Trump so far on Israel; MOST PRO ISRAEL POTUS EVER
1. Nixed Obama's
catastrophic Iran deal. Warns Iran against resumption of program. https://www.bloomberg.com/…/trump-warns-iran-of-severe-cons…. 98% of Israeli leadership knows the Iran
deal was genocidal for them and applaud Trump's nixing of Obama's (who is
despised in Israel) perfidy. This is also supported by our traditional Arab
allies, Saudis and Gulf States.
2. Recognizing
Jerusalem as capital
3. Reversing State
Dept. claiming Judea and Samaria are "occupied"
4. Got Taylor Force
ACT, denying use of our tax dollars for Palestinians to
fund murderers of
Jews.
5. Told Israel US has
their back
6. Says only 20,000
palestinian refugee, not millions https://worldisraelnews.com/us-report-only-20000-palestini…/ https://worldisraelnews.com/us-report-only-20000-palestinia…
7. Mitigated impact of
Obama's "most anti-semitic act in the world in 2016. betrayed by Obama's
most-anti-Semitic act in the world in 2016 (according to Simon Wiesenthal nazi
Hunting org) when Obama abstained in UN resolution making much of Jerusalem
illegally occupied territory. The impact of that odious Obama act has been
mitigated and reversed by the Trump State Dept. no longer calling Judea/Samaria
"occupied territory" and by recognizing Jerusalem as the capital.
8. largest aid package
ever approved august 2018
9. Peace Plan
supported by Bibi, and first time ever Arab nations not taking the Palestinian
side re flexibly.
10. The United States recognized the Golan Heights as part of Israel through a presidential
proclamation signed by U.S. president Donald Trump on March 25, 2019 ...
11. Appoints one pro Israel
staffer to top diplomatic and National Security posts after another vs Obama
hiring Samantha Powers and Susan Rice and many Dem candidates have ANTI ISRAEL
top aids.
Why Israel’s West Bank Settlements Are Legal
Based on David M. Phillips. The Illegal-Settlements Myth. Commentary Magazine. December 2009. https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-illegal-settlements-myth/ It is troubling that people, including Jews, accept the idea that the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) is Arab territory when, in fact, it is not owned by anyone. Eugene Rostow, U.S. Undersecretary of State in 1967 and former dean of Yale Law School, stated that Jews have a right to settle it under the British Mandate and that this right is "unchallengeable as a matter of law." He said it should be considered "unallocated territory" (in contradistinction to "occupied" [or even "disputed"]) territory. Therefore, Israel has the status of a legitimate claimant. It can be said, in fact, that if one accepts the arguments being made to support the view that Israeli settlement in the West Bank is illegal, then all of Israel is illegal (see Conclusion below). The History of Ownership Though routinely referred to nowadays as “Palestinian” land, neither Jerusalem nor the West Bank has ever been under Palestinian Arab sovereignty. The Romans gave the name “Palestine” (from “Philistine”) to the area of the Middle East they controlled. Until it was vanquished in World War I, the Ottoman Empire (1299 to 1923) controlled pretty much all of the Middle East. Because British-led Allied troops had routed the Turks from Palestine, the League of Nations gave the British conditional control of the area under a mandate. It authorized England to facilitate the creation of a “Jewish National Home,” while respecting the rights of the native Arab population. British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill partitioned the mandate in 1922 and gave the East Bank of the Jordan to England’s Hashemite Arab allies, who created the Kingdom of Jordan (aka Trans-Jordan). After World War II, England gave up its mandate authority, and its troops departed in May 1948. Israel immediately declared statehood, whereupon Jordan and four other Arab countries invaded. Israel survived, but the fighting left Jordan in control of what would come to be known as the West Bank, as well as approximately half of Jerusalem, including the Old City. Jordan illegally annexed the territory. Upon Israel’s stunning 1967 victory against another Arab onslaught, Jordan lost its control of Jerusalem and the West Bank. At the end of the war, the heads of eight countries, including Egypt, Syria, and Jordan (all of which lost land as the result of their failed confrontation with Israel), met at a summit in Khartoum, Sudan, and agreed to three principles concerning Israel: 1. No peace with Israel 2. No recognition of Israel 3. No negotiations with Israel Though many Israelis hoped to trade most of the conquered lands for peace, they had no takers. No one even suggested that any of the conquered land belonged to the “Palestinians,” as there was no concept of a Palestinian “nation” at the time. In 1970, the Palestine Liberation Organization fomented a bloody civil war against Jordan. With Israel’s open support, King Hussein survived the threat, but at that point, he wanted to reduce, not enlarge, the Palestinian population in his kingdom. He therefore disavowed any claim to the lands he lost in 1967. Applicable International Law Opponents of West Bank settlement have based their arguments on one or both of the following: The 1907 Hague Regulations, whose provisions are primarily designed to protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of a short-term occupation The 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, the first international agreement designed specifically to protect civilians during wartime Most of the objections to the West Bank settlements have been based on an article in The Hague Regulations that bars an occupying power from confiscating private property. Israel requisitioned land from private Arab owners to establish some early settlements; this differs from confiscation, because compensation was paid for use of the land. Since 1979, all Israeli settlements legally authorized by the Israeli Military Administration have been built either on lands that Israel classifies as state-owned or “public,” or, in a small minority of cases, on land purchased by Jews from Arabs after 1967. The term “public land” includes uncultivated rural land not registered in anyone’s name and land owned by absentee owners, both of which are considered public land under Jordanian and Ottoman law. (Even Mishnaic law allows certain squatters’ rights to property if they have not been challenged by its owner for three years. [Baba Batra Ch. 3]) The article of the 1949 Geneva Convention that prohibits forcible transfer of an occupier’s subjects into or out of occupied territory is often cited by settlement opponents. However, the Gaza and West bank territories were not forcibly settled; some were even settled without Government permission. Moreover, the forcible deportation of people from the settlements would similarly violate the Convention, which is what Israel did when it removed settlers from Gaza. The existence of Jewish communities in the West Bank before the creation of the State of Israel is completely ignored. These Jewish communities were destroyed by Arab armies, militias, and rioters, and, in at least one case (Hebron), the community’s population was slaughtered. Conclusion People who oppose West Bank settlements while considering themselves friends of Israel make a dangerous argument. By falsely claiming that international law prohibits Israeli settlements on unallocated territory that has no legitimate owner (other than private owners of individual parcels of land), they will inevitably have to conclude that the State of Israel is itself illegitimate because it too was established on land that was unallocated. Conversely, Arabs who build homes in the West Bank really are illegal settlers.
Why Israel’s West Bank Settlements Are Legal
Based on David M. Phillips. The Illegal-Settlements Myth. Commentary Magazine. December 2009. https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-illegal-settlements-myth/ It is troubling that people, including Jews, accept the idea that the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) is Arab territory when, in fact, it is not owned by anyone. Eugene Rostow, U.S. Undersecretary of State in 1967 and former dean of Yale Law School, stated that Jews have a right to settle it under the British Mandate and that this right is "unchallengeable as a matter of law." He said it should be considered "unallocated territory" (in contradistinction to "occupied" [or even "disputed"]) territory. Therefore, Israel has the status of a legitimate claimant. It can be said, in fact, that if one accepts the arguments being made to support the view that Israeli settlement in the West Bank is illegal, then all of Israel is illegal (see Conclusion below). The History of Ownership Though routinely referred to nowadays as “Palestinian” land, neither Jerusalem nor the West Bank has ever been under Palestinian Arab sovereignty. The Romans gave the name “Palestine” (from “Philistine”) to the area of the Middle East they controlled. Until it was vanquished in World War I, the Ottoman Empire (1299 to 1923) controlled pretty much all of the Middle East. Because British-led Allied troops had routed the Turks from Palestine, the League of Nations gave the British conditional control of the area under a mandate. It authorized England to facilitate the creation of a “Jewish National Home,” while respecting the rights of the native Arab population. British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill partitioned the mandate in 1922 and gave the East Bank of the Jordan to England’s Hashemite Arab allies, who created the Kingdom of Jordan (aka Trans-Jordan). After World War II, England gave up its mandate authority, and its troops departed in May 1948. Israel immediately declared statehood, whereupon Jordan and four other Arab countries invaded. Israel survived, but the fighting left Jordan in control of what would come to be known as the West Bank, as well as approximately half of Jerusalem, including the Old City. Jordan illegally annexed the territory. Upon Israel’s stunning 1967 victory against another Arab onslaught, Jordan lost its control of Jerusalem and the West Bank. At the end of the war, the heads of eight countries, including Egypt, Syria, and Jordan (all of which lost land as the result of their failed confrontation with Israel), met at a summit in Khartoum, Sudan, and agreed to three principles concerning Israel: 1. No peace with Israel 2. No recognition of Israel 3. No negotiations with Israel Though many Israelis hoped to trade most of the conquered lands for peace, they had no takers. No one even suggested that any of the conquered land belonged to the “Palestinians,” as there was no concept of a Palestinian “nation” at the time. In 1970, the Palestine Liberation Organization fomented a bloody civil war against Jordan. With Israel’s open support, King Hussein survived the threat, but at that point, he wanted to reduce, not enlarge, the Palestinian population in his kingdom. He therefore disavowed any claim to the lands he lost in 1967. Applicable International Law Opponents of West Bank settlement have based their arguments on one or both of the following: The 1907 Hague Regulations, whose provisions are primarily designed to protect the interests of a temporarily ousted sovereign in the context of a short-term occupation The 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, the first international agreement designed specifically to protect civilians during wartime Most of the objections to the West Bank settlements have been based on an article in The Hague Regulations that bars an occupying power from confiscating private property. Israel requisitioned land from private Arab owners to establish some early settlements; this differs from confiscation, because compensation was paid for use of the land. Since 1979, all Israeli settlements legally authorized by the Israeli Military Administration have been built either on lands that Israel classifies as state-owned or “public,” or, in a small minority of cases, on land purchased by Jews from Arabs after 1967. The term “public land” includes uncultivated rural land not registered in anyone’s name and land owned by absentee owners, both of which are considered public land under Jordanian and Ottoman law. (Even Mishnaic law allows certain squatters’ rights to property if they have not been challenged by its owner for three years. [Baba Batra Ch. 3]) The article of the 1949 Geneva Convention that prohibits forcible transfer of an occupier’s subjects into or out of occupied territory is often cited by settlement opponents. However, the Gaza and West bank territories were not forcibly settled; some were even settled without Government permission. Moreover, the forcible deportation of people from the settlements would similarly violate the Convention, which is what Israel did when it removed settlers from Gaza. The existence of Jewish communities in the West Bank before the creation of the State of Israel is completely ignored. These Jewish communities were destroyed by Arab armies, militias, and rioters, and, in at least one case (Hebron), the community’s population was slaughtered. Conclusion People who oppose West Bank settlements while considering themselves friends of Israel make a dangerous argument. By falsely claiming that international law prohibits Israeli settlements on unallocated territory that has no legitimate owner (other than private owners of individual parcels of land), they will inevitably have to conclude that the State of Israel is itself illegitimate because it too was established on land that was unallocated. Conversely, Arabs who build homes in the West Bank really are illegal settlers.
Essentials of the Trump “Deal of the
Century”
The Trump administration stated that it would break with the
worn paradigms of past approaches to the Israeli–Palestinian peace process,
removing two core issues, namely (1) recognizing
Jerusalem as Israel's capital on December 6, 2017; and (2) on November 18,
2019, stating that Jewish settlements in the West Bank were consistent with
international law. As a visible signal of its break with the past, the United
States opened its Jerusalem embassy on the 70th anniversary of the
establishment of the State of Israel.
Preconditions for a Palestinian StateThe plan puts the Palestinian Authority (PA) on probation by establishing a set of conditions they must meet to become a state in name only, with Israel in control of its borders, air space, electromagnetic spectrum, foreign policy, and security. Its capitol would be on the outskirts of East Jerusalem, and it would not be established until four years into the execution of the plan. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the proposal gives Palestinians a chance to achieve "conditional, limited sovereignty". The PA must:
- Disarm the governing
authority of the Gaza Strip, Hamas, together with Islamic Jihad Movement in
Palestine and all Palestinians under their authority
- Recognize Israel as a Jewish
State
- Refrain from any attempt to
join any international organization without the consent of the State of
Israel
- Take no action, and dismiss
all pending actions, against the State of Israel, the United States, and
any of their citizens before the International Criminal Court, the
International Court of Justice,
and all other tribunals
- Take no action against any
Israeli or United States citizen before Interpol
or any non-Israeli or United States legal system
- Immediately terminate making
"prisoner & martyr payments" (defined as salaries to the
families of terrorists serving sentences in Israeli prisons, as well as to
the families of deceased terrorists and develop humanitarian and welfare
programs to provide essential services and support to Palestinians in need
that are not based upon the commission of terrorist acts.
The
Trump plan sets forth criteria the PA
must meet before a Palestinian state is allowed to form. Whether
Palestinians have met this criteria will be determined by Israel and the United
States. If, at any time, Israel decides the Palestinians are not meeting the
criteria, the Trump plan gives Israel the right to retake military control. The
criteria are:
- The PA shall have implemented
a governing system with a constitution or another system for establishing
the rule of law that provides for freedom of the press, free and fair
elections, respect for its citizens’ human rights, protections for
religious freedom, uniform and fair enforcement of law and contractual
rights, due process under law, and an independent judiciary with
appropriate legal consequences and punishment established for violations
of the law.
- The PA shall have established
transparent, independent, and credit-worthy financial institutions capable
of engaging in international market transactions in the same manner as
financial institutions of western democracies, with appropriate governance
to prevent corruption and ensure the proper use of such funds, and a legal
system to protect investments and to address market-based commercial
expectations. The State of Palestine should meet the independent objective
criteria to join the International Monetary Fund.
- The PA shall have ended all
programs, including school curricula and textbooks, that serve to incite
or promote hatred or antagonism toward its neighbors, or which compensate
or incentivize criminal or violent activity.
- The PA shall have achieved
civilian and law enforcement control over all of its territory and
demilitarized its population.
- The Palestinians shall have
complied with all the other terms and conditions of this Vision.
Status of borders and territory
The plan recognizes Palestinian rights to roughly 70% of the
West Bank (i.e., Judea and Samaria). The plan calls for land swaps, albeit not
"1-to-1 land swaps," arguing that Palestinians would not receive 100%
of pre-1967 territory, but it provides for territory that would be
"reasonably comparable" to pre-1967 territory. The plan recognizes an
Israeli right to the entire Jordan
Valley, which it regards as militarily strategic.
The implementation of the plan is conditional, being subject
to the "Gaza Criteria" and would only proceed if the governance of
the Gaza Strip, at present administered by Hamas, were transferred back either
to the PA or to another Palestinian entity that Israel approves of. Hamas is required to commit itself to making
peace with the State of Israel by adopting the Quartet Principles, which include unambiguously
and explicitly recognizing the State of Israel, committing to nonviolence, and
accepting previous agreements and obligations between the parties.
Status of Jerusalem, a Palestinian Capitol, and Holy Sites
The plan affirms Israel’s right to the entirety of
"undivided Jerusalem", recognizing it as Israel's capitol. The plan
does accept a Palestinian capitol for a future State of Palestine to be located
outside, and east and north of, the Separation Barrier. The plan puts the Haram
al Sharif/Temple Mount, including the Al-Aqsa
mosque, under Israeli sovereignty. The plan gives Israel the task of
safeguarding the holy sites and guaranteeing freedom of worship.
Status of refugees
There would be no right
of return to Israel for Palestinian refugees from the wars of 1948 and
1967. Were the deal to be signed, the assistance of UNRWA to the
Palestinian population would be terminated.
Economic
Incentives
The plan proposes a $50 billion investment fund for 179
infrastructure and business projects, to be administered by a
"multilateral development bank", with investments protected by
accountability, transparency, anti-corruption, and conditionality safeguards
The administration envisions the plan being funded mostly by Arab states and wealthy
private investors. The plan advocates a free market, including greater
protection of property rights and a "pro-growth tax structure."
The entire Peace to Prosperity plan is available here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/peacetoprosperity/
No comments:
Post a Comment