The 'settlements' are completely legal
In an earlier post, I reported that British Foreign Secretary William Hague had pronounced the 'settlements' illegal.Many of you may not have noticed, but I have actually been out for the last five hours, and have just returned home from a post-wedding Sheva Brachot celebration (Mrs. Carl's nephew got married on Monday night - you might have noticed that absence from posting). The Sheva Brachot took place in Samaria in what much of the world contemptuously refers to as an 'illegal settlement.'
I have to tell you that those of you who have never visited a 'settlement' should probably visit one. I hate the term because I think it carries a connotation of not having permanence, and that's why whenever I use the term 'settlement' I put it in scare quotes. The 'settlements' are here to stay. And they deserve to stay. They are located on land on which Jews have lived for more than 3,000 years, and they look quite permanent. Real houses - not trailers or sheds. You all should see them. It will change how some of you think about them. And the people who live in them are the salt of the earth - people who are among our most idealistic.
So why are the 'settlements' completely legal? Here's why.
According to Professor Newton, “Occupation itself does not change sovereignty, but temporarily displaces it until full sovereignty is either restored or reasserted.” By extension, Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria is legal and legitimate because it did not acquire territory belonging to another state or legal entity.Read the whole thing.
Sooner or later, Israel will have to decide what part of Judea and Samaria belongs to the Jewish people and what to do about that.
Finally, since Israel did not “forcibly transfer” populations, prohibited in GC IV, condemning Israel lacked solid foundations. Therefore, in 2002, the Arab states at the Rome Statutes of the International Criminal Court added a new element to the law governing war crimes, making it a crime for an “occupying power” (i.e., Israel) to transfer its citizens into “occupied territory” not only forcibly, but indirectly as well — that is, by providing any assistance such as mortgages and infrastructure.
This Rome treaty provision was specifically designed to declare Jews who built homes over the Armistice Lines of 1949 and Israel guilty of war crimes. An extension of GC IV, it leads back to the ICRC. Without the ability to examine their archives, however, it’s a dead end. What is the ICRC hiding, and why?
Whether Israeli settlements are “unacceptable” and “unhelpful” is debatable. ICRC and kangaroo court rulings against Israel, like those of the International Court of Justice, however, have no basis in proper judicial procedures. They serve only to demonize and delegitimize Israel, and abrogate the meaning of just law.
Labels: settlements are legal
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 11:47 PM
5 Comments:
Did you know that a URJ (i.e., liberal) Rabbi I know gave a sermon recently saying that he is stopping with using the word "settlement" and is henceforth going to use the word "community". He will be in our area starting this summer, so I'll try to get him to do some essays on his evolving thinking. Anyone who knows the inside baseball on the Jewish streams will know that this is progress.
For those of you in Rio Linda, and much to Israel's chagrin that I would say so, the "settlements" look exactly like the newer "master planned communities" in Orange County in SoCal.
Next thing to imagine is what the areas where the "settlements" are would be like vis-a-vis the map of southern Lebanon that the IDF released with the bunkers, etc. Or vis-a-vis rocket launching sites a la Gaza after Gush Katif was evacuated. (Hint hint: IDF, we need title search maps and elevation visualizations re rocket ranges, etc.)
The bottom line is that Jordan renounced their claim in 1988.
The next thing you know, they'll declare the Jew illegal.
Don't laugh. Its a short step from demolishing buildings to burning people.
Its happened before and that's the future with the rampant anti-Semitism manifest throughout the world.
Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
The question is whether it is legal for Israel to evict settlements.
Won't Israel be breaking the law if it trys to conduct mass forcible transfers of settlers from the territories against their will?
I am sure alot of those settler have children that lived there their whole lives, is it not a crime and a breech of the Geneva Convention to evict settlements?
Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
The question is whether it is legal for Israel to evict settlements.
Won't Israel be breaking the law if it trys to conduct mass forcible transfers of settlers from the territories against their will?
I am sure alot of those settler have children that lived there their whole lives, is it not a crime and a breech of the Geneva Convention to evict settlements?
Post a Comment
<< Home