Trump ends Arab preoccupation with occupation in Judea and Samaria
President Trump’s decision to recognise the right of Jews to live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) ends a long-running Arab political campaign accompanied by murderous terrorist attacks to drive the Jews out under the Arab mantra – “End the Occupation”.
This mantra had become the Arabs’ rallying cry over the last 53 years as they sought to assert sovereignty over every square meter of this hotly-disputed territory.
These three little words managed to turn Israel’s miraculous victory in the 1967 Six Day War in Judea and Samaria – that saw the Jewish People’s triumphal return to the heart of the biblical and ancestral land of its forefathers – as something to be reviled and reversed.
Those mouthing the mantra did not seek to have the “occupation” ended in favour of Jordan – the previous Arab occupier between 1948 and 1967.
Rather they were insisting it all be given to another group – the “Palestinians” – who did not exist:
- In 1922 – when the League of Nations created the Mandate for Palestine
- In 1937 – when the Peel Commission issued its Report
- In 1947 – when the United Nations recommended the partition of western Palestine into an Arab State and a Jewish State.
- Between 1948-1964 – when Judea and Samaria had been ethnically cleansed of every single Jew who had been living there prior to 1948
The “Palestinians” only first saw the light of day in 1964 when the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Charter was promulgated and Article 1 declared:
Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.
In 2019 the PLO’s legitimacy to rule the “Palestinians” is being challenged by Hamas. Reconciliation between these two competing power seekers is still not in prospect after 13 years of bitter internecine conflict – nor are elections anywhere in sight.
Jordan now sits on the sideline having abandoned any claim to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) in 1988. Jordan shows no interest in attempting to try and restore – as far as is now possible – the status quo existing in these areas Jordan ruled on 4 June 1967.
President Trump is waiting patiently in the wings ready to release his “deal of the century” when Israel’s next Government is eventually formed.
It is surely time for a new mantra – “Right the Wrongs” – to enter into the lexicon of international diplomacy in the Middle East – to replace the racist and apartheid “end the occupation”.
The wrongs are the failure of the United Nations to acknowledge that:
- the provisions of Article 80 of the United Nations Charter reserve to the Jewish people the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Judea and Samaria in accordance with the provisions laid down in article 6 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine
- Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 remain the only internationally accepted bases for resolving the conflict in former Palestine.
The United Nations failure to insist on these binding tenets of international law being universally acknowledged has proved to be a major stumbling block in resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict.
Bowing to extreme pressure from the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference – the United Nations has succumbed to a myriad of General Assembly resolutions that have buried these pillars of international law. The sooner they again become the foundations for peace – the sooner some sanity will return to the Middle East.
Trump’s decisiveness has amazingly ended 53 wasted years of Arab preoccupation with occupation.
David Singer is a Sydney lawyer and foundation member of the International Analysts Network
Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog
I think this article unfortunately misses some key points.. The argument that the “Palestinians” did not exist is a spurious one – the word “Palestinian” like all similar terms is just a label and refers to the non-Jewish inhabitants of the area. The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine states that “nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”. The Peel Reports actually has a chapter titled “The Arabs in Palestine”. What matters is the existence of these people – whether they are called “Palestinians” or some other names is irrelevant. Readers may also be interested in Googling for “Jewish Virtual Library: Population of Israel/Palestine 1517”. What I wonder is why the argument that “Palestinians did not exist” is being made?
Currently the civil rights of non-Jewish communities are being severely prejudiced, for example via restrictions in building permits in “Area C”, restricted water allocations, and the loss of land to exclusively Jewish “settlements”. There is a horrific long-term cycle of violence, with much hatred & distrust on both sides, and with evil & counter-productive terrorist attacks leading to retaliation and mass casualties among civilians, thereby fueling more hatred & terrorism.
Security Council Resolutions 242 calls for “a just and lasting peace”. A lasting peace requires that the land be shared with a spirit of mutual dignity. This can only be achieved if the momentum changes into the direction of comprehensive peace-building & trust-building. This has a chance of reducing support to increasingly dangerous terrorists & getting the terrible Palestinian leaders to do more against them. The settlements and Trump’s latest decision go in the opposite direction, and will certainly not end demands to end “the occupation”..
Eugene:
1. Sorry – the term “Palestinians ” has been appropriated by the Arab residents of former Palestine to apply solely to them and not to the Jews or other non-Arab people who lived in former Palestine – as the PLO Charter makes unambiguously clear. This is a racist and apartheid concept that should be absolutely condemned by everyone.
2. Israel has sole administrative and security control over Area C under the Oslo Accords. Decisions for Area C are its to make and no one else. The European Union’s attempt to meddle in Area C policy is disgraceful. The Arab population of Area C is very small and attempts by the European Union to create facts on the ground for them without receiving Israeli permission is fueling and encouraging Arab discord.
3. You omit to mention that the requirements for a “just and lasting peace” in Security Council Resolution 242 require the application of both the following principles:
(a) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; and
(b) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
Israel has already withdrawn from over 90% of the territories occupied in the Six Day War. Resolution 242 does not require Israel to withdraw from 100%. Resolution 242 says nothing about creating an additional Arab state between Israel and Jordan. Israel is entitled to enjoy secure and recognized boundaries.
When the Arabs realise they are not going to get 100% of Judea and Samaria – the peace train can leave the station. If they want to ignore this simple fact – then the conflict will continue and the train will stand stationary whilst continuing to let off a lot of steam.
Trump’s decision will hopefully be an important stepping stone towards realising the twin requirements of Resolution 242.
I appreciate the reply David.
1. Well, the term “Palestinians” now referring to non-Jewish people is indeed a shift in meaning as often happens to words but as long as one accepts that Jews & Arabs & others are indigenous inhabitants of those lands I don’t think it’s a big problem. Jews also stopped using the term to refer to themselves. I do agree it makes racist anti-Jewish rhetoric easier. The PLO Charter by the way, which I certainly don’t endorse, does actually contain an Article 6 stating that “The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.”
2. Yes Israel has sole administrative and security control over Area C under the Oslo Accords. That’s why it’s called an “occupation”. The Areas were only established as a temporary transitional arrangement. Area C contains 60% of the West Bank and has ~380,000 “settlers” and ~300,000 Arabs, which I don’t think is very small population. There would be a lot more Arabs if Israel didn’t restrict construction in a brazenly apartheid/racist way. By the way, under the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, which the Jewish side apparently agreed to, the Area C would go to a Palestinian state. I’d be interested to know what you think should happen to it? Do you support a two-state solution, a one-state solution, or something else?
3. The twin requirements of resolution 242 also say nothing about there not being an additional Arab state. That’s left to negotiations of a dignified outcome acceptable to the majority of both sides, which requires peace-building momentum from both sides. Trying to cement control over the hotly disputed & expanding settlements does the opposite. It’s already accepted by the Arabs that they will not get 100% but an Arab state without the vast majority of Area C is unviable, the result would be extremely unfair to the Arab side, and it has little chance of achieving a just and lasting peace. The other alternative, a one-state solution, would require full citizenship of Israel by West Bank & Gaza Arabs, constitutional guarantees for all, full equality, a change of flag, anthem, perhaps of the country name to Israel-Palestine, etc.