Tuesday, December 26, 2017

The legal rights and title of sovereignty of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and Palestine under international law.


The legal rights and title of sovereignty of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and Palestine under international law. 
                                                                 
  
These rights originated in the global political and legal settlement, conceived during World War I and carried into execution in the post-war years between 1919 and 1923. Insofar as the Ottoman Turkish Empire was concerned, the settlement embraced the claims of the Zionist Organization, the Arab National movement which received over 6 million sq. mi. of territory with a wealth of oil reserves, the Kurds, the Assyrians and the Armenians.
As part of the settlement in which the Arabs received most of the lands formerly under Turkish sovereignty in the
Middle East which was about 13 million sq. km., the whole of Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan, was reserved exclusively for the Jewish people as their national home and future independent state.
Under the terms of the settlement that were made by the Principal Allied Powers consisting of Britain, France, Italy and Japan, there would be no annexation of the conquered Turkish territories by any of the Powers, as had been planned in the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement of May 9 and 16, 1916. Instead, these territories, including the peoples for whom they were designated, would be placed under the Mandates System and administered by an advanced nation until they were ready to stand by themselves. The Mandates System was established and governed by Article 22 of the Covenant of the
League of Nations, contained in the Treaty of Versailles and all the other peace treaties made with the Central Powers – Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey

The Covenant was the idea of US President Woodrow Wilson and contained in it his program of Fourteen Points of January 8, 1918, while Article 22 which established the Mandates System, was largely the work of Jan Christiaan Smuts who formulated the details in a memorandum that became known as the Smuts Resolution, officially endorsed by the Council of Ten on January 30, 1919, in which Palestine as a whole envisaged in the Balfour Declaration was named as one of the mandated states to be created. The official creation of the country took place at the April 1920 San Remo Peace Conference where the Balfour Declaration was adopted by the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers as the basis for the future administration of Palestine which would henceforth be recognized as the Jewish National Home with no boundary restrictions.
The moment of the re-birth of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty thus took place at the same time Palestine was created a mandated state for the Jewish people, since it was created for no other reason than to reconstitute the ancient Jewish state of Judea in fulfillment of the Balfour Declaration and the general provisions of Article 22 of the League Covenant. This meant that
Palestine without boundary restrictions from the start was legally a Jewish state in theory that was to be guided towards independence by a Mandatory or Trustee, also acting as Tutor, and who would take the necessary political, administrative and economic measures to establish the Jewish National Home. The chief means for accomplishing this was by encouraging large-scale Jewish immigration to Palestine, which would eventually result in making all of Palestine an independent Jewish state, not only legally but also in the demographic and cultural senses.
The details for the planned independent Jewish state were set forth in three basic documents, which may be termed the founding documents of mandated
Palestine and the modern Jewish state of Israel that arose from it. These were the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, the Mandate for Palestine conferred on Britain as trustee by the Principal Allied Powers and confirmed by the League of Nations on July 24, 1922, and the Franco-British Boundary Convention of December 23, 1920. These founding documents were supplemented by the Anglo-American Convention of December 3, 1924 respecting the Mandate for Palestine. It is of supreme importance to remember always that these documents were the source or well-spring of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty over all of Palestine and the Land of Israel under international law,
because of the near-universal but completely false belief that it was the United Nations General Assembly Partition Resolution of November 29, 1947 that brought the State of Israel into existence. In fact, the UN resolution was an illegal abrogation of Jewish legal rights and title of sovereignty to the whole of Palestine and the Land of Israel, rather than an affirmation of such rights or progenitor of them.
The April 1920 San Remo Resolution converted the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917 from a mere statement of British policy expressing sympathy with the goal of the Zionist movement to create a Jewish state into a binding act of international law that required specific fulfillment as trustee by Britain of this object in active cooperation with the Jewish people. Under the Balfour Declaration as originally issued by the British government, the latter only promised to use their best endeavors to facilitate the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. But under the San Remo Resolution of April 24-25, 1920, the Principal Allied Powers as a cohesive group charged the British government as trustee with the responsibility or legal obligation of putting into effect the Balfour Declaration. A legal onus as trustee was thus placed on Britain to ensure that the Jewish National Home would be duly established. This onus the British Government willingly accepted because at the time the Balfour Declaration was issued and adopted at the April 1920 San Remo Peace Conference, Palestine was considered a valuable strategic asset and communications center, and so a vital necessity for protecting far-flung British imperial interests extending from Egypt to India. Britain was fearful of having any major country or power other than itself, especially France or Germany, positioned alongside the Suez Canal.
The term “Jewish National Home” was defined to mean a state by the British government at the Cabinet session which approved the Balfour Declaration on
October 31, 1917. That was also the meaning originally given to this phrase by the program committee which drafted the Basel Program at the first Zionist Congress in August 1897 and by Theodore Herzel, the founder of the Zionist Organization. The word “home” as used in the Balfour Declaration and subsequently in the April 1920 San Remo Resolution was simply the euphemism for a state originally adopted by the Zionist Organization when the territory of Palestine was subject to the rule of the Ottoman Empire, so as not to arouse the sharp opposition of the Sultan and his government to the Zionist aim, which involved a potential loss of this territory by the Empire. There was no doubt in the minds of the authors of the Basel Program and the Balfour Declaration regarding the true meaning of this word, a meaning reinforced by the addition of the adjective “national” to “home”. However, as a result of not using the word “state” directly and proclaiming that meaning openly or even attempting to hide its true meaning when it was first used to denote the aim of Zionism, ammunition was provided to those who sought to prevent the emergence of a Jewish state or who saw the Home only in cultural terms.
YJ Draiman


The San Remo Conference of April 1920, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration as international treaty and law; reconstituted the Jewish National Home in all of Palestine as international law; thus, they assigned its implementation to the League of Nation with the Mandate for Palestine and the British as trustee to promote Jewish immigration, development of the land and bring about the sovereign Jewish State in all of Palestine. These terms was confirmed by the 1920 Treaty of Sevres Article 95 that all the Allied Powers signed and which terms were incorporated to the Mandate of Palestine.
The Jewish National Home in all of
Palestine was reconstituted to take affect in 1920; with a provision that sovereignty will be reached when they become majority.
Faisal Weizmann Agreement signed January 3, 1919, stated that The Jewish National Home will be in what is known as
Palestine.
The Inquiry academics accompanied President Wilson to
Paris in 1919. For Palestine, they recommended that the dispersed Jewish People settle there and later, rule in Palestine. Initial rule was to be carried out by a trustee for the Jewish People (Great Britain under the Mandate for Palestine).
American Proposal for Jewish Homeland, January 21, 1919
An excerpt from the Tentative Report and Recommendations of the Intelligence Section of the American Delegation to the Peace Conference, in accordance with instructions, for the President and the Plenipotentiaries, January 21, 1919*
26.
Palestine
It is recommended:
1) That there be established a separate state of
Palestine.
2) That this state be placed under
Great Britain as a mandatory of the League of Nations.
3) That the Jews be invited to return to Palestine without boundary restrictions and settle there being assured by the Conference of all proper assistance in so doing that may be consistent with the protection of the personal (especially the religious) and the property rights of the non-Jewish population, and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize all of Palestine as a Jewish state as soon as it is a Jewish state in fact.
4) That the holy places and religious rights of all creeds in
Palestine are placed under the protection of the League of Nations and it’s mandatory.
For discussion:
1) It is recommended that there be established a separate state of
Palestine.
The separation of the Palestinian area from
Syria finds justification in the religious experience of mankind. The Jewish and Christian churches were born in Palestine, and Jerusalem was for long years, at different periods, the Jewish capital. And while the relation of the Mohammedans to Palestine is not so intimate, from the beginning they have regarded Jerusalem as a holy place. Only by establishing Palestine as a separate state can justice be done to these great facts.
As drawn upon the map, the new state would control its own source of water power and irrigation, on
Mount Hermon in the east to the Jordan; a feature of great importance since the success of the new state would depend upon the possibilities of agricultural development.
2) It is recommended that this state be placed under
Great Britain as trustee and a mandatory of the League of Nations.
Palestine would obviously need wise and firm guidance. Its population is without political experience, is racially composite, and could easily become distracted by fanaticism and bitter religious differences.
The success of
Great Britain in dealing with similar situations, her relation to Egypt, and her administrative achievements since General Allenby freed Palestine from the Turk; all indicate her as the logical mandatory.
3) It is recommended that the Jews be invited to return to Palestine in its entirety and settle there, being assured by the Conference of all proper assistance in so doing that may be consistent with the protection of the personal (especially the religious) and the property rights of the non-Jewish population, and being further assured that it will be the policy of the League of Nations to recognize all of Palestine as a Jewish state as soon as it is a Jewish state in fact.
It is right that
Palestine without boundary restrictions should become a Jewish state, if the Jews, being given the full opportunity, make it such. It was the cradle and home of their vital race, which has made large spiritual contributions to mankind, and is the only land in which they can hope to find a home of their own; they being in this last respect unique among significant peoples.
At present, however, the Jews form barely a tenth of the total population of 550,000 in
Palestine, and whether they are to form a majority, or even a plurality, of the population in the future state remains uncertain. Palestine, in short, is far from being a Jewish country now. England, as mandatory, can be relied on to give the Jews the privileged position they should have without sacrificing the rights of non-Jews.
4) It is recommended that the holy places and religious rights of all creeds in
Palestine be placed under the protection of the League of Nations and it’s mandatory.
The basis for this recommendation is self-evident.

YJ Draiman

2 comments:

  1. Political Rights in Palestine aka The Land of Israel were granted only and exclusively to the Jews in all of Palestine and that includes the east bank of the Jordan River which is now Jordan.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Face it - No Arab-Palestinian state west of the Jordan River
    If you read the 1917 Balfour Declaration (Which emulated Napoleons 1799 letter to the Jewish community in Palestine promising that The National Home for The Jewish people will be reestablished in Palestine, as the Jews are the rightful owners). Nowhere does it state an Arab entity west of The Jordan River. The San Remo Conference of 1920 which incorporated The Balfour Declaration into International Law does not state an Arab entity west of The Jordan River, confirmed by Article 95 in the 1920 Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne. The Mandate for Palestine terms does not state an Arab entity west of the Jordan River. It specifically states a Jewish National Home in Palestine without limiting the Jewish territory in Palestine. It also states that the British should work with the Jewish Agency as the official representative of the Jews in Palestine to implement the National Home of the Jewish people in Palestine. I stress again; nowhere does it state that an Arab entity should be implemented west of the Jordan River.
    As a matter of historical record, The British reallocated illegally over 77% of Jewish Palestine to the Arab-Palestinians in 1922 with specific borders and Jordan took over additional territory like the Gulf of Aqaba which was not part of the allocation to Jordan.

    No where in any of the above stated agreements does it provides for an Arab entity west of the Jordan River. The U.N. resolutions are non-binding with no legal standing, same applies to the ICJ. The Oslo Accords are null and void.

    It is time to relocate the Arabs in Israel to Jordan and to the homes and the 120,000 sq. km. the Arab countries confiscated from the over a million Jewish families that they terrorized and expelled and those expelled Jews were resettled in Israel. They can use the trillions of dollars in reparations for the Jewish assets to finance the relocation of the Arabs and help set-up an economy and industry instead of living on the world charity. The Arab countries were allocated over 13 million sq. km. with a wealth of oil reserves.
    YJ Draiman

    P.S. Possession is nine tenths of the law – Israel has it.
    Political Rights in Palestine aka The Land of Israel were granted only and exclusively to the Jews in all of Palestine and the right to settle in all of Palestine with no exclusions.

    ReplyDelete