Palestine Today

[ForeverYoung436]

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

It only says that the individuals living in the areas of the former Ottoman Empire will now become the citizens of their respective successor states. But it never mentions Palestine as a successor state. Israel could be considered a successor state of the Ottoman Empire.

 

[Shusha]

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

Don't blame your reading comprehension problem on me.

Sigh. Only someone who believes that Israel does not actually exist would insist that:

"Turkey renounces all claims to the territory and leaves it in the hands of the parties concerned"

actually means

"Turkey cedes the territory to the State of Palestine".


And then blames it on my reading comprehension.

 

[P F Tinmore]

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

It only says that the individuals living in the areas of the former Ottoman Empire will now become the citizens of their respective successor states. But it never mentions Palestine as a successor state. Israel could be considered a successor state of the Ottoman Empire.

Now that is funny.

You wouldn't have a link for that, would you?

 

[P F Tinmore]

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

Don't blame your reading comprehension problem on me.

Sigh. Only someone who believes that Israel does not actually exist would insist that:

"Turkey renounces all claims to the territory and leaves it in the hands of the parties concerned"

actually means

"Turkey cedes the territory to the State of Palestine".


And then blames it on my reading comprehension.

The citizens of the states are the parties concerned.

 

[Shusha]

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

It only says that the individuals living in the areas of the former Ottoman Empire will now become the citizens of their respective successor states. But it never mentions Palestine as a successor state. Israel could be considered a successor state of the Ottoman Empire.

Now that is funny.

You wouldn't have a link for that, would you?

LINK

 

[P F Tinmore]

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

It only says that the individuals living in the areas of the former Ottoman Empire will now become the citizens of their respective successor states. But it never mentions Palestine as a successor state. Israel could be considered a successor state of the Ottoman Empire.

Now that is funny.

You wouldn't have a link for that, would you?

LINK

It is the rule of popular sovereignty. The people have the right to sovereignty within their territory.

 

[Shusha]

The people have the right to sovereignty within their territory.

Could not agree with you more. Indeed, you are the one which holds this not to be true.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The people have the right to sovereignty within their territory.

Could not agree with you more. Indeed, you are the one which holds this not to be true.

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237

 

[Shusha]

The people have the right to sovereignty within their territory.

Could not agree with you more. Indeed, you are the one which holds this not to be true.

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237

Sure. I'm with you. I agree with that. I agree that the Arab Palestinian people have the right to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty. Over at least one more State, and probably two.

Your turn:

...establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, ...whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I have to chuckle every time you say this....

Yeah, whatever. Palestine's international borders were defined by post war treaties. The Treaty of Lausanne ceded the land to the respective successor states.

Britain never annexed or otherwise claimed that land. The land was ceded to the respective successor states.

(COMMENT)

The Treaty of Lausanne does not mention "Palestine" even once. The Treaty does not mention the successor state requirements.

Another important understanding to remember is that although Turkey voted against UN Resolution 181 (II) of November 1947, Turkey was the first state, with a majority of its citizenry --- holding the Muslim faith --- to recognize the State of Israel.

•→ New World Encyclopedia
"The Ottoman government signed an armistice on October 30, 1918. The Treaty of Sèvres was signed on August 10, 1920 but this was never ratified by the Turkish Parliament. Russia negotiated a separate treaty, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918. With the Empire dismembered, one issue was: what status would Turkey be allowed; and another issue was the redistribution of territory. The division of the Middle Eastern provinces of the empire between the three powers was recognized; other territories went to Greece and Russia and the area which became Saudi Arabia was declared an independent state. The Treaty left the Ottoman government in place but appointed Britain, France and Italy to manage Turkey's finances and restricted the size of the army to 50,000 men. Some people would be arrested for war crimes."​

The Redistribution of the Ottoman territory outside the boundaries of Turkey was NOT unique at all; but, was customary for the that period in time. Individually, the Allied Powers were very familiar with the concepts of establishing protectorates and outreaching colonies well before WWI. The redistribution was not considered a one-of-a-kind solution or the uncommon treatment when dividing up territories of defeated state (Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic).

It is not the case that the outlying political subdivision of Turkey, or even Turkey itself, had very much to say about the territorial redistribution. Certainly, the Citizenry of the former Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) of the Allied Powers had little or no input --- or --- could effect the outcome; including the redistribution of territory; in as much as the Syke-Picot Agreement had already been made. The occupation, the treaty and the redistribution of territory were totally in the hands of the Allied Powers and determined well before the conclusion of hostilities.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Wow --- Do you have a lot of room to talk.

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

Don't blame your reading comprehension problem on me.

(COMMENT)

The treaty does not mention the linage of a "successor state" --- or --- "successor government" in any part of the treaty. While it does mention "transfer" --- that was not in reference to either "sovereignty" or "territory."

DO NOT confuse "nationality" with "sovereignty." They are not the same thing.

The transfer of nationality to another authority is not the same as the transfer of sovereign territory. The "nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred" does not negate the fact that the Sykes-Picot Agreement determined the distribution of the territory, NOT THE TREATY.

The people (and thus the nationality) follow the Agreement made by the Allied Powers.

The intent of Article 30 is to resolve the potential for "stateless people." Understanding the intent is the key to understanding the outcome.

I would not worry about the reading comprehension skills of Shusha. It is yours that need some honing.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Wow --- Do you have a lot of room to talk.

the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Indeed, to the respective states the land was ceded to.

But that is not IN the document you quoted. The Treaty of Lausanne does not cede land to respective states. It only documents the renuciation of that land by Turkey.

So which document the result of further negotiation and the settlement by the parties concerned?

Don't blame your reading comprehension problem on me.

(COMMENT)

The treaty does not mention the linage of a "successor state" --- or --- "successor government" in any part of the treaty. While it does mention "transfer" --- that was not in reference to either "sovereignty" or "territory."

DO NOT confuse "nationality" with "sovereignty." They are not the same thing.

The transfer of nationality to another authority is not the same as the transfer of sovereign territory. The "nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred" does not negate the fact that the Sykes-Picot Agreement determined the distribution of the territory, NOT THE TREATY.

The people (and thus the nationality) follow the Agreement made by the Allied Powers.

The intent of Article 30 is to resolve the potential for "stateless people." Understanding the intent is the key to understanding the outcome.

I would not worry about the reading comprehension skills of Shusha. It is yours that need some honing.

Most Respectfully,
R

Ah, but they do incorporate the principle of state succession. The people remain the citizens of that land is one of them. Of course the issue of statelessness is addressed also.

The people and the land stay together. The land was transferred to Palestine, the Palestinians became the citizens, and the Palestinians have the right to sovereignty. The rule of popular sovereignty.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Oh, don't read into something that is not there.

Ah, but they do incorporate the principle of state succession. The people remain the citizens of that land is one of them.
.

(COMMENT)

The idea of citizenship and sovereignty are NOT the same. The people are citizens based on the will of the sovereignty. If the US says you are not a citizens, no matter what principle you cite, you are still not a citizen. The same is true of every member of the Arab League; you are only a citizen as long as they say you are a citizen.

The land was transferred to Palestine,.

(COMMENT)

Exactly where does it say that? Yes, it is true that the Allied Powers agreed to present citizenship to those in the territory of the Mandate they have been assigned. BUT, it was the Mandate Authority that assigned citizenship, not the treaty and not the non-existent state/government (within the boundaries as defined). Just like the Lebanese and the Jordanians, the Allied Powers determined the boundaries and then established citizenship protocols.

The Palestinian Authority Passport/Travel Document Arabic: جواز سفر‎ (Jawaz Safar)
is a passport/travel document issued since April 1995 by the Palestinian Authority to
Palestinian residents of the Palestinian territories for the purpose of international travel.

The Palestinian Authority passport is available to anyone on production of a birth certificate
showing that they were born in Palestine. What constitutes "Palestine" for this purpose is
not clear. In practice, only residents of areas under the Palestinian Authority jurisdiction
can apply. Whether Palestinians born outside Palestine could apply for the passport is also
not clear.[1]

However, the passport issuance is subject to additional restrictions imposed by the
Israeli government.[1] Israel asserts that the requirement is permitted for security
needs under the Interim Agreement.[2]

[1] INS Resource Information Center (May 20, 2002). "Palestinian Territory, Occupied" (PDF). UNHCR. Retrieved 2009-01-24.
[2] UNHCR 17 Dec 1998: Palestine/Occupied Territories: Information On Passports Issued By The Palestine National Authority Archived 2012-10-12 ​

(By REUTERS December 21, 2015) Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said in Athens on Monday that his national authority was going to issue State of Palestine passports within 2016.
​

The Palestinians became the citizens, and the Palestinians have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

How do you know when a people (in this case Palestinians) have sovereignty?

Describe the essential elements of sovereignty; so I might be able to distinguish between those that have sovereignty, and those that do not.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Oh, don't read into something that is not there.

Ah, but they do incorporate the principle of state succession. The people remain the citizens of that land is one of them.
.

(COMMENT)

The idea of citizenship and sovereignty are NOT the same. The people are citizens based on the will of the sovereignty. If the US says you are not a citizens, no matter what principle you cite, you are still not a citizen. The same is true of every member of the Arab League; you are only a citizen as long as they say you are a citizen.

The land was transferred to Palestine,.

(COMMENT)

Exactly where does it say that? Yes, it is true that the Allied Powers agreed to present citizenship to those in the territory of the Mandate they have been assigned. BUT, it was the Mandate Authority that assigned citizenship, not the treaty and not the non-existent state/government (within the boundaries as defined). Just like the Lebanese and the Jordanians, the Allied Powers determined the boundaries and then established citizenship protocols.

The Palestinian Authority Passport/Travel Document Arabic: جواز سفر‎ (Jawaz Safar)
is a passport/travel document issued since April 1995 by the Palestinian Authority to
Palestinian residents of the Palestinian territories for the purpose of international travel.

The Palestinian Authority passport is available to anyone on production of a birth certificate
showing that they were born in Palestine. What constitutes "Palestine" for this purpose is
not clear. In practice, only residents of areas under the Palestinian Authority jurisdiction
can apply. Whether Palestinians born outside Palestine could apply for the passport is also
not clear.[1]

However, the passport issuance is subject to additional restrictions imposed by the
Israeli government.[1] Israel asserts that the requirement is permitted for security
needs under the Interim Agreement.[2]
​

[1] INS Resource Information Center (May 20, 2002). "Palestinian Territory, Occupied" (PDF). UNHCR. Retrieved 2009-01-24.

[2] UNHCR 17 Dec 1998: Palestine/Occupied Territories: Information On Passports Issued By The Palestine National Authority Archived 2012-10-12 ​

(By REUTERS December 21, 2015) Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said in Athens on Monday that his national authority was going to issue State of Palestine passports within 2016.
​

The Palestinians became the citizens, and the Palestinians have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

How do you know when a people (in this case Palestinians) have sovereignty?

Describe the essential elements of sovereignty; so I might be able to distinguish between those that have sovereignty, and those that do not.


Most Respectfully,
R

The people of the place have the right to sovereignty. The people from someplace else do not.

The Palestinians, being the citizens of a defined territory, have the right to sovereignty.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, come on.

The people of the place have the right to sovereignty. The people from someplace else do not.

The Palestinians, being the citizens of a defined territory, have the right to sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

The people we call Arab Palestinians today (of the occupied territories --- or --- West Bank and Gaza Strip) have never defined a territory. Only outside influences have stipulated or recognized such.

The regional area you refer to as "Palestine" was defined within such boundaries as fixed by the Allied Powers (specifically the Mandatory Powers -- Great Britain and France).

(QUESTIONs)

• What territory did the Arabs define (borders) as "Palestine?"
  
• What means or forum did they use?
• When did they do that?

(CLARIFICATION)

All people have the right to self-determination and the protection against all forms of intervention or interference threatening the sovereignty and political independence of the nation form by that self-determination.

This is not unique to the Arabs within the "Palestine" defined within such boundaries as fixed by the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

All people have the right to self-determination and the protection against all forms of intervention or interference threatening the sovereignty and political independence of the nation form by that self-determination.

That is what I have been saying for years.

The Palestinians are the citizens of Palestine by treaty, international and domestic law. They are the undisputed people of the place.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

All people have the right to self-determination and the protection against all forms of intervention or interference threatening the sovereignty and political independence of the nation form by that self-determination.

That is what I have been saying for years.

The Palestinians are the citizens of Palestine by treaty, international and domestic law. They are the undisputed people of the place.

(OBSERVATION)

• The Jewish People were made the citizens of Palestine by Mandate.

√ Article 7, Mandate for Palestine:

There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

• The Jewish People were made the citizens of Palestine by International Law

√ VI.--Nationality. (APPENDICES TO THE REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON
THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE AND TRANSJORDAN FOR THE YEAR 1924.)

1.Q.--What is the text of the Nationality law?

2. Q.--Have special provisions been enacted, framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews?

1 and 2. A.--The Palestine Citizenship Order-in-Council was drawn up in 1924, but the final text was not settled and the Order made until July, 1925. The matter will therefore be dealt with in the Report for 1925.​

Excerpt The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council, 1925

By virtue and in exercise of the powers in his behalf by the Foreign Jurisdiction Act of 1890, or otherwise, in His Majesty vested , is pleased by and with the advice of His Privy Council to order , and it is ordered as follows:-

PART 1.

(1) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August 1924 shall become Palestine citizens.

(2) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen may [...]

(3) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of clause (1) of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen and differs in race from the majority of the population of Palestine may in the like manner and subject to the same conditions opt for the nationality of one of the States in which the majority of the population is of the same race as the person exercising the right to opt subject to the consent of that State and he shall thereupon cease to be a Palestinian citizen.​

Article 21: Definitions

For the purpose of this Order:

1. The expression “Palestine” includes the territories to which the mandate for Palestine applies, except such parts of the territories comprised in Palestine to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea as were defined by Order of the High Commissioner dated the first of September 1922.

2. The expression “Palestinian citizen” means a person who is by birth or becomes by naturalisation of otherwise a Palestinian citizen.​

• The Jewish People were made the citizens of Palestine by domestic law.

√ Readings on Citizenship and Nationality in Israel/Palestine​

(COMMENT)

The major discrepancy and dispute is in the understanding of the territorial effective control.

The territorial area in the region, which is discussed here as "Palestine" (as defined within the boundaries described by the Allied Powers) had not been sovereign unto the Arabs for more than a thousand years. Even today, the question is open as to whether the Arabs have sovereign or effective control over any portion of the territory formerly under the Administration of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

All people have the right to self-determination and the protection against all forms of intervention or interference threatening the sovereignty and political independence of the nation form by that self-determination.

That is what I have been saying for years.

The Palestinians are the citizens of Palestine by treaty, international and domestic law. They are the undisputed people of the place.

(OBSERVATION)

• The Jewish People were made the citizens of Palestine by Mandate.

√ Article 7, Mandate for Palestine:

There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

• The Jewish People were made the citizens of Palestine by International Law

√ VI.--Nationality. (APPENDICES TO THE REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON
THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE AND TRANSJORDAN FOR THE YEAR 1924.)

1.Q.--What is the text of the Nationality law?

2. Q.--Have special provisions been enacted, framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews?

1 and 2. A.--The Palestine Citizenship Order-in-Council was drawn up in 1924, but the final text was not settled and the Order made until July, 1925. The matter will therefore be dealt with in the Report for 1925.​

Excerpt The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council, 1925

By virtue and in exercise of the powers in his behalf by the Foreign Jurisdiction Act of 1890, or otherwise, in His Majesty vested , is pleased by and with the advice of His Privy Council to order , and it is ordered as follows:-

PART 1.

(1) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August 1924 shall become Palestine citizens.

(2) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen may [...]

(3) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of clause (1) of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen and differs in race from the majority of the population of Palestine may in the like manner and subject to the same conditions opt for the nationality of one of the States in which the majority of the population is of the same race as the person exercising the right to opt subject to the consent of that State and he shall thereupon cease to be a Palestinian citizen.​

Article 21: Definitions

For the purpose of this Order:

1. The expression “Palestine” includes the territories to which the mandate for Palestine applies, except such parts of the territories comprised in Palestine to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea as were defined by Order of the High Commissioner dated the first of September 1922.

2. The expression “Palestinian citizen” means a person who is by birth or becomes by naturalisation of otherwise a Palestinian citizen.​

• The Jewish People were made the citizens of Palestine by domestic law.

√ Readings on Citizenship and Nationality in Israel/Palestine​

(COMMENT)

The major discrepancy and dispute is in the understanding of the territorial effective control.

The territorial area in the region, which is discussed here as "Palestine" (as defined within the boundaries described by the Allied Powers) had not been sovereign unto the Arabs for more than a thousand years. Even today, the question is open as to whether the Arabs have sovereign or effective control over any portion of the territory formerly under the Administration of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

The nationality law was imposed on Palestine by military force.

This was a violation of the Palestinian's right to self determination without external interference.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Not all nations of the world hold to the concept that the principle use of military force is a matter of deterrence, defense and maintenance of the peace.

Many nations of the world see the use of military force as a necessary tool to protect their national interests —- and —- to carry out national policy as an extension of international diplomacy.

Historically, many successful empires have used military force to structure a form of composite of fragmented nations, ruled under a single entity to extend control over greater resources, producing wealth and expanding commerce for the improvement of the entire territory as a whole.

The nationality law was imposed on Palestine by military force.

(COMMENT)

The territory called Palestine has been under foreign control imposed by military regimes since before the time of the crusaders, the Fatima and Abbasid Caliphates — until the present (a period of more than a 1000 years). This span of foreign control —- with the Fatima’s dominating most of the region from NW Africa —- after the Abbasids which governed most of the Islamic world from Baghdad.

On the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the surrender of the Turkish Republic, the rule and nationality changes were no different from that experienced by the Middle Easterners from the previous millennium.

The suggestion that the nationality and citizenship, supported by the forces of the Allied Powers was somehow strange or different —- taken outside the customary rule of law is simply historically inaccurate. From the time of Persian Rule (540 BC) to the British Mandate (1922) there was no change in sovereignty that was not a shadow outcome of a conflict or war.

This was a violation of the Palestinian's right to self determination without external interference.

(COMMENT)

At mid-night 14/15 May 1948, the Provisional Government of Israel announced its independence on the departure of the British High Commissioner; British control of Palestine officially ended with the successor government handed to the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC). This was the exercise of a form of self-determination (alla Chapter I of the UN Charter); fully coordinated in advance with the UNPC.

The UN approved the Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of States, the text of which is annexed to the present resolution; (A/RES/36/103 9 December 1981).

The UN adopted the Respect for the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of States in their electoral processes (A/RES/50/172 27 FEB 1996).

This aspect of the complaint is rather ambiguous. It does not stipulate a place on the timeline. It is unclear if the objection is relative to the pre-Armistice period —- or the —- post-Six Day War period — or the — pre-Jordanian abandonment — or the — period between the abandonment and the PLO Declaration of Independence. THUS, the issue cannot be addressed — while not knowing the applicable conditions which apply and which laws the Arab Palestinians are claiming to be in their favor.

Most Respectfully,
R