Renowned legal scholar: There is no Israeli occupation

[JoelT1]

Renowned legal scholar, former Dean of Yale Law school and statesman Eugene Rostow dispels the myth that Israel is in “occupation” of its own land > Google Groups

Eugene V. Rostow '37: Dean, Scholar, Statesman - Yale Law School

 

[Shusha]

Articles by the late Eugene Rostow

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Rostow was born in Brooklyn, New York, to Jewish immigrants from the Russian Empire, and raised in Irvington, New Jersey, and New Haven, Connecticut. His parents were active socialists and their three sons, Eugene, Ralph, and Walt, were named after Eugene V. Debs, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Walt Whitman.

 

[abi]

"Renowned legal scholar?" Does it matter who claims that? The world refers to Palestine as "the occupied territories."


The Israeli-occupied territories are the territories occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War of 1967. Originally, those territories included the Syrian Golan Heights, the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula and Egyptian-occupied Gaza Strip and Jordanian-annexed West Bank.

the occupied territories - Google Search

 

[Shusha]

Another good article about the notion of "occupation".

In an update, Ian lacey adds that in his view, any possible concept of an occupation came to an end with the Oslo Accords.

The current binding legal instrument under the Accords is the Interim Agreement of 1995, which governs the status of the Territories on an interim basis until a final status agreement is negotiated. Under Article XI all of the civil powers and responsibilities in the whole of the Territories are now exercised by the Palestinian Authority, although in the lightly populated area still defined as Area C, this does not include powers relating to territory. The result is that 100% of the Palestinian population of the territories is presently governed by the Palestinian Authority.

|Under Article XII(1), ie. by express agreement with the Palestinians, Israel retains responsibility for defense and the overall security of Israelis and settlements, and has the powers to take the steps necessary to meet this responsibility. In other words Israel forces are present in the Territories by agreement and only to the extent made necessary by attacks on Israelis.

Further, under Article XXXI permanent status negotiations are to include Jerusalem, Settlements and Borders. In other words it is expressly acknowledged that existing Settlements are not illegal during the interim period, and that ultimate borders will be subject to negotiation. This reinforces the description of the Territories as disputed. As can be seen, they are certainly not occupied in any sense.

The legal position may enter a state of flux as a result of the election of a Palestinian government which has expressly stated that it does not intend to enter into the permanent status negotiations contemplated by Oslo. If the Interim Agreement were to be officially repudiated by the PA, and if that repudiation was officially accepted by Israel, then the legal situation would revert to the status quo ante. Israel would remain the only State body entitled to exercise sovereignty in the Territories, certainly until a permanent peace was negotiated, and arguably with a right of unilateral annexation, in whole or part, for the purposes of defense against future aggression, and as occurred in Europe after the Second World War.

 

[Shusha]

"Renowned legal scholar?" Does it matter who claims that? The world refers to Palestine as "the occupied territories."

Of course international law matters. Its not a popularity contest and the "world" can refer to Palestine as the deep blue sea but that won't make it true.

 

[jillian]

Renowned legal scholar, former Dean of Yale Law school and statesman Eugene Rostow dispels the myth that Israel is in “occupation” of its own land > Google Groups

Eugene V. Rostow '37: Dean, Scholar, Statesman - Yale Law School

you know.... generally occupied lands don't have their own governments.... particularly terrorist ones.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Renowned legal scholar?" Does it matter who claims that? The world refers to Palestine as "the occupied territories."


The Israeli-occupied territories are the territories occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War of 1967. Originally, those territories included the Syrian Golan Heights, the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula and Egyptian-occupied Gaza Strip and Jordanian-annexed West Bank.

the occupied territories - Google Search

The Israeli-occupied territories are the territories occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War of 1967

Who did the territories belong to before 1967?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

A Jew says that Jews aren't occupying anything.
Who knew?

 

[abi]

Of course international law matters.

Good. Thank-you.

The state of Israel has violated many international laws, including United Nations Resolutions and the Laws of War and Occupation as stated in the Fourth Geneva Convention. Below is a summary of some of those violations. Much of the fact sheet was taken from the Israeli Law Resource Center (ILRC).

israel violations international law - Google Search

 

[Shusha]

A Jew says that Jews aren't occupying anything.
Who knew?

Yep, why bother with presenting legal arguments? Let's just go straight for the antisemitism. Because, Jooooooos.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

A Jew says that Jews aren't occupying anything.
Who knew?

Yep, why bother with presenting legal arguments? Let's just go straight for the antisemitism. Because, Jooooooos.

Like the U.S legally created it's self on Native lands, and sent them to reservations.

Hmm, why does this sound so familiar?

 

[Shusha]

The state of Israel has violated many international laws, including United Nations Resolutions and the Laws of War and Occupation as stated in the Fourth Geneva Convention. Below is a summary of some of those violations. Much of the fact sheet was taken from the Israeli Law Resource Center (ILRC).

israel violations international law - Google Search

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The state of Israel has violated many international laws, including United Nations Resolutions and the Laws of War and Occupation as stated in the Fourth Geneva Convention. Below is a summary of some of those violations. Much of the fact sheet was taken from the Israeli Law Resource Center (ILRC).

israel violations international law - Google Search

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

Uh, that's like saying because Native Americans didn't have much of a government, they therefor lost their rights to the U.S.

Same old tired colonialism like arguments, just when Jews do it, it's Kosher.

 

[Shusha]

Uh, that's like saying because Native Americans didn't have much of a government, they therefor lost their rights to the U.S.

Same old tired colonialism like arguments, just when Jews do it, it's Kosher.

Um. Not saying any such thing. All people have the right to self-determination. But the US does not legally "occupy" First Nations land, in the legal sense of the term, because the First Nations peoples have never had a State. This does not in any way preclude the development of a State by First Nations peoples.

And the Jewish peoples ARE the First Nations peoples. They are the equivalent of the Native Peoples of the US.

 

[abi]

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

Canada, agreeing with UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, argues that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the occupied territories (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip) and that Israeli settlements are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

occupied territories violate international law - Google Search

 

[Shusha]

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

Canada, agreeing with UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, argues that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the occupied territories (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip) and that Israeli settlements are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

occupied territories violate international law - Google Search

Sigh. The Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply because there is no occupied territory. There have been only three sovereigns in the territory since the end of the Mandate: Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Jordan and Egypt NEVER had any legal claim to the territory, and even if they did -- they renounced all claim to the territory in the peace treaties with Israel. (Which, btw, set borders between themselves and Israel.)

Which leaves us with only two options: The territory belongs to Israel. Or the territory is terra nullius. There is no third option.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

Canada, agreeing with UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, argues that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the occupied territories (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip) and that Israeli settlements are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

occupied territories violate international law - Google Search

Sigh. The Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply because there is no occupied territory. There have been only three sovereigns in the territory since the end of the Mandate: Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Jordan and Egypt NEVER had any legal claim to the territory, and even if they did -- they renounced all claim to the territory in the peace treaties with Israel. (Which, btw, set borders between themselves and Israel.)

Which leaves us with only two options: The territory belongs to Israel. Or the territory is terra nullius. There is no third option.

What about all those people who are citizens of Palestine?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

Canada, agreeing with UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, argues that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the occupied territories (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip) and that Israeli settlements are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

occupied territories violate international law - Google Search

Sigh. The Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply because there is no occupied territory. There have been only three sovereigns in the territory since the end of the Mandate: Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Jordan and Egypt NEVER had any legal claim to the territory, and even if they did -- they renounced all claim to the territory in the peace treaties with Israel. (Which, btw, set borders between themselves and Israel.)

Which leaves us with only two options: The territory belongs to Israel. Or the territory is terra nullius. There is no third option.

What about all those people who are citizens of Palestine?

What about all those people who are citizens of Palestine?

No one is a citizen of Palestine. It's not a country.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Speaking specifically of the topic of this thread -- the laws of "occupation" demand that the territory in question be under the sovereignty of one entity in order to be occupied by another. Since Arab Palestine has never been a sovereign entity, it CAN NOT, by definition be "occupied".

Canada, agreeing with UN Security Council Resolutions 446 and 465, argues that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the occupied territories (the Golan Heights, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip) and that Israeli settlements are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

occupied territories violate international law - Google Search

Sigh. The Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply because there is no occupied territory. There have been only three sovereigns in the territory since the end of the Mandate: Israel, Jordan and Egypt. Jordan and Egypt NEVER had any legal claim to the territory, and even if they did -- they renounced all claim to the territory in the peace treaties with Israel. (Which, btw, set borders between themselves and Israel.)

Which leaves us with only two options: The territory belongs to Israel. Or the territory is terra nullius. There is no third option.

What about all those people who are citizens of Palestine?

What about all those people who are citizens of Palestine?

No one is a citizen of Palestine. It's not a country.

Israeli bullshit talking point.
--------------
The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​