Stewart

1. The point of my article is that the recognition of the State of Palestine by 194 states in UNESCO has acknowledged that the Palestinian Arabs are no longer stateless or homeless – at least as far as those 194 states are concerned.

The two-state solution was achieved on 31 October 2011. Not one of those countries since then has sought to have that decision reversed or referred to the International Court for an advisory opinion on whether its decision was lawful or not.

Do you disagree? If so why?

2. What you also need to come to grips with is that Israel’s right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in the West Bank and Gaza is legitimised under article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

Whether that right should be exercised or not is a different consideration. You are entitled to argue
that it should not – but not that Israel has no legal claim under the above well settled international law,

To base your argument on the idea that the West Bank is “confiscated Palestinian land ” is a load of nonsense. It comprises the remaining 5% of the Mandate where sovereignty has not yet been allocated between Arabs and Jews.

At best – Palestine has now been recognized as a State by 194 other states in the area it effectively controls – Area A and Gaza – the minimum requirement before any entity can seek recognition as a State.

Sovereignty in Areas B and C remain undetermined.

If Palestine wants any of Areas B and C – it will have to come to some agreement with Israel on a new negotiating process to replace Oslo and the Roadmap.

That negotiating process will not be about Palestinian statehood (which occurred on 31 October 2011), It will be about two states claiming the same piece of land.

Do you disagree? If so why?

“Ben” , in this context, is ridiculously irrelevant.

What recognition of Palestine does is increase the bargaining power for the PLO and legitimacy on the international scene.

Israel is losing the PR war. How can it win? Occupying another people is not a good look. Images of soldiers with M-16s handcuffing minors in the middle of the night does not win friends.

Anyone who really cares about Israel will ensure that Israel gets out of the West Bank and opens Gaza to freedom of movement and economic development.

The words of Haider Shafi spoken 21 years ago at the Madrid Peace Conference still ring true:
“We have already wasted enough time, energy, and resources locked in this violent embrace of mutual destruction and defensiveness. We urge you to take this opportunity and rise to meet the challenge of peace.

Settlements on confiscated Palestinian land and the expropriation of our resources will surely sabotage the process launched by this Conference, for they are major obstacles to peace. They constitute a flagrant violation of Palestinian rights and the Fourth Geneva Convention. All settlement activity and confiscation of Palestinian land must stop, for these measures constitute the institutionalized plunder of our people’s heritage and future.

The Palestinians are a people with legitimate national rights. We are not “the inhabitants of territories” or an accident of history or an obstacle to Israel’s expansionist plans, or an abstract demo graphic problem. You may wish to close your eyes to this fact, Mr. Shamir, but we are here in the sight of the world, before your very eyes, and we shall not be denied. In exile or under occupation, we are one people, united despite adversity, determined to exercise our right to self-determination and to establish an independent state, led by our own legitimate and acknowledged leadership. The question of all our refugees will be dealt with during the permanent status negotiations under the terms of United Nations Resolution 194.”

Thank you Shirlee for your contribution. Arabs, like Turks, are a linguistic/cultural grouping extending from Yemen to Morocco. As Turkic people exist from Anatolia to China, or Latin Americans existing from Panama to Chile.

Jews include the Berbers of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisians, Libyans, Egyptians, Baghdadis, Iranians, Ethiopians, the Himyar of Yemen, the Shanivar Teli and Cochinites of India and the Shangai Jews of China, the Yiddish Jews of Germany, Poland, Ukranians and Russians to name a few nationalaties.
Even if you go by the bible, the Hebrew tribes that invaded Canaan were from Ur in Babylon – modern Iraq.

Ben

Here we go again with another attempt by you to do anything but discuss the subject matter of my article.

Human rights can mean different things to different people. The law is the law. It gives the authority for people to act in accordance with it.

The Mandate of Palestine is international law. Its terms were unanimously approved by every single member of the then League of Nations.

Article 80 of the UN Charter is international law – approved by every member of the then United Nations.

You need to make a decision – do you believe in the rule of law or rule of the jungle?

The law is not necessarily perfect – but I believe it is the best system we have of regulating relations between human beings.

The Mandate system created by international law gave the Arabs 99% of the captured Ottoman Empire and the Jews just 0.001%.

By any standards this was a generous disposition of territory and the law confirmed it as such.

Focusing on the 0.001% (which was even further reduced when 78% of that infinitesimal amount was also given to the Arabs to eventually become Jordan) has been the cause of the continuing conflict in the Middle East for the last 90 years – bringing death and suffering to both Jews and Arabs alike.

Until the Arabs and people like yourself accept what the law has decreed – the conflict will not end.

The PLO declared such laws to be null and void in 1964 because it made their claims to take over this 0.001% of territory not in Arab hands untenable under the PLO Charter. The PLO represents the perfect example of where lawbreakers eventually end up – cornered and with nowhere to go.

Hamas and the 22 Arab States ( with the exception of Egypt and Jordan) that have refused the right of the Jews to have their own state in this tiny sliver of land being their biblical and ancestral homeland – as decreed by the Mandate and article 80 – are also in a corner and headed nowhere. Even Egypt and Jordan may be set to go the same way if they seek to annul the peace treaties they have signed with Israel or unlawfully breach their terms.

Agitate to change the law if you feel aggrieved. But until it happens – act in accordance with it.

I believe the admission of Palestine to UNESCO was unconstitutional and unlawful and have tried to get UNESCO to review this decision by approaching the International Court for an advisory opinion. UNESCO has refused.

Until it is reversed – it stands – and I believe all 194 states in UNESCO now complicit in that decision are bound by that decision and its consequences. Do you?

Ben

Please do some research before saying that Arabs are the indigenous people of the region of Palestine.

They aren’t, Jews are.

Arabs are a Mesopotamian people and are the native inhabitants of Iraq.

Both Winter and Singer raise interesting points, but not the obvious ones about human rights. Why is it incumbent on an indigenous people to accept a colonial partition ? The Zionist presence in Palestine, indigenous Jewish communities not included, was that of a colonial project.
In spite of ideological differences, neither Herzel ( represented by his successors), nor Jabotinsky made any bones about the colonial nature of their project. Herzel even contemplated colonies in Argentina and was open to settling Uganda with British colonial support. The mandate and Balfour declaration were imposed on the Palestinian people by power of arms, and both were opposed by indigenous Palestinians.

Does the right of colonisers over-ride the rights of an indigenous people to resist colonisation ? Are we talking hierarchies of rights for different people or universal human rights ?

Let me pre-empt the predictable accusations of distortion, lies, anti-semitism, self-hatred etc and state that I am willing to show evidence that both Herzel and Jabotinsky stated their project as one of colonisation.

There ae a lot of Lawyer’s opinion here but nio human rights. Art 80 makes – by inference – reference to the GA resolution on the partition of Palstine into Jewish and Arab territories, th resolution also names Jerusalem as a corpus separatum. The mandate was imposed on the Palestinian people, as was the Balfour declaration, and was opposed by Palestinian freedom fighters, incidentally with the collaboration of the Jewsih agency.
The only reference one find here is that on partition, and a GA resolution at that. Incidentally, there are approximately 60 GA resolutions on Palestinian issues and the resolution on Jerusalem as a corpu separatum. Israeli apologists have argued that GA resolutions are un-enforcable, so how does just one GA resolution (in part if the Jerusalem is included) become enforcable in international Law ?

Ben, your comprehension of written matter is as poor as your spelling.

Art. 80 of the UN Charter states what you wrote, but it means that previous legal instruments apply.

Your, oh so important, contribution, makes David’s case. Thanks.

Paul

I agree with your comments.

Turning down the offers made by Israel to the the Palestinian Arabs in 2000 and 2008 proved yet again the truth of Abba Eban’s wise observation.

Ironically however rushing off to the UN and UNESCO to unilaterally seek statehood outside the negotiating framework established by the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap are two opportunities the Palestinians should have missed.

I guess you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.