JUNE 2007
SHOULD
WE BE AWARE THAT SCHOLARS ARE TRYING TO MANIPULATE THE
USE OF THE WORD WAR IN ITS ACCEPTED DEFINITION AND THUS
MANIPULATE THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS?
Legal opinions on the West Bank
Sir: With reference to "Secret memo shows Israel knew its occupation of Palestinian land was illegal" (26 May), legal scholars such as Julius Stone and Eugene Rostow, Dean of Yale Law School, take the opposite view to the secret memo's author, Theodor Meron. They have argued that the settlements are legal.
They argue that the last legal sovereignty over the territories, the League of Nations Palestine Mandate, still applies. This stipulates the right of the Jewish people to settle in the whole of the mandated territory. Because Israel took control of the West Bank as a result of a defensive war, Palestinian spokesmen who point to "occupation" reverse cause and effect. They portray the current territorial dispute as the result of an Israeli decision "to occupy", rather than a result of a war imposed on Israel by Arab states in 1967.
Former State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, who later headed the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 : "Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defence has, against that prior holder, better title."
LYN JULIUS
LONDON SW5 LETTER IN THE INDEPENDENT MAY 29TH
the word
"WAR" may now become subject to a dangerous
legal wrangle that will endanger both the Geneva Accord
and other International Agreements ?
The following notice of Protest was sent to The Handstand
from an acquaintance in Tel Aviv and I noticed that the
word WAR occurs in relation to the events of June 1967
when the US Ship LIBERTY was partially destroyed because
it had monitored Israel's ATTACKS AND SUBSEQUENT
OCCUPATION OF Palestine and the Golan Heights.
Gedenken
an die Opfer infolge der israelischen Besatzung der
palästinensischen Gebiete
seit dem Krieges/Occupation?/
vom 5. Juni 1967
Mahnwache am 5. Juni 2007
11:00 bis 13:00 Uhr
Am Sicherheitszaun Vorder Bollhagen,
Deutschland
The press release of the lawyers Schultz/Förster is being translated and will be available by tomorrow.
Wir versammeln uns am 40. Jahrestag des
Krieges/Occupation?/ zwischen Israel und seinen
arabischen Nachbarstaaten, um der Palästinenser und
Israelis zu gedenken, die infolge der israelischen
Besatzung des Westjordanlands, des Gazastreifens sowie
der Golanhöhen ihr Leben lassen mussten.
Wir versammeln uns am 40. Jahrestag der
israelischen Besatzung am Sicherheitszaun zum Schutz des
G8-Gipfels in Vorder Bollhagen, Deutschland, um
symbolisch an die von Israel errichtete und von den
G8-Staaten geduldete Unrechtsmauer zu erinnern, die quer
durch die besetzten Gebiete verläuft und Palästinenser
von Palästinenser sowie von ihren Arbeitsstätten und
von ihrem Hab und Gut trennt.
Wir versammeln uns am 40. Jahrestag der
israelischen Besatzung der palästinensischen
Gebiete und klagen im Gedenken an die Opfer der Besatzung
die israelischen Regierungen und ebenso die G8-Staaten
an, die Errichtung eines lebensfähigen Staats Palästina
und einen gerechten Frieden zwischen Israel und seinen
Nachbarstaaten vereitelt zu haben.
Ein gerechter Frieden in Nahost ist möglich!
Israelis gegen G8 c/o Jüdische Stimme für einen gerechten Frieden in Nahost
In memory
of the victims of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian
land
since the war/Occupation?/ of 5 June 1967
Vigil, 5 June 2007,11 A.M. to 13 P.M
at the Security Fence, Vorder Bollhagen, Germany
We are gathered together on the 40th
anniversary of the war/OCCUPATION?/ between
We are gathered together on the 40th
anniversary of the Israeli occupation at the Security
Fence protecting the G8 Summit in Vorder Bollhagen,
Germany, to call to mind the Wall of Injustice
constructed by Israel and tolerated by the G8 States, the
Wall which runs through the Occupied Palestinian
Territories and separates Palestinians from Palestinians,
as well as from their places of work and from their
property.
We are gathered together on the 40th anniversary of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and, in the memory of the victims of the occupation, accuse the Israeli Governments and the G8 States, to have thwarted the establishment of a viable and sovereign State of Palestine and a just peace between Israel and its neighbour States.
A just peace in the
Israelis against G8 c/o Jewish Voice
for a Just Peace in the
I HAVE ALTERNATED THE WORD "WAR" IN THE ABOVE DOCUMENT TO THAT OF "OCCUPATION" J.Braddell editor.
I asked that Jewish acquaintance to comment on this as she had sent me the following:
For your information, Israel during the Oslo agreements turned over to the Palestinian Authority responsibility for Palestinians in all areas (e.g., health, education, etc) with one exception: residency rights. Israel retained for itself the right to decide who can visit, live, work in the OPT (see http://www.btselem.org/english/Publications/Summaries/200607_Perpetual_Limbo.asp .[newprofile message1170] an incident that has just happened to one of our students
and she then wrote:Hi Jocelyn,
I don't understand the objection to the use of the term
"War" for what happened in 1967--I mean who is
the faction, how important is it, and has the courts
ruled on this? As for 1948, when I write and speak
about occupation, I do state that it began with the
formation of the State of Israel. But there is also
value to calling attention to the 1967 escapade and what
has happened in the 40 years since. Another 40
years like the past ones will have this unhappy land in
rivers of blood. Re
[newprofile message1165] Fw G8-Gipfel Gedenken der
OpferG8 summit comemoration of the victims] (EJJPJewish
Voice)The fact that it
was entirely provoked by Israel (with which I agree) does
not mean that the term 'war' is wrong. Google the
definition of the term, and you will see why. Best, DorothyRe The Six Day War Victory with a
40-year Hangover
| GOOGLE WIKIPEDIA War is a prolonged state of violent, large-scale conflict involving two or more groups of people. When and how war originated in humans is a highly controversial topic. Some believe it began only about five millennia ago, with the rise of the first states; afterwards war "spread to peaceful hunter-gatherers and agriculists" (Otterbein 2004: 31-32). Others (Azar Gat 2006 36-37) argue that war originated in the hunter-gatherer past. Keith Henson proposes that future outlook, memes and behavioral switches account for the origin of wars.[14] Often two or more different leaders or governing bodies have a disagreement and engage other individuals to fight for them - even if those fighting have no interest vested in the issues fought over. The original cause of war is not always known. Wars may be prosecuted simultaneously in one or more different theaters. Within each theater, there may be one or more consecutive military campaigns. Individual actions of war within a specific campaign are traditionally called battles, although this terminology is not always applied to contentions in modernity involving aircraft, missiles or bombs alone in the absence of ground troops or naval forces. The factors leading to war are often complicated and due to a range of issues. Where disputes arise over issues such as territory, sovereignty, resource, or ideology, and a peaceable resolution fails, is not sought, or is thwarted, war often results. A war may begin following an official declaration of war in the case of international war, although this has not always been observed either historically or currently, nor in the case of civil wars. A declaration of war is not normally made in internal wars. |
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Jocelyn Braddell <mailto:jocelynb@eircom.net>
*To:* Haaretz <mailto:info@haaretz.com>
;
dor_naor@netvision.net.il
<mailto:dor_naor@netvision.net.il>
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:16
PM
*Subject:* Re: The Six Day War:
Victory with a 40-year Hangover?
Dear Peace Now, you are using the
wrong word "war" for the 1967
event as it was entirely an invasion
provoked by Israel and they
plan to take legal advantage of this
word if you and others go on
using it. You can read a letter to
that effect in The Independent
and English newspaper on the 29th May
ie. Legal Opinions on the
West Bank: from Lyn Julius
LondonSW5 Re
The Six Day War Victory with a 40-year Hangover
Dorothy wrote:
The fact that it was entirely provoked by Israel (with
which I agree) does not mean that the term 'war' is
wrong. Google the definition of the term, and you
will see why.
Best, Dorothy
From: "Jocelyn Braddell" <jocelynb@eircom.net>
To: "Dorothy" <dor_naor@netvision.net.il>
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: The Six Day War: Victory with a 40-year Hangover?
Hi, the word "war" - this is what they are trying to fix in a legal trap. Definitions are never established until the legal wrangling is over which in this case is just beginning. It could make a diffference to all the International Treaties, Geneva etc. Regards,J
My Lord. What next!
Dorothy
----- Original Message -----
I have seemingly been unable to draw attention to the
LEGAL curiousity in the leading letter from Lyn Julius -
as fear of new problems seems to be the MAIN FEAR that
prevents careful discussion of this matter. It is easier
to say 'It's alright' or to ridicule any threat to
outlooks on legislation in the Middle East. Signing off,
One Fool Editor! JB
meantime let us remember 1948 :
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story680.html
"The only thing that surprised me," said David
Ben-Gurion at a Cabinet meeting, "and surprised me
bitterly, was the discovery of such moral failings among
us, which I had never suspected. I mean the mass robbery
in which all parts of the population participated."
Soldiers who entered abandoned houses in the towns and
villages they occupied grabbed whatever they could. Some
took the stuff for themselves, others "for the
boys" or for the kibbutz. They stole household
effects, cash, heavy equipment, trucks and whole flocks
of cattle. Behor Shitrit told his colleagues of the
Ministerial Committee for Abandoned Property that he had
visited some of the occupied areas and saw the looting
with his own eyes. "From Lydda alone," he
said, "the army took out 1,800 truck-loads of
property."...
WELL, WHAT DO YOU KNOW....LETTERS IN THE INDEPENDENT
31st MAY confirm my curiousity and suggestions on the
issue:
Legal arguments over the West Bank
Sir: Lyn Julius confuses the Law of Belligerent Occupation and the Law of Title to Territory, and her conclusions over the occupied territories are wrong on both counts (letter, 29 May). She should read the declaration of the US Judge Buergentha, the only member of the International Court of Justice bench to advise that the court should have declined to issue its advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's so-called wall
Buergenthal, a Holocaust survivor, nevertheless accepted that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the Occupied Palestinian Territory and that its people have the right of self-determination. Where the right of self-determination exists it overrides claims by a state to sovereignty. Israeli civilian settlements are therefore illegal, and which of Israel or Jordan might have "better title" against the other is irrelevant.
The time has come for all people of good-will to call on Israel to renounce its inadmissible territorial ambitions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory so that peace may be negotiated between the parties, including the "secure and recognised boundaries" required by Resolution 242. I look forward to seeing Ms Julius do this.
JOHN MCHUGO
LONDON SW15
Sir: Rewriting history is rarely a constructive act, but Lyn Julius takes the biscuit for sheer effrontery.
The 1922 League of Nations mandate did not grant the whole of mandate Palestine to the Jewish people. It incorporated the Balfour Declaration that "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people ... it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine".
In any case, the League of Nations was succeeded by the UN, whose Resolution 181 most specifically did not cede what is now the West Bank to Israel, but identified it as the proposed Arab state. It was subsequently agreed between Israel and Jordan that this area would be incorporated into the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan, an agreement which neither party had a right to make.
What is needed today is not a rehashing of old, dubious, neo-colonial disputes but a recognition that the human rights of the Palestinians are consistently being abused by Israel, and the need for Justice for all the inhabitants of the Holy Land, Jews and Arabs alike, plus recognition by Israel of international law and the democratic right of Palestinians to elect their own government.
ROBERT SHEARER
WINSHAM, SOMERSET
ZNet Commentary
On the 40th Anniversary of the Six Day War June 16, 2007
By Francis A. Boyle
On the 40th Anniversary of the so-called Six Day War,
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas stated that the
Palestinians were on the verge of a civil war--as if he
had nothing to do with it, in contrast to his
predecessor.
To be sure, by signing the Oslo Agreement in 1993, the
late President Yasser Arafat knowingly accepted a
Palestinian Bantustan that was offered to him by Israel
and the United States in the hope and expectation that it
would ripen into a liberated Palestinian State within
five years.
Yet, to his everlasting credit, President Arafat refused
to set-off a Palestinian civil war in the name of
consolidating this Oslo Bantustan, which was the ultimate
objective of Israel and the United States all along.
That is precisely why President Arafat was marginalized,
demonized and ultimately eliminated. Nevertheless, Israel
and the United States are still doing everything humanly
possible to promote a Palestinian civil war by means of
arming, financing and encouraging comprador Palestinian
surrogates toward that diabolical end.
To the contrary, the Palestinian People must strive to
maintain their current Government of National Unity that
was originally called for by Dr. Haidar Abdul Shaffi,
while better organizing comprehensive resistance to the
colonial Israeli military occupation regime of their
State (including Jerusalem) that they had originally
proclaimed on 15 November 1988 and is now recognized by
about 130 other States and has Observer State Status at
the United Nations Organization.
Francis A. Boyle, Professor of Law, University of
Illinois, is author of Foundations of World Order, Duke
University Press, The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence,
and Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, by
Clarity Press. He can be reached at: FBOYLE@LAW.UIUC.EDU
