Shusha
Gold Member
- Dec 14, 2015
- 16,218
- 3,635
- 290
His list is a Zionist pipe dream. It has no relevance.One of the basics in international law is that the people belong to the land. An old American Indian saying is that "The land does not belong to the people, the people belong to the land." The people belong to the land regardless of who governs it. We find this reiterated in the Treaty of Lausanne, The citizenship order of 1925, UN Resolution 181, and everywhere else.RE: Who are the Israelis?
That would be a "domestic question.
(COMMENT)Would Palestine be considered a state as part of the "keep citizenship of another state"?
Technically, the acquisition of territory and nationality/citizenship are two separate issues. Yes, there are such things as "dual citizenship holders."
The international concern on the matter revolves around the question of a person who is not considered as a national by any State. The international community takes a dim view in cases where the actions result in the creation of stateless people. It renders a financial burden and questionable upon others.
The mechanism could be citizenship by default, meaning they are automatically in the window. Or, domestic law may require a filing of intention, where there would be a specified period (usually less than a year) in which those persons enveloped by the territorial acquisition, would declare intentions and make an application for new citizenship.
The State of Israel does not necessarily have to annex the territory. They could extend protectorate status as unincorportated; similar to American Samoa or Puerto Rico.
Most Respectfully,
R
Many other laws hinge on this basic principle like ethnic cleansing and population transfers, denationalization, denying the right to return. These push the burden of people onto other states who have no responsibility to accept foreign nationals.
So how would you apply this thinking to rylah’s list?
It’s irrelevamt because you don’t think Israel can accomplish it?!
