by Salubrius
In 1920 at San Remo the Jewish People
were recognized by the Principal Allied War Powers in WWI as owning the
political rights to Palestine; the competing Arab claims also submitted at the
Paris Peace talks were implicitly denied in Palestine but recognized in the
rest of the Middle East, i.e. Syria & Mesopotamia and, indirectly later in
Transjordan. The Allies had conquered this area from the Ottoman Empire in a
defensive war. Their ruling was based on the historic association of the
Jewish People with Palestine in which there had been a continuous uninterrupted
Jewish presence for 3,700 years. In 1922 this political right was
recognized by 52 nations but limited to Palestine west of the Jordan River.
The rights were required to be placed in trust until the Jewish People
attained a majority of population in the area in which they were to exercise
sovereignty and were capable of exercising sovereignty in that area.
In 1948 the trustee abandoned its legal
dominion over the political rights that were in trust and the Jewish People had
established unified control over Palestine west of the Jordan River with some
exceptions. Just after it had declared independence in that year, the
Jewish People’s State of Israel was invaded. Judea, Samaria, and East Jerusalem
were invaded by the Arab Legion supplied and led by the British; they became
illegally occupied by Jordan, and the Gaza Strip was similarly invaded and
illegally occupied by Egypt. By 1950 the Jews had also attained a Jewish
majority population in the remaining area. With both a majority population in
the area governed and the ability to exercise sovereignty, the political rights
to that area vested in the Jews so they had legal dominion over them and the
Jews were then sovereign in that area. Following 1967 the Jewish People
had annexed East Jerusalem; in 1967 it also liberated the other areas that had
been illegally occupied. Later, in 2005 the Jews withdrew from the Gaza
Strip.
It follows that now the Jewish People
have sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem as well as the
territory within the Green Line because they own and have legal dominion over
the political rights to these areas and have established unified control over
them even though they have not as yet asserted that sovereignty except for East
Jerusalem.
International Law does recognize the
right of political self-determination in the case of colonies external to the
areas from which they are ruled. This is
referred to as "decolonization". International Law supports
decolonization. The quest for the right of political-self determination
of a group of people in an area internal to the boundaries of a state that has
sovereignty is referred to as "secession". A secession would violate the territorial
integrity of a sovereign state.
Effective as of 1976, International Law
recognized the right of a "people" to political self- determination
but it did not provide any indication of where that rule would be applied.
In any event, the so-called "Palestinians" do not meet the test
of a legitimate "people" but are, in fact, an undifferentiated part
of the Arab people residing in Palestine who were invented as a separate
"people" by the Soviet dezinformatsiya
in 1964.
In a decolonization, International Law
gives preference to self-determination over territorial integrity.
International Law regarding secession of an area internal to a
state is a wholly different matter. The right to secede is not a general
right of political self-determination for all peoples or nations. It is
limited by the territorial integrity of a sovereign state. The unilateral right
to secede, i.e. the right to secede without consent from a sovereign state, if
it is to be recognized, say most commentators on International Law, should be
understood as a remedial right only, a last resort response to serious
injustices. In addition, those wanting to secede must show they have the
capability of exercising sovereignty.
There is no evidence of serious injustice
to support such a remedial right for the Arabs residing in Judea, Samaria and
East Jerusalem although they have long complained of perpetual victimhood.
Nor do they have the capability to exercise sovereignty such as unified
control over the area they wish to have designated as an independent state.
It follows that the so called
"Palestinians" have no right to political self determination under
International Law.
Salubrius is the nom de guerre of Wallace Edward Brand, retired attorney living in Virginia.
Source: Middle East and Terrorism
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment