Settlements Are Legal Under International Law

[HouseKnight1]

Thus, as Kerry threatened us in the course of his 2013 negotiations with Netanyahu, we are declared an apartheid. This time did it the New York Times. The reason is,that the Likud party decided that the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria should formally move under the rule of the civil administration, instead of the military administration. But where there is apartheid?

According to the opinion of anti-Semites, and also according to the opinion of some of the American Jews who voted for Obama and Clinton, the Jewish settlements of Judea and Samaria are placed in the occupied territory of Palestine. Acquisition of the territory unilaterally, not on the basis of the agreement on delimitation, is illegal.

The move of Jewish settlements of Judea and Samaria from the control of the army will mean a formal annexation of the territory of Jewish settlements. And yes, that’s right, I agree with that! We have a legal right, and even duty, to annex the territory of Jewish settlements. But why do we have such a right? And why will the transfer of Jews from Judea and Samaria, which anti-Semites seek, be illegal?

Regarding settlements, our enemies (and even a part of our friends and neutrally minded people) refer to the 4th Geneva Convention, which prohibits the settlement of civilians from occupying force to occupied territory. They argue that Israel violated the Geneva Convention, that the Jews settled in the West Bank illegally, live there illegally, give birth and raise children illegally. That  houses of settlers should be destroyed, and they themselves must be evicted from those cities and villages, where most of them were born and grew up.

But In fact, the requirements of the Geneva Convention of 1949 cannot be applied to the West Bank and Gaza in the period between 1967 and 1994, because this territory could not be considered occupied.

In 1967, Israel liberated the West Bank from the Jordanian occupation and concluded a ceasefire agreement with Jordan. The line of demarcation was established along the Jordan River. We did not take this territory from the Palestinians, but only drove out the army of Jordan, which occupied the West Bank from 1948 to 1967. In 1992, Jordan formally declared a «disengagement» from the West Bank, and in 1994 signed a peace treaty with Israel. The border between the two states was established along the Jordan River. This is the legitimate border of Israel and Jordan.

When the Jews settled in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, the state of Palestine did not yet exist. This state was created after the Oslo accords, in 1994. All of the foregoing means that between 1967 and 1994, Israel was the sole legitimate owner of the entire territory of the West Bank and Gaza. Accordingly, the citizens of Israel had the right to settle in this territory, without violating any laws. And it was during this period that all the Jewish settlements of the West Bank and Gaza were established. The land on which Jewish settlements are located was owned by the State of Israel. Settlements were not created on lands owned privately  by Arabs.

Let’s say that during this period the West Bank and Gaza could be called a colony, but certainly not an occupied territory. By the way, although this seems a ridiculous anachronism, the status of colony is considered legal under the UN Charter. Of course, such a status is undesirable and should be discontinued at any opportunity. Such opportunity occurred when Israel signed an agreement with Egypt at Camp David.

In 1980, Palestine was given the status of autonomy. This Palestinian autonomy existed in the period from Camp David agreements to Oslo. Of course, autonomy cannot be considered an occupied territory, the state has the right to keep troops on its territory, and settlers do not violate the requirements of the Geneva Convention, especially since they mostly settled there before the creation of autonomy.

The Government of Israel believes that this status of autonomy remains up to this day, but I disagree with such approach. Autonomy waging war against the «mother» state with the aim of destroying it, and which is recognized by the majority of the states of the World, is more independent in its actions than Israel. It is in fact an independent state. It is time to recognize the fact of the independence of Palestine. The question is, in what boundaries?

The Palestinian state was created in 1994 by Israel, in accordance with the Oslo agreements. Whether we like this agreement or not, there was no other agreement between Israel and Palestine. Any court that will take up the dispute between Israel and Palestine, will have to rely on these agreements.

By the way, the Arab brothers of the Palestinians, who occupied the West Bank and Gaza from 1948 to 1967, did not allow the establishment of a Palestinian state, although they could do so. The ingratitude of the Palestinians, who bite the giver’s hand, and even try to kill him, is especially striking.

The international law considers legal the border that the parties established in their last of all delimitation agreement, signed by both. In our case, this is the Wye Plantation Agreement of 1998. Hence, the border between Israel and Palestine was established by the 1998 Wye Plantation agreement. The agreement was signed by Benjamin Netanyahu and Yasser Arafat. According to this agreement, territory «C», where all Jewish cities and villages of Judea and Samaria are located, remained under the jurisdiction of Israel, while zones «A» and «B» became the state of Palestine.

In accordance with international law, it is this, last of all delimitations, which determines the only legitimate border between Israel and Palestine. Consequently, Israel has the legal right to annex ALL the territory of zone «C», much less that small part of this zone occupied by Jewish settlements, which we call Judea and Samaria. This is the answer to the question of the right to annexation of zone «C».

Moreover, even if we agree with our enemies that in the period before Oslo Israel did occupy the West Bank and Gaza, and  created Jewish settlements there illegally, the Oslo agreements legalized all the settlements in zone «C», whereas all settlements in zone «A» and «B» were demolished during the 2005 «disengagement». It seems that Ariel Sharon conceived a «disengagement» just with the purpose of finally and indisputably legalizing Jewish settlements, and unilaterally implementing the terms of the Oslo Accords.

Today, the Palestinians refuse to negotiate peace with Israel under mutually acceptable terms, the Palestinian people vote for Hamas, which demands the destruction of Jews. Hamas conducts practical training for the extermination of the Jews, and does not hide this. This military-political grouping is preparing to join the aggression of Iran, aimed at genocide of Jews.

Since the Palestinians do not want to live with us in peace, but are trying to destroy us by the hands of foreign anti-Semites, we have the right to unilaterally implement the Oslo Accords. That is, to recognize the independent state of Palestine on the territory designated as zones «A» and «B», and to annex zone «C» (Judea and Samaria), which remained under the control of Israel under the treaty signed by both parties.

In 2001, Israel did occupy Palestine,  in the course of Operation Defensive Wall. It was a forced step, the Palestinians literally forced Israel to occupy Palestine, abusing their newly created state for the purposes of terrorist aggression. Only Palestinians and their anti-Semitic patrons are guilty of this occupation. Occupying Palestine for the purpose of self-defense, Israel does not violate the UN Charter or any international law.

On the other hand, the racist apartheid demands of the Palestinians to clean the zone «A» and «B» from  the Jews, were carried out by Israel in the course of the 2005 «disengagement”. The Jewish settlements that existed in zone «A» (Gaza and the West Bank) were cleansed, so Palestine became «Judenfrei».  This way, Israel does not violate the requirements of the 1949 Geneva Convention in the “A” and “B” zones.

So, from the point of view of international law, the occupation of Palestine (zone «A» and «B») began in 2001. There was not a single Jewish settlement left on this territory. Therefore, we shouldn’t  be accused of violating the Geneva Convention in the (really) occupied territory of Palestine.

Zone «C» (Judea and Samaria), where all Jewish settlements are located, cannot be considered an occupied territory, because we control it according to the Oslo agreement, on a legal basis. And anyway, the Jewish settlements of Judea and Samaria were legalized by the Oslo Accords, so do not violate the requirements of the 1949 Geneva Convention. Me personally  believe that all this zone should be annexed  while granting Israeli citizenship to all its inhabitants, Jews and Arabs. If this territory is not annexed, then it will retain the status of the colony, which is undesirable from our own interest, and causes complaints not only of our enemies, but also of our friends.

Gaza could be considered an occupied territory since 1993, when Oslo agreements were concluded. As we know, all Jewish settlements in Gaza were established before Oslo, so did not violate the Geneva Convention. However, in 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza unilaterally, and the Jewish civilian population was forcibly evicted. In Gaza, as in Judea and Samaria, Israel has never violated the requirements of the Geneva Convention.

Anywhere, Israel has never violated the Geneva Convention. Jewish settlements were founded legally and continue to exist up to this day on a legal basis. From the point of view of international law, settlers are «clean». All demands for the eviction of Jews from Judea and Samaria are illegal. Economic sanctions and other forms of persecution of settlers are illegal. European or Irish sanctions are illegal. BDS is a movement that calls for breaking the law.

Yes, Israel abstained from formal annexation of the West Bank and Gaza, for two reasons.

First, the people of Israel did not want to create a state where almost one half of the citizens (Palestinians) would be enemies.

Secondly, throughout the course of its history, the State of Israel is committed to a peace based on compromise. When the Palestine Liberation Organization agreed to negotiate peace, Israel concluded Oslo agreements and created a Palestinian state. It is not our fault that the Palestinians violated these agreements and misused the Palestinian state (created by Israel) with the purpose to try to exterminate us. Today, most of the Israelis vote against the «peace now» because the Palestinians do not want peace and seek annihilation of Israel.  Would the Palestinians agree to peace, the Israelis will accept peace even under hard conditions.

Contrary to the claims of anti-Semites, Jewish settlers in Judea and Samaria did not violate any international or Israeli laws. So they should have all the human rights prescribed to any other people, including the right to live in their homes, built in full compliance with any laws. The demands of anti-Semites to cleanse Jews from Judea and Samaria, are immoral and illegal.

All Israelis, all Jews and all honest people, have a moral duty to protect the Jews of Judea and Samaria from persecutions, to recognize their legitimate rights, including the right to live in their homes on their land. No to economic sanctions, no to BDS — this is what any honest and sensible person has to say.

The only «legitimate» reason for the ethnic cleansing of Judea and Samaria from the Jews don’t pass a logical and legal examination. The only reason for the non-recognition of human rights for Jews of Judea and Samaria, including the right to live at home, , is racist anti-Semitism. The demand to forcibly evict Jews from their homes is indeed a genuine apartheid.

Why cannot Palestinians live peacefully together with Jews in Gaza and the West Bank, as part of the independent state of Palestine? Why do they demand that Jews be evicted or killed, first in Judea and Samaria (Fatah’s demand), and then all over Israel (Hamas’ demand)? And why are the alleged anti-apartheid fighters (The New York Times, John Kerry, the European Parliament and many others) supporting the racist apartheid demand of Palestinians for ethnic cleansing of the Jews? Why did the Irish Parliament prohibit the import of goods produced by Jews in Judea and Samaria? This law just enforces a real anti-Semitic apartheid! It is Palestine which demands and achieve apartheid, with the broad support of anti-Semites. It is the corrupted UN that decides to evict the Jews from their homes!

From the point of view of morality, the Jews of Judea and Samaria are the best part of the Jewish people. They tried to settle as many lands as possible not for the sake of their own enrichment, but for the sake of those Jews who need refuge from persecution.

Defeat of settlers means in practice, that the idea of ​​a state of asylum for the Jews has already failed. The Jews of Europe, Latin America, the USA and other countries who want or will want to leave these countries, in particular because of the pro-Islamic, anti-Israeli, «pro-Palestinian” policies, will have to find a more secure and spacious refuge, than Israel. Israel played its role, as far as it could. Zionism has ended, forcibly. Now, it is necessary to create another, alternative Jewish state of asylum.

Now the settlers themselves need our protection and solidarity. Our duty is to protect them. To withstand sanctions and BDS, it is necessary to create a worldwide solidarity organization that will explain to us and the whole World how anti-Semitic apartheid is immoral, and that the Jews of Judea and Samaria became a victim of apartheid. If the annexation of settlements will help protect the Jews of Judea and Samaria from treachery and persecution, long live annexation! In this case, the annexation is legitimate and morally justified.

Just the Palestinians have closed for us other ways. The idea of ​​an exchange of territory with Palestine, in particular the idea of ​​»Judea and Samaria in exchange for the Gaza  Environment «, cannot be performed today, because Hamas controls Gaza. It refuses any compromises resolutely. Expanding Gaza Hamastan will endanger our existence.

Since the Palestinians leave no other choice, we must annex the settlements of Judea and Samaria unilaterally. But this means that the rest of zone «C» we must pass under the effective civilian control of Palestine, otherwise this zone will remain the colony. Another way to get out of the trap prepared for us by the anti-Semites and the Palestinians, is annexation of whole Zone “C”, coupled with Israeli citizenship for the Arabs of this zone. I would prefer just this last, strictly anti-apartheid solution.

[HouseKnight1]

en.m.wikipedia.org — International law and Israeli settlements — Wikipedia
The Wikipedia article recalls numerous anti-Semitic UN resolutions, which label Jewish settlements as “illegal”. Strikingly, this article doesn’t mention Oslo agreements at all. If You do recognize independent Palestine, established due to Oslo process, how do You not recognize Palestine agreements with Israel? The «unanimous» UN resolutions are illegal, contradict both UN Charter and international law. These resolutions only disclose UN antisemitism.*Without dispute, Oslo agreements have legalized Jewish settlements, placed in the «C» zone, while all settlements established in the occupied Palestine territory (zones «A» and «B») were destroyed.