Resetting the Middle East History Button
Filed under Israel & The Jewish People, News on May 16th, 2010 by Guest WriterEditor’s Note: A guest article from Messianic Jewish Scholar Noel Rabinowitz.
On May 14 the nation of Israel celebrates its sixty-second birthday. Despite insurmountable odds, Israel has not only survived, it has prospered.
The United States has played an enormous part in that prosperity—at least until now. President Obama has demanded that Israel reset the Middle East history button.
On March 10, Obama dispatched Vice President Joe Biden to demand that Israel halt renewed building in East Jerusalem. The trip resulted in what Israeli ambassador Michael Oren called the “most serious crisis since 1975″ for U.S. and Israel relations.
That assertion was dramatically confirmed on March 23 when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington to meet with the President. Failing to acquire concessions from the Prime Minister, Obama – in a breach of protocol, left Netanyahu to dine alone.
Despite extraordinary pressure from the White House, Netanyahu remains resolute regarding Israel’s right to build in East Jerusalem.
There are two reasons for this. First, Israel has a historical claim to the territory, a fact recognized by the international community. Second, Israel fought a series of defensive wars over the territory and the current borders are legitimate under the rules of international law.
Obama and other opponents of Israel’s sovereignty need to acquaint themselves with the history of Jerusalem and international law regarding the annexation of territory captured during a defensive war. If they did, they would discover the following:
The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine recognized Jewish national rights to the entire territory in 1922. While recognizing the need to protect the rights of the territories’ Arab inhabitants, the Mandate declared that “recognition has been to the historical connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to reconstituting their Jewish national home in that country.” When the UN replaced the League of Nations in 1946, its charter specifically stated that the UN must uphold the terms of all existing international instruments ratified by the League of Nations. In other words, the UN—and President Obama—are obligated to recognize Israel’s legitimate claims on Jerusalem.
That obligation would be less clear, however, had the Palestinians agreed to UN Resolution 181—the Partition Plan of 1947. Conceding that the creation of a single Jewish state was impossible, the resolution was a non-binding recommendation that called for the partition of “Palestine” into two separate states, with Jerusalem existing temporarily under the administration of the UN.
For over half a century, the Palestinians rejected a two-state solution. They did so because they were confident that their Arab neighbors would intervene and destroy Israel militarily. That never occurred and Palestinian dreams of statehood never materialized.
Resolution 181 was a non-binding resolution and more importantly, it was one that the Palestinians rejected. Moreover, the Arab aggression that ignited the 1967 war irreversibly changed the territorial landscape and made a return to borders that existed nineteen year earlier impossible. In 2004 President George W. Bush acknowledged this fact in a letter to Prime Minister Arial Sharon. “In light of new realities on the ground,” Bush wrote, a return to the armistice lines of 1949 is “unrealistic.”
The Palestinians discarded UN Resolution 181 more than sixty years ago but they now wish to resurrect it to legitimatize their claim to Jerusalem.
President Obama also wishes to hit the reset button. He chooses to ignore Israel’s legal claim to Jerusalem, the fact that the Palestinians rejected UN Resolution 181, and that the U.S. has acknowledged current geo-political realties make a return to previous borders impossible.
Despite adamant claims to the contrary, East Jerusalem does not meet the criteria of an occupied territory. Following the 1948 war, Jordan occupied East Jerusalem and expelled its Jewish community. By the standards of international law, Jordan’s nineteen year occupation of Jerusalem — not Israel’s — was illegal.
Israel’s capture of East Jerusalem in a war of self-defense makes it the legitimate claimant to the territory. Former Chief Judge of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations, Stephen Schwebel wrote in 1970 regarding the matter: “Where the prior holder of the territory had seized the territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense, has against the prior holder, better claim.”
Why has the President turned on America’s staunchest ally in the Middle East and embraced the revisionist history of Israel’s enemies? As long as the U.S supports Israel’s claim to Jerusalem, Israel’s enemies will remain our enemies. President Obama has chosen to appease our enemies rather than stand by our ally.
About the Author: Noel Rabinowitz is Associate Professor of Biblical Studies at The King’s College in New York City. You can contact Noel via his faculty profile located here.
Tags: Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Guest Writer: Noel Rabinowitz, israel, jews, Middle East, Netanyahu, palestinians
Possibly Related Posts:
[...] Resetting the Middle East History Button | Voice of Revolution voiceofrevolution.askdrbrown.org/2010/05/16/resetting-the-middle-east-history-button – view page – cached Editor’s Note: A guest article from Messianic Jew and Biblical Scholar Noel Rabinowitz. On May 14 the nation of Israel celebrates its sixty-second Tweets about this link Topsy.Data.Twitter.User['ambassadorgwen'] = {“photo”:”http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/142020383/GAHardy_normal.jpg”,”url”:”http://twitter.com/ambassadorgwen”,”nick”:”ambassadorgwen”}; ambassadorgwen: “Editor’s Note: A guest article from Messianic Jew and Biblical Scholar Noel Rabinowitz. On May 14 the nation of Is… http://bit.ly/cZAOVw ” 19 minutes ago view tweet retweet Topsy.Data.Twitter.User['v_o_r'] = {“photo”:”http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/77643996/vor_70_70_normal.jpg”,”url”:”http://twitter.com/v_o_r”,”nick”:”v_o_r”}; v_o_r: “New article: Resetting the Middle East History Button http://bit.ly/djfXG6 ” 19 minutes ago view tweet retweet Filter tweets [...]
[...] Recent Political Developments and Jerusalem Today Jump to Comments My friend Noel Rabinowitz has an interesting summary of recent political developments related to Israel and Jerusalem: Resetting the Middle East History Button. [...]
Do you believe in a two state solution in the area of the west bank etc.? WHaT WOULD BE THE CAPITAL OF THE pAlESTINIAN STATE? sHOULD THEY HAVE SUPERVISED FREE ELECTIONS? sHOULD THEY HAVE AND ARMY, AIR FORCE , NAVY ETC? What would include the new state of Palestian???
Going foward and not all the way back to biblical times about God giving the Jews the ri ght to take over Caanan etc. Is everything negotiable?Is President Obama antisemitic? Examples specified? Is President Obama anti Israel specific?
The present geo-political realties in the Middle East suggest that a two state solution is inevitable. Since its inception, the state of Israel has been willing to co-exist with its Palestinian neighbors.
As Daniel Pipes points out in his recent review of “Palestine Betrayed” (by Ephraim Karsh), the UN handed the Palestinians a state on a silver platter in 1947. The Palestinian leadership, however, chose to remain stateless rather than recognize the right of the Jewish people to live in their own ancestral homeland.
Like the State of Israel, the State of Palestine would be celebrating its 62nd birthday this year had its leaders chosen peace rather than war.
That said – for the reasons I argued above a two state solution does not include the West Bank. Those who occupied the West Bank prior to 1947 had no legitimate claim to that territory – and whatever claim they might have had was forfeited by an unprovoked war of aggression.
You ask: “Going foward and not all the way back to biblical times about God giving the Jews the ri ght to take over Caanan etc. Is everything negotiable?”
First, one cannot divorce the land of Israel, or the people of Israel, from “biblical times.” The Jewish people have a right to this territory precisely because it was deeded to them by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Theologically speaking, Israel’s statehood is anchored in the Hebrew Bible.
Second, Israelis (they are citizens of Israel as well as ethnically Jewish) did not “take over” the land of Israel (it has not been called ‘Canaan’ for several thousand years now) – if anything, they have reclaimed what was taken from them.
As I said, Palestinian statehood seems inevitable. Nevertheless, the biblical text – both the Hebrew Bible and the NT Scriptures are clear that the nation of Israel will one day be restored in its totality under the kingship of the messiah. God is deeply concerned for the welfare of the Palestinian people – but this does not change the fact that promises made by Him concerning the geographic boundaries of Israel remain intact.