Israeli settlements Israeli/Palestinian Conflict

JUDEA AND SAMARIA ARE DISPUTED TERRITORIES NO MATTER WHAT THE ARABS AND THEIR USEFUL STOOGES SAY…….

 

It’s disputed, not ”occupied” territory.

Folks, any time you hear anyone talk about ”occupied territories” in relation to Judea and Samaria (or the disingenuous term of West Bank), you should automatically exclude them as the radical fringe, or the grossly ill informed.

Looking at the language which determines what is, and what isn’t occupied, (occupation itself is actually a neutral term that’s become a pejorative to slam Israel with), the areas that comprise ancient Judea and Samaria, are de facto disputed territories, with the Arabs maintaining 90% authority over themselves in areas A & B in accordance with the signed agreements of the Oslo Accords.

NOTE: It’s high time that the false meme of ”occupation/occupier” be rendered to the periphery of rational debate on the issues surrounding the Arab’s/Islam’s war against the Jewish state of Israel. So here is an article from 2001 that helps to disarm the arguments of the Arabs and their radical Left apologists.

Describing the West Bank and Gaza Strip as “occupied Palestinian territories” is incorrect and misleading. Israel’s transfer of government functions under the Oslo Agreements greatly strengthens Israel’s case that the main international conventions relevant to military occupations do not apply. Describing these territories as “Palestinian” may serve the Palestinians’ political agenda but prejudges the outcome of future territorial negotiations that were envisioned under UN Security Council Resolution 242. It also serves the current Palestinian effort to obtain international affirmation of Palestinian claims and a total denial of Israel’s fundamental rights in every international forum.

Vol. 1, No. 1   2 September 2001

Occupied Territories or Disputed Territories?

Last month’s Palestinian draft resolution at the UN Security Council again described the West Bank and Gaza Strip as “occupied Palestinian territories.” References to Israel’s “foreign occupation” also appear in the Durban Draft Declaration of the UN World Conference Against Racism. This language was not just chosen for rhetorical purposes but in order to invoke specific legal claims: For example, Palestinian insistence on using the term “occupied territories” is usually connected to the assertion that they fall under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. Yet, Palestinian spokesmen also speak about Israeli military action in Area A as an infringement on Palestinian sovereignty: If Israel “invaded Palestinian territories,” then they cannot be regarded as “occupied”; however, if the territories are defined as “occupied,” Israel cannot be “invading” them.

Israel’s Traditional Definitions

Israel entered the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israeli legal experts traditionally resisted efforts to define the West Bank and Gaza Strip as “occupied” or falling under the main international treaties dealing with military occupation. Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Meir Shamgar wrote in the 1970s that there is no de jure applicability of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention regarding occupied territories to the case of the West Bank and Gaza Strip since the Convention “is based on the assumption that there had been a sovereign who was ousted and that he had been a legitimate sovereign.” In fact, prior to 1967, Jordan had occupied the West Bank and Egypt had occupied the Gaza Strip; their presence in those territories was the result of their illegal invasion in 1948. Jordan’s 1950 annexation of the West Bank was recognized only by Great Britain and Pakistan and rejected by the vast majority of the international community, including the Arab states.

International jurists generally draw a distinction between situations of “aggressive conquest” and territorial disputes that arise after a war of self-defense. Former State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, who later headed the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 regarding Israel’s case: “Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.” Israel only entered the West Bank after repeated Jordanian artillery fire and ground movements across the previous armistice lines; additionally, Iraqi forces crossed Jordanian territory and were poised to enter the West Bank. Under such circumstances, even the UN rejected Soviet efforts to have Israel branded as the aggressor in the Six-Day War.

More here at the JCPA.

4 Responses

  1. The real Clue to Judea and Samaria is in the name: Judea = land of Jews

  2. I’ve been reading about this for many decades but won’t be reading this article because the title is misleading.
    The only reason land west of the Jordan River is disputed is because of Israel’s coward traitor leaders who’ve spent 47 years trying to destroy Israel by giving it to an overwhelmingly genocidal population of Arab Muslims.
    Since Israel’s Six-day War victory, her leaders have chosen the death, dismemberment, serious injury, & forced displacement of hundreds of the thousands of innocent people rather than solve the existential threat of overwhelmingly genocidal Arab Muslim population by the ONLY effective AND compassionate method that has been used by everyone everywhere since the beginning of time, REPATRIATION TO JORDAN & EGYPT.

  3. I also disagree with the term “disputed territories”. The Arabs have NO valid claim to this land. They can call it whatever they like – we don’t have to give credence to their claim. This land was given to the Jewish people as part of the Mandate for Palestine, and these rights are still in effect today (see article 80 of the UN Charter). Although Israel has not exerted sovereignty over these areas, they are legally defined as Jewish land. I simply call them Judea and Samaria. Period.

  4. Samaria and Judea (aka the West Bank), Gaza, the Golan and the State of Israel are in an irrevocable trust for the Jewish people. It is so by international law. It was done by the same authority that created many of the current Arab states.

    If you want to spread the facts that should be made known, we have many articles on Israel’s legal rights by Wallace Brand, Howard Grief, Yoram Shifftan, Alan Baker, Alex Rose, etc., at https://www.think-israel.org. Also, Ted Belman at https://www.Israpundit.com and Arlene Kushner at https://www.arlenefromisrael.info are actively promoting Israel’s historic and legal rights to Samaria and Judea.

    It is plain stupid to say that the land is in dispute. You are saying you believe that the non-people, the “Palestinians”, have a legitimate claim just because they assert they do.

    If you want to give them their own place, set aside an area in the vast lands owned by the Arabs — they were granted 99.99% of the Middle East — for them and the other “Palestinians” now living in refugee camps and elsewhere. We have written about Palestina at
    https://www.think-israel.org/lipkin.palestinaproposal.html. Giving
    away Jewish land to Fatah and/or Hamas won’t give these tenured
    refugees their own state, because the PALs have already announced
    most of the refugees, even those currently in Samaria and Judea,
    won’t be citizens of a new Arab state in Samaria and Judea.

    If readers want to give them their own place, set aside an area in the vast land owned by the Arabs — they were granted 99.99% of the Middle East — for them and the other “Palestinians” now living in refugee camps and elsewhere. We have written about Palestina at
    https://www.think-israel.org/lipkin.palestinaproposal.html. Giving away Jewish land to Fatah and/or Hamas won’t give these tenured refugees their own state, because the PALs have already announced most of the refugees, even those currently in Samaria and Judea, won’t be citizens of a new Arab state in Samaria and Judea.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.