The International Law says there is No Occupation

Cover of Subliminal's Album "Haor VeHatzel" (The Light & The Shadow)

The International Law supports that Judea and Samaria (a.k.a West Bank) are not being occupied by Israel. The Levy Report states:

“Having considered the approaches presented before us [from the Left and from the Right], we think a reasonable interpretation of the standard term of "occupation", with all the obligations arising from it, in the provisions of international law is intended to apply for short periods of occupation of a territory of a sovereign state until the end of the conflict between the parties and the return of the land or any other negotiated agreement regarding it.

But the Israeli presence in Judea and Samaria is significantly different: the possession of the territory continues for many decades, and no one can predict its end, if at all; the territory was conquered from a state (the Kingdom of Jordan) whose sovereignty over the territory has never been firmly legalized, and in the meantime it even renounced its claim of sovereignty; the State of Israel claims sovereign rights to the territory.” (Read the complete Legal Arguments of the Report, in English, Here)

PM Netanyahu ordered this report, in January of the current year, to learn about the legal status of settlements in the “West Bank” and to determine, once and for all, whether the Palestinian & International accusation of “occupation” was backed up by the International Law. Conclusion: it is not.

So, what does this mean? It means that:

• The Palestinians have no legal rights over Samaria and Judea
• The International Community is, and has been, deadly wrong
• The Jewish Left (in and out of Israel) has been making a fool of itself for far too long
• The Iranians will perhaps have to replace “Quds Day” with “Mecca Day”
• Anti-Semitic people will have to come up with a different subterfuge to express their irrationality.

“In November 1947 the General Assembly adopted the United Nations committee's recommendation to divide the Land of Israel west of the Jordan river into two states: one Arab and one Jewish. But the plan was never implemented, and therefore was not binding under international law, since the Arab states rejected it and started a war to prevent its implementation and the establishment of a Jewish state.(..)

Nevertheless, in April 1950, Jordan annexed the West Bank, unlike Egypt, which has never claimed sovereignty over the Gaza Strip. However, Jordan's annexation was not accepted on any legal basis, and most Arab countries opposed it, until 1988 when Jordan renounced its claim to the territory.

Thus the original legal status of the territory was restored, namely, a territory designated as a national home for the Jewish people, who had a "right of possession" to it during Jordanian rule while they were absent from the territory for several years due to a war imposed on them, and have now returned to it.”

So far, it has been convenient to disregard that the League of Nations, in 1922, acknowledged that the international law supported the Jewish people's right to settle in their historic homeland, and to establish their State there; it has been convenient to make perverted readings of Article 49(6) ofthe Fourth Geneva Convention and, it has been interesting to see how the EU and President Obama (a professor of law himself) have been so quiet regarding this legal issue. What are they waiting for; a historical evidence of some sort? One would believe that the international law would suffice.

Palestine is occupying Jewish Land.

Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza strip where the Palestinian people have elected a president and a prime minister (and suffered the consequences of their democratic act).

Saeb Erekat, the ball is in your court: the Palestinians have now a chance to abide to the international law and build a thriving nation in Gaza, the lawful Homeland of the Palestinian People. Should you, and the Palestinian political elite, continue to refuse doing so, you will once again prove to the world that you are unwilling to build a nation for the Palestinian refugees and that you are, truly, a political tool in the hands of the Arab League to delegitimise the Jewish State – will that be your legacy?

It is utterly uncreative, and witless, to affirm that the Levy Report perils the Two State Solution. Those who claim to support a fractured Palestine (one in Gaza, another in “West Bank”) are not thinking it through for the Arab ambition is geo-strategically perilous: a divided Palestine, as a sovereign nation, will never be strong.