Opinions of Peter Belmont
Speaking Truth to Power
| Newt Gingrich and the proper territory of the “invented” Israeli people |
|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2011-12-21
Newt Gingrich has had some fun telling fibs to the American people (really, telling rich Zionist political donors what he thinks they’d like to hear), namely, that the Palestinians are an “invented” people. The talk show host might have had a more interesting segment by requesting the comments of a few Native Americans – a Cherokee, an Apache, or a Navajo ‘Indian,’ for example. What would a Native American have to say to Newt Gingrich had he claimed that the indigenous people of North America are “invented”? as we read at link to MondoWeiss. M.J.Rosenberg, in the HuffingtonPost roasts Gingrich, but also has a bit to say about Israelis, whom he identifies as a modern, “invented”, people—and the following statement requires some critical examination. Israelis are not just Jews who happen to live in Palestine even though the concept of Israel-ness started just over a hundred years ago with nothing but an idea. They are Israelis, entitled to self-determination, peace and security in their own land. I’m willing to indulge M.J.Rosenberg for this last idea, but not without asking an all-important question: What, exactly, is Israelis’ “own land”? How could we know? If the proper (and legal) land of Israel is all of Mandatory Palestine—that is pre-1967 Israel plus Gaza and the West Bank (and within the West Bank, occupied East Jerusalem), then it is clearly a land being ruled as an apartheid-style, non-democratic semi-dictatorship. Furthermore, the UNSC and ICJ are clearly wrong to call Gaza and the West Bank “occupied territory”. And the USA is wrong to have been calling Israel a “democracy” since 1967. If, on the other hand, the proper and legal land of Israel (as most people including the PLO since 1988 seem ready to agree) is pre-1967 Israel, then Israel is indeed a belligerent occupier of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, and the settlements are all illegal (at international law) (as UNSC-465 said (1980) and the ICJ said (2004) (see previous link) and the 600,000 Israeli settlers are present illegally (at international law) in occupied territories. Everyone will acknowledge, however, that every square inch of land which Israel controls was “acquired” by war, whether in the war of 1947-50 or the war of 1967 (I’ll leave the question of Lebanese territory captured in 2006 for another day)—and that it was thus acquired in exactly the manner which UNSC-242 (1967) called “inadmissible”[1] and contrary to a principle of the UN Charter that nations should not use force or the threat of force to settle international issues.[2]. So, I return to the question raised by M.J.Rosenberg—what is Israelis “own land”? Whatever it is, the matter of identifying it must not be decided by what the government of Israel (or of any other state) wants, but (as to the sharing of the land of Palestine) either by a freely-arrived-at agreement between Israel and all the Palestinian people (if such agreement can be reached in a short time, a year or so) or by a large-scale international agreement, best by the UNSC. Israel’s territory, as so determined, may not prove large enough (or to have sufficient appurtenant water) to serve even as a home for the Israelis who now live there, for Israel has been an energetic inviter of new (Jewish) immigrants, and about 10% of all Israelis who now livfe within Israel-Palestine now live as (illegal) settlers in the occupied Palestinian (and Syrian and Lebanese) territories. If they must “come home” to pre-1967 Israel, will there be enough room? And will there be enough room in that “Israel” for all the Jews who now live anywhere in the world or who might ever live anywhere in the world? Perhaps not. But so what? Israelis’ “own land” cannot grow to meet their needs any more than any nation state can expand (at its neighbor’s expense) to accommodate growing populations. Well, except to note the general agreement that Israelis’ “own land” is the territory of pre-1967 Israel, I’ll say “back to you, M.J.Rosenberg. ----------- [1] inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war ----------- [2] Article II, Section 4: All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations. |
Comments:
Submit a comment, subject to review:
|
123pab.com | Top
©2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 www.123pab.com |