within them, regardless of which Government is in power.

Non-Sovereign States, States and non-state entities also have territories. They are not there just for the taking.
A state entity might have full control of it’s territories and still not declare itself an independent sovereignty.
A state might also only partially control it’s territories, in which case, it cannot declare independent sovereignty.

( See why Palestine has never declared itself an independent sovereignty)
The difference between state and non-state is: a state has declared itself to be a state. There is no obligation for any entity to declare either statehood or independent sovereignty. It is a matter of self determination. Unilateral by nature. Independence means not being under the control of any other entity, person or power.

‘real estate’ is not ‘territory’: Real estate is bought and sold by private individuals, businesses, corporations, institutions. ‘Territory’ is the stuff of States and entities. ‘Real estate’ is irrelevant to the status of the ownership of the ‘territories’ of states/non-states/sovereign-states, entities. A person who rents or even a landless bum, living under a bridge, is an equal part of a state or entity. Territories of an entity belong to all the citizens of the entity. Annexation is of territory and its citizens.

Recognition:
For there to be International recognition of an independent sovereign State, the boundaries of the sovereign state must be defined in order to know exactly the extent of the territory being claimed as sovereign. Israel’s boundaries were defined when the Jewish People’s Council accepted and declared sovereignty per UNGA res 181, in order to be recognized as an Independent Sovereign State. The Israeli Government confirmed it’s declared boundaries in statements to the UNSC on May 22nd 1948 and June 15th 1949

UNGA res 181:
The resolution set out conditions under which either party could declare independent sovereignty, if they wished. No one can demand an entity declare independence. It did not require the two parties to co-sign. This would have been against the notions of self determination. On the 14th of May 1948 the Provisional Government of Israel proclaimed the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel to the International Community of Nations.

Although UNGA Res 181 was a non-binding resolution, UN/UNSC resolutions remind parties of laws, the UN charter etc that are binding. A Declaration of Sovereignty IS binding. It is a statement to the International Community of Nations, signifying the intention of the party declaring. Israel implemented it’s part of UNGA resolution 181. UNGA Res 181 is STILL enshrined in the Declaration of a Jewish State.

The UN did not implement the corpus separatum, Jerusalem remained a part of Palestine

The Arab League refused to recognize UNGA Res 181 on legal grounds. Not because of hatred towards Jews.

The Palestinians COULD NOT declare on 15 May 1948, because Jewish forces under Plan Dalet, were already in control of territories slated for the new Arab State by the time the British Mandate ended, midnight 14th May 1948

Recognition – de facto or de jure?: (de facto – facts on the ground) – (de jure – in law).
A State must exist before a State Government can be instituted. The territories must be defined in order for other Nations to know the extent of the Sovereignty being declared and the declaring entity must have full control over those territories. (Independence)

Link to this section
Statements made by the Jewish Agency to the UN/UNSC prior to recognition in respect to UNGA res 181 made it quite clear The Jewish Agency was going to abide by UNGA res 181. Recognitions were based on the notion that Israel accepted UNGA res 181 and the Israeli Government’s pleas for recognition to states.

The Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (entered into force on December 26, 1934), which required ” b ) a defined territory;” All those signatories would have required the same lest they breached the convention by recognizing a state without a defined territory.

Examples of recognition :
USA 15 May 1948 “… as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947…”

Russia 17 May 1948
Letter from Mr. Molotov stated: “Confirming receipt of your telegram of May 16, in which you inform the Government of the USSR of the proclamation, on the basis of the resolution of the United Nations Assembly of November 29, 1947, of the creation in Palestine of the independent State of Israel and make re-quest for the recognition of the State of Israel and its provisional government by the USSR. I inform yon in this letter that the Govern-ment of the USSR has decided to recognize officially the Stale of Israel and its Provisional Government.”

British 27 April 1950 The British Foreign Office issued a statement on May 17 to the effect that Great Britain would not recognize Israel for the time being because it had not fulfilled the “basic criteria” of an independent state. The British waited until a political party was elected to Govern the State of Israel, then granted de jure recognition, with conditions. The territories Israel had acquired by war, outside of it’s declared Sovereign Boundaries, were considered to be ‘occupied’. I.e., NOT Israeli Sovereign territory.
“His Majesty’s Government have also decided to accord de jure recognition to the State of Israel, subject to explanations on two points corresponding to those described above in regard to the case of Jordan. These points are as follows. First, that His Majesty’s Government are unable to recognise the sovereignty of Israel over that part of Jerusalem which she occupies, though, pending a final determination of the status of the area, they recognise that Israel exercises de facto authority in it. Secondly, that His Majesty’s Government cannot regard the present boundaries between Israel, and Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Lebanon as constituting the definitive frontiers of Israel, as these boundaries were laid down in the Armistice Agreements concluded severally between Israel and each of these States, and are subject to any modifications which may be agreed upon under the terms of those Agreements, or of any final settlements which may replace them.” Thus far nothing has replaced them.

Australia 28 January 1949 “… on the basis of the resolution of the United Nations Assembly of November 29, 1947…”

New Zealand 29 January 1949 “It is the understanding of the New Zealand Government that the settlement of boundaries and other outstanding questions will be effected in accordance with the resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations of 11 December 1948.”

Israel has never legally annexed any territory. Unilateral annexation is not legal. It must be under a treaty or agreement via a referendum and; “territories occupied” and never withdrawn from or legally annexed, are still ‘occupied’.

Fairy Tales from the Fallacy Factory. UNSC Resolution 242 calls for negotiating borders. But that’s not what it says.

shortlink http://wp.me/pDB7k-hR

Comments are closed.
This article has been Incorporated
Please ClickHere