The UN acts in violation of International Law while claiming to uphold it

T. Belman. I decided to repost this important article because the title was right then and is right now.  The UNGA recently recognized the State of Palestine contrary to the Montevideo Convention which sets out the legal requirements for statehood:

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

At a minimum, “Palestine” does not have a “defined territory.”

Another example of the UN ignoring the law. The UN backed Oslo Accords clearly gives Israel full control of Area C.  Nevertheless the UN and its member states are financing Arab construction in Area C in total disregard of the Oslo Accords.

My 2009 article Can the UN impose a solution on Israel?  shed’s further light on the purpose of the UN

By Ted Belman (Published April 21, 2012)

The United Nations’ Human Rights Council has resorted to official enquiries as a precursor to damning Israel — the most recent of which was the Goldstone Enquiry on Cast Lead, Israel’s attack on Hamas in Gaza.  And we know how that turned out. Israel was accused of all manner of war crimes, though none were proven to have been committed.

Last week, the UNHRC passed a resolution to “dispatch an independent international fact-finding mission, to be appointed by the president of the Human Rights Council, to investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.”  The resolution was based, inter alia, on a written statement produced by Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, a Palestinian NGO financed by a number of European countries.

This statement, under the heading “Concentration and Containment,” accused Israel of applying various land laws and planning laws which aimed at “the ‘confiscation and colonization’ of the vast majority of Palestinian owned land; and the ‘concentration and containment’ of the Palestinian population within small pockets of land, which are dispersed and fragmented across the OPT and within Israel.”  A number of allegations are set out in support.

Given the liberal proclivities of the Israel High Court, there should be no worry that anyone’s rights are being trampled on in Judea and Samaria, or in Jerusalem, for that matter.  Alan Dershowitz praised the Court with these words:

    “Many also seem to be unaware of the fact that Israel’s record on human rights and freedoms is among the best in the world, and certainly the best in the region. Israel has a completely free press, which is generally highly critical of the Israeli government.  No Arab country has a free press, nor does the Palestinian Authority. Israel has a completely independent judiciary, the only one in the entire area. Its Supreme Court, one of the best in the world, is the only court in which an Arab in the Middle East can expect to get justice in lawsuits brought against any government.”

So why resort to the UNHRC?  Simple.  The report will be a basis to delegitimize and demonize Israel and to force her to change her legal course.

The acronym “OPT” stands for “Occupied Palestinian Territory.”  The Arabs no longer refer to Judea and Samaria as the “West Bank,” which was Jordanian nomenclature during its period of occupation from 1948 to 1967; they now prefer to brand it as Palestinian land which is occupied.

Not only is the land not “occupied,” but it is also not “Palestinian.”  It never was “Palestinian” — i.e., subject to Palestinian sovereignty.  Sovereignty of Judea and Samaria has never been allocated, nor has sovereignty been claimed.  Israel refers to the region’s status as “disputed,” but I personally reject such a description because the Palestinians have no legal claim to this territory.  Israel alone has the right to claim sovereignty over these lands.

During the first half of the last century until the State of Israel was declared in 1948, the Jews living under the Palestine Mandate were referred to as Palestinians and thought of themselves as such. The Arabs living there were generally considered Syrians or Jordanians or just plain Arabs.  It was not until the sixties and seventies that they began calling themselves Palestinians so as to claim all of Mandated Palestine for themselves.

Howard Grief, the author of The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law and the leading expert on the subject, co-copied me with three powerful letters in defense of Israel’s rights, in which he writes:

  • The country of Palestine was created in April 1920 at the San Remo Peace Conference for one purpose only – to be the Jewish National Home, and the term “Occupied Palestinian Territory” is thus an oxymoron since Palestine was never intended to be an Arab land under international law[.]” …
  • “Upon the re-birth of the Jewish State on May 15, 1948, Jewish legal rights to Palestine were devolved upon the State of Israel. Whatever you may think, those rights never lapsed, were never annulled or voided and never validly or legally transferred to an Arab people known as “Palestinians”, as you so wrongly assume. Moreover, subsequent events – such as the 1947 Partition Resolution, Security Council Resolution 242, the Israel-PLO Agreements or the Road Map Peace Plan – have not superseded or curtailed the rights of the Jewish People to former Mandated Palestine[.]”

Israel’s Deputy FM Ayalon explained The Truth about the West Bank in a now famous video.

The charters of both Fatah and Hamas and the Arabs in general consider the San Remo Resolution and the Mandate to be passed in violation of Arab rights and therefore illegal.  They want these laws reversed and Israel destroyed.  They have no respect for international law, but they bash Israel in the name of international law, though Israel is not in violation of it.

The international community accepts these legal determinations but applies the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention (FGC) to classify Judea and Samaria as occupied territory.  Opponents of Israel cite in support the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the apparently questionable legality of the security fence built by Israel.  Israel chose not to participate in its hearing.  The ICJ determined that the FGC applied and that the construction fence was illegal.  With all due respect to them, I suggest that this determination was wrong and certainly not binding..

FGC provides:

    1. In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party.

Previous to the ’67 War, Jordon was in possession of the lands, but Jordan’s sovereignty over them was recognized only by Britain and Pakistan.  Thus, the lands in question were not “the territory of a High Contracting Party.”

The IJC finessed this precondition by holding that

    “the Convention applies, in particular, in any territory occupied in the course of the conflict by one of the contracting parties.”

Be that as it may, the Palestinians, as set out in the statement submitted by BADILS, are not really complaining about violations of the FGC so much as they are  complaining about the terms of the Oslo Accords, which divide the land into Areas A, B, and C.  The Palestinians are not satisfied with building in Areas A and B, where they are fully in control; instead, they want to build in Area C, where they have no rights and where Israel is in control.

Accordingly, they ask of the HRC, inter alia, to:

    1. Condemn Israel’s policy of land and resources grab in area C and in east Jerusalem in order to build and/or expand colonies while the Palestinian communities in these areas are prohibited from acquiring permits to build houses on their own land. To call upon Israel to immediately revoke all orders concerning the demolition of houses and eviction of Palestinians in the OPT.

Condemn Israel’s practice of prohibiting Palestinians living in Area C and in East Jerusalem of receiving building permits and therewith hindering the natural growth of those communities.

They also ask that the HRC to:

    1. Register Israel’s system of institutionalized discrimination that distinguishes between Jewish nationals and citizens and Palestinian Arabs and extends from Israel Proper to the OPT.

Register Israel’s continuing practices of house demolitions, land confiscations, and its adoption of policies resulting in inadequate housing and living conditions.

Israel is treating all residents living in Judea and Samaria, whether Arab or Jew, pursuant to  Occupation Law and is treating all residents of Israel, whether Jew or Arab, according to Israeli law.  Any house demolitions or land confiscation in either place takes place according to the law of the land.

Essentially, the Palestinians, with the aid of the international community, keep rewriting the rules of the game to favor their cause.

Israel accepted Res. 242 in ’67, which allowed her to stay in occupation until she had an agreement for secure and recognized borders.  The resolution also permitted Israel to keep some of the land.  It was not until ’83 that Yasser Arafat accepted the resolution, which he was required to do as a precondition to entering the Oslo Accords.  In reality, he and the PA rejected the resolution, and they still do, as they demand 100% of the land in any settlement. And the PA violates said resolution by inciting and perpetrating violence every day.

The Oslo Accords were silent on the question of settlement construction, yet the PA demands the cessation of same as a precondition to negotiations.  And now they are demanding that the Accords be amended to allow them to build in Area C.

Unfortunately, the U.N., the EU, and even the U.S. support them in their endeavors.

The sooner Israel abrogates the Oslo Accords for cause, the better. But that won’t stop the delegitimizing and demonizing.  It will just change the playing field.

Pursuant to her legal rights as defined above by Howard Grief, Israel should claim sovereignty over Area C and settle it as she sees fit.  It is her right.

May 12, 2024 | 17 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

17 Comments / 17 Comments

  1. We’ve discussed this a number of times before (review the comments). The real issue is that Israel cannot shout the information regarding ownership of Judea and Samaria loud enough that even a few in the world would pay attention, not to speak of actually believing it.
    Our current main problem is that those who call themselves Palestinians, a) stole that identity, and b) that the have managed with US help, to gain a foothold in and around Ramallah.
    If they were to be granted statehood based on Areas A & B, they would then proceed to legally militarize that region and ask for help from a number of surrounding countries such as Iran or Saudi Arabia, not to speak of Qatar, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and any number of North African countries. Please note the emphasis on “legally” above. Any agreement the might sign would be immediately discarded on the grounds of apparent coercion.
    With these foreign forces within spitting distance of Jerusalem, there would be no way to keep them under control that they not attack Jewish towns and villages nearby.
    In the ensuing war, all of Judea and Samaria would become “Occupied Territory” and the whole world would scream that Israel, although attacked, would not be permitted to retain its “ill gotten gains”.
    This is the mild version of what could happen.
    The more likely version is that all these foreign forces would call for support from the rest of the world and plenty of those would be only too pleased to join in. This would mean genocide and annihilation of the Israelis which is explicitly reported in various chapters of your bible, should you have one. The result can also be found there.

  2. The international community is twisting and rewriting the Geneva Convention rules to desperately try to portray Israel as a war criminal.

  3. Top European Human Rights Judge Exposed As A Jew-Hater

    Not the pro-Palestinian left-wing kind which we have come to expect, but an open neo-Nazi, to be precise. He served in the court from 1998 to 2016 and was vice-president of the UN committee against torture. Somebody just noticed his social media posts. How many more like this, do you suppose?

    https://www.jewishpress.com/news/jewish-news/antisemitism-news/top-european-human-rights-judge-exposed-as-a-jew-hater/2023/08/24/

  4. UN acts in violation of many laws. Thanks Ted for your edifying article. With 22 Arab nations and only one Jewish (?) nation, is it any wonder who has a majority vote in the UN? (Not to ignore the self-righteous EU nations who back the false claims of the Arabs re: so-called “OPT”. England is at the front of supporting unlawful building in “Area C”. Why won’t our government stop it and confiscate any buildings illegally built there?

  5. Under the terms of the Oslo Accords, the palestinian authority agreed to Israeli presence in Area B and Area C for security purposes until a final status agreement. How can it possibly be considered “occupied” when Israel is there with the agreement of the palestinians?

    Ninety nine percent of the “common knowledge” about the Israeli – palestinian conflict is utter bullshit.

  6. @ Stanley:

    Excuse me Stanley, I am not concerned about international law. If you haven’t noticed lately international law has done nothing for Israel.

    I just feel Israelis will feel more comfortable with Jewish tort law when they kick the Arabs out of Israel.

    By the way notice how international law has responded to Hamas raining rockets on Israel on almost a daily basis.
    Their silence has been deafening.

    International law is anti-Semitic.

  7. @ rongrand:
    Correct me if I”m wrong- Jewish tort Law has little influence in international affairs. Rabbis do not usually negotiate on behalf of governments. Now perhaps you know better!

  8. @ bernard ross:

    by not pursuing its rightful claims and by not unilaterally enforcing these claims.

    It’s said “in Jewish Rabbinic tort law, there is a general principle that “Whoever is taking away from the other, it’s his responsibility to prove his ownership”, i.e., whoever is in possession of the object or money in dispute does not have the burden of proving his right to hold onto it…it’s the other litigant who must prove he doesn’t.

    Not being Jewish someone needs to help me out on this.

    Maybe it’s “Possession is 9/10’s of the law”

    Bottom line Israel needs to be sure it doesn’t give any more land away (Gaza was a no no), in fact they should start reclaiming as much as they can, by force if necessary. Why not?

    If Hamas can rain rockets into Israel without the world interference, why not Israel kicking Arabs out of Israel.

    No moderation Ted

  9. there seems to be little doubt among those who familiarize themselves with the Balfour declaration, san remo treaty, league of nations mandate, illegal UK swindle creating JEW FREE Jordan,ethnic cleansing of Jews from arab lands after 48 war and accepted by world post GC, etc. that Israels legal rights appear strong. However, what does this mean if the govt of Israel, or any other jewish organization, does not prosecute these rights in a legal forum, does not educate its citizens accordingly, does not demand redress for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from arab lands, does not claim precedent set by the ethnic cleansing and establishment of Jordan. Israel has painted itself into the corner of public opinion, and the ignorance thereof, by not pursuing its rightful claims and by not unilaterally enforcing these claims. If Israel was united in its rightful claims there would not be a problem: it is the wide discrepancy between the position of the left and right in Israel that is perpetuating Israel problems

  10. @ rongrand:
    Who controls The U.N.? Just a few groups that number several hindred,PERHAPS A COUPLE OF THOUSAND. THE NEW WORLD ORDER, THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION, THE SAUDI ROYAL FAMILY, THE BILDERBERG GROUP.

  11. Agree with you Ted, Lisa did well.

    The Palestinians can color it all they want, bottom line it’s not theirs.

    Let’s face reality, the UN can say whatever they want, consider the source. The UN is a worthless body of a number of bad governments, a majority are anti-Semites. It’s obvious who they stand with or should I say stand against.

    Like Obama, neither he or the UN can be trusted.

    Bottom line, trust G-d.

  12. Another important component that underlies political misconceptions over Israel’s claim to exist and its so-called “occupied” territory–namely, that which the Palestinians now claim, is how and where the name derived. Contrary to common perceptions, the original Palestinians were not Arabs. I have excerpted the following response by Eiffel-ga, who has compiled and quoted several sources that describe the “etymology of Palestine” (see http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/65959.html):

    Hi adon,

    Some people are attempting to bend the etymology of “palestine” to
    suit their own political agenda, so I will start this answer with a
    quote predating the current political situation. This quote is from
    Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary, which I accessed via Google’s
    dictionary lookup facility.

    “Palestine originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan
    inhabited by the Philistines (Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel 3:4),
    and in this sense exclusively the Hebrew name Pelesheth (rendered
    “Philistia” in Ps. 60:8; 83:7; 87:4; 108:9) occurs in the Old
    Testament…”

    The dictionary entry is several pages long, going into considerable
    detail of the biblical history of this area:

    Dictionary.com
    http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=palestine&r=67
    (scroll down to the third entry)

    Other sources provide some more detail:

    “The name Palestine refers to a region of the eastern Mediterranean
    coast from the sea to the Jordan valley and from the southern Negev
    desert to the Galilee lake region in the north. The word itself
    derives from ‘Plesheth’, a name that appears frequently in the Bible
    and has come into English as ‘Philistine’. Plesheth, (root palash) was
    a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the
    Philistine’s invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea. The
    Philistines were … most closely related to the Greeks originating
    from Asia Minor and Greek localities”:

    Where did the name Palestine come from?
    http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early_palestine_name_origin.php

    “In the First Century CE, the Romans crushed the independent kingdom
    of Judea. After the failed rebellion of Bar Kokhba in the Second
    Century CE, the Roman Emperor Hadrian … took the name Palastina
    [‘land of the Philistines’] and imposed it on all the Land of Israel.
    At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia
    Capitolina”:

    The History and Meaning Of “Palestine” and “Palestinians”
    http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/meaning.html

    “The Romans renamed the land we call Israel, ‘Palestinia’ from which
    has come the modern term ‘Palestine’ … The term Palestine is rarely
    used in the modern translations of the Old Testament, and when it is,
    it refers specifically to the southwestern coastal area of Israel
    occupied by the Philistines. It is a translation of the Hebrew word
    ‘Pelesheth.’ The term is never used to refer to the whole land of
    Israel … In the New Testament, the term Palestine is never used”:

    Israel or Palestine? Which is it?
    http://www.israelunitycoalition.com/archive/may01/052601_israelorpalestine.htm

    “The word Palestine does not occur in the original Hebrew or Greek
    translations of the Bible. The Hebrew term Pelesheth, which refers to
    the land of the ancient Philistines – Philistia – is … translated in
    King James Version as ‘Palestina’ in Exodus 15:14 and in Isaiah 14:29
    and 31, and as ‘Palestine’ in Joel 3:4. The New King James Version …
    reads ‘Philistia’ – the land of the Philistines – in every case noted
    above.”

    Palestine and the Palestinians
    http://www.restoredcog.org/articles/patp-print.html

    I wish more people cared to be better informed. The propaganda campaign to delegitimize Israel has swayed a vast majority.

  13. Another important component that underlies political misconceptions over Israel’s claim to exist and its so-called “occupied” territory–namely, that which the Palestinians now claim, is how and where the name derived. Contrary to common perceptions, the original Palestinians were not Arabs. I have excerpted the following response by Eiffel-ga, who has compiled and quoted several sources that describe the “etymology of Palestine” (see http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/65959.html):

    Hi adon,

    Some people are attempting to bend the etymology of “palestine” to
    suit their own political agenda, so I will start this answer with a
    quote predating the current political situation. This quote is from
    Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary, which I accessed via Google’s
    dictionary lookup facility.

    “Palestine originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan
    inhabited by the Philistines (Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel 3:4),
    and in this sense exclusively the Hebrew name Pelesheth (rendered
    “Philistia” in Ps. 60:8; 83:7; 87:4; 108:9) occurs in the Old
    Testament…”

    The dictionary entry is several pages long, going into considerable
    detail of the biblical history of this area:

    Dictionary.com

    http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=palestine&r=67

    (scroll down to the third entry)

    Other sources provide some more detail:

    “The name Palestine refers to a region of the eastern Mediterranean
    coast from the sea to the Jordan valley and from the southern Negev
    desert to the Galilee lake region in the north. The word itself
    derives from ‘Plesheth’, a name that appears frequently in the Bible
    and has come into English as ‘Philistine’. Plesheth, (root palash) was
    a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the
    Philistine’s invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea. The
    Philistines were … most closely related to the Greeks originating
    from Asia Minor and Greek localities”:

    Where did the name Palestine come from?
    http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early_palestine_name_origin.php

    “In the First Century CE, the Romans crushed the independent kingdom
    of Judea. After the failed rebellion of Bar Kokhba in the Second
    Century CE, the Roman Emperor Hadrian … took the name Palastina
    [‘land of the Philistines’] and imposed it on all the Land of Israel.
    At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia
    Capitolina”:

    The History and Meaning Of “Palestine” and “Palestinians”
    http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/meaning.html

    “The Romans renamed the land we call Israel, ‘Palestinia’ from which
    has come the modern term ‘Palestine’ … The term Palestine is rarely
    used in the modern translations of the Old Testament, and when it is,
    it refers specifically to the southwestern coastal area of Israel
    occupied by the Philistines. It is a translation of the Hebrew word
    ‘Pelesheth.’ The term is never used to refer to the whole land of
    Israel … In the New Testament, the term Palestine is never used”:

    Israel or Palestine? Which is it?

    http://www.israelunitycoalition.com/archive/may01/052601_israelorpalestine.htm

    “The word Palestine does not occur in the original Hebrew or Greek
    translations of the Bible. The Hebrew term Pelesheth, which refers to
    the land of the ancient Philistines – Philistia – is … translated in
    King James Version as ‘Palestina’ in Exodus 15:14 and in Isaiah 14:29
    and 31, and as ‘Palestine’ in Joel 3:4. The New King James Version …
    reads ‘Philistia’ – the land of the Philistines – in every case noted
    above.”

    Palestine and the Palestinians

    http://www.restoredcog.org/articles/patp-print.html

    I wish more people cared to be better informed. The propaganda campaign to delegitimize Israel has swayed a vast majority.