Arabs recognized Israel

The Arab position is that Jewish settlements on the West Bank and Gaza are "illegal" because they interfere with the right, usually articulated with vague references to international law, of the Arabs to create an all-Arab state west of the Jordan. In addition, over 50 per cent of the Arab population on the West Bank and Gaza, according to a recent poll, support the idea of Arab control over all of "historic Palestine" which is to say they support Israel's destruction. History stands witness to the falseness of these claims.

The fact is that the international community, including the emerging Arab nations, recognized Israel at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference which was held by the victorious Allies in order to settle international questions after the 1918 Armistice ended World War I. An official Arab and Zionist delegation, as well as delegations from nations and groups from around the world, were invited to attend the conference. The head of the Arab delegation, Emir Feisal, great-grandfather of Abdallah, the present King of Jordan, agreed that "Palestine" would be the Jewish homeland.

Feisal accepted the British Balfour Declaration of Nov. 2, 1917, which afforded recognition to a Jewish national homeland, and agreed with the Zionist delegation stating, "All such measures shall be adopted as we afford the fullest guarantee of carrying into effect the British Government's Balfour Declaration." Emir Feisal confirmed this determination in a March 3, 1919 letter to Harvard Law Professor and later US Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter with whom he wrote: "Our deputation here in Paris is full acquainted with the proposals submitted by the Zionist organization to the Peace Conference, and we regard them as modest and proper. We will do our best, insofar as we are concerned, to help them through. We will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home."

In exchange for Arab recognition of Israel, the allied powers, in 1919, agreed to the eventual sovereignty of almost 20 Arab States, covering vast oil-rich lands, after a period of mandatory oversight by European powers. The Europeans would proceed to draw the borders of their respective mandates and, in essence, create the system of Arab States that would emerge out of the remnants of the old Turkish Ottoman Empire. In 1922, a couple of years after the Conference, in a land for peace deal, the British would split Mandatory Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish Mandate using the Jordan River as the line of demarcation. The Arabs were granted East Palestine, or Transjordan, which would later become Arab Jordan while West Palestine, or Cis-Jordan, would become the Jewish National homeland of Israel.

In 1948, upon Israel's declaration of Independence from Britain, Jordan and Egypt, by use of aggressive military force, illegally occupied portions of the internationally recognized Jewish State. The Arab occupation continued until Israel reasserted its sovereignty, June 1967, after defending itself against an aggressive military campaign launched by combined Arab forces. Following the June 1967 war, UN Resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw from "occupied territories." Israel proceeded to fulfilled the letter and spirit of UN Resolution 242 when, in 1978, it concluded a peace treaty with Egypt and withdrew from the only territory that was, in fact, occupied by Israel which was the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula. Since that time, Israel has existed within borders that are, and have been since 1919, recognized by the nations of the world, including the Arab nations.

In light of the seditious opinions of over 50 per cent of the Arab population on the West Bank and Gaza, and the murderous campaign that has been launched from that territory against Jewish citizens, its time for Israel to stop playing along with the charade and re-assert its legitimate sovereignty over its internationally recognized territory. While it would be reasonable for Israel to consider the establishment of a regional elected Arab Authority on the West Bank and Gaza, Israel would be acting entirely within international law and custom if it did what any nation would do in similar circumstances. Try those involved in conspiring to overthrow the state by violent means and expel them.

A lot of inaccuracies in this article. The Balfour Declaration only declared that the Jewish national home would be IN Palestine, not that it would encompass the entire area of Palestine.

Jewish soveriegnty of the entire area west of the Jordan River was never internationally recognized, not in 1948 and not today. To this day Israel itself does not claim the West Bank to be its sovereign territory.

No I think you are confused. The Palestine referred to here included all of Jordan as well as Israel and the "occupied territories". So when you say it was supposed to be "IN Palestine" not "All of" that is exactly what occured. West of the Jordan was to be the Jewish homeland, east of the Jordan an Arab state, but all of it was collectively known as "Palestine" as per the Balfour Declaration.

The British had explained thoroughly in writing to Arab leaders after 1919 that they had never promised them a state on the west side of the Jordan river.

The Arabs continued to press their case, and by 1947 had been able to coerse/convince the British and others that they should split Palestine once more and create yet a third Arab state. Which is what occured as witnessed by UN resolution 181.

You have to realize that the word "Palestine" has many different meanings depending on what time frame you are talking about (or who you are talking to). To this day the PLO prints maps depicting all of Jordan as "Palestine", and indeed, after WW1 Palestine meant the land that is now Jordan, and Israel, and the territory claimed by the "Palestinians".

If the Palestinians are rightfully due to have their own state, then why didn't Jordan give them one during the 19 years they controled the West Bank?

Because they didn't want a "state of their own", they wanted what the Jews had.

The British carved up and distributed the Ottoman Empire to sundry "allies" in the Arab world. They gave the Arabian peninsula to the Saud robber gang, and when the Hashemites demanded their share of the booty, the British then gave them 80% of the "Jewish National Homeland" for a consolation prize.

Ottoman empire maps showed the territory now known as the country of Jordan as being part of the "Vilayet of Syria". Northern Israel and part of Lebanon was called the "Vilayet of Beirut". Southern and central Israel (as far as Jaffa) was called the Independent Sanjak of Jerusalem. A Sanjak was normally a subdivision of a Vilayet. Independent meant that it was separate from any Vilayet. Thus according to the maps of 1914, Jordan was part of Syria and not part of Palestine.

The Feisal Weizman agreement of 1919 did not provide for a jewish state in Palestine. The agreement provided for "cordial understanding" between Arab and Jew and "to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scal and as quickly as possible to settle jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil." The agreement had a protective clause stating, "In taking such measures, the arab peasant and tennant farmers shall be protected in their rights and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development."

The english text of the agreement included a reservation written in Feisal's own handwriting stating,

"Provided that the Arabs obtain their independence as demanded in my memorandum dated the fourth of January 1919 to the Foreign Office of the Government of Great Britain, I shall concur in the above articles. But if the slightest modification or departure were to be made, I shall not then be bound by a single word of the present Agreement which shall be deemed void and of no account or validity and I shall not be answerable in any way whatsoever."

The Balfour declaration was not without conditions. It had three parts. The first part stated "His majesties government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the jewish people and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object."
The second part said "It being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."
The third part said "The rights and political status enjoyed by the Jews in any other country shall not be prejudiced by the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."

Please show me a single document that promised the Jews the entire area West of the Jordan.

The Balfour Declaration. The "National Home for the Jews" encompassed both areas under the British Mandate until 2/3 was severed and given to the Hashemite clan in 1922:

The Balfour Declaration — Commentary

On November 2, 1917, Britain issued the Balfour Declaration:

His Majesty's Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

According to the Peel Commission, appointed by the British Government to investigate the cause of the 1936 Arab riots, "the field in which the Jewish National Home was to be established was understood, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, to be the whole of historic Palestine, including Transjordan."

The Mandate for Palestine's purpose was to put into effect the Balfour Declaration. It specifically referred to "the historical connections of the Jewish people with Palestine" and to the moral validity of "reconstituting their National Home in that country." The term "reconstituting" shows recognition of the fact that Palestine had been the Jews' home. Furthermore, the British were instructed to "use their best endeavors to facilitate" Jewish immigration, to encourage settlement on the land and to "secure" the Jewish National Home. The word "Arab" does not appear in the Mandatory award.

The Mandate was formalized by the 52 governments at the League of Nations on July 24, 1922.

JSOURCE

I see Lent has done it already.

But for the record, I never said that they promised the Jews a state on the entire area west of the Jordan river. I said that they had written to Arab leaders that they had not promised them a state west of the Jordan river. These are not the same thing.

But since you brought it up, I checked, and I was slightly inaccurate. They had actually explicitly denied that they had promised the Arabs independence at all in Palestine.

Here is what Sir Henry MacMahon, High Commissioner for Egypt, wrote to the Sharif of Mecca in 1915: "I feel it my duty to state, and I do so definitely and emphatically, that it was not intended by me in giving this pledge to King Hussein to include Palestine in the area in which Arab independence was promised. I also had every reason to believe at the time that the fact that Palestine was not included in my pledge was well understood by King Hussein."

The sources you show do not say what you want them to. As indicated previously, the Balfour Declaration simply stated that the British were going to establish a national home for Jews IN Palestine. Nowhere did it say that Jews were to receive all of Palestine.

Your Jsource website gives this comment:

Where does it get that quotation from? I read the text of the Peel commission report, and nowhere did I find that quote. Nowhere in the enitre Peel report did I find anything even remotely suggesting that the British recognized all of Palestine as rightfully belonging to the Jews (not that such recognition has any relevence).

So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state.

I find it ammusingly ironic that the pro-Zionist crowd is relying so heavily upon League of Nations mandates to support their case while at the same time flaunting and disparaging the UN, which is nothing more than a post-war version of the League of Nations.

Not that I give much weight to either the UN or League of Nations. I fail to see how Birtish declarations or mandates issued by a now defunct globalist bureaucracy have any relevence today.

Where is the text you're relying on? Secondly, the British, at the time of the Declaration ("understood, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, to be the whole of historic Palestine, including Transjordan") understood that, not by 1937 which by then they had already turned their backs on the "National Home" concept. You're misreading the quote.

So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state.

You are misreading the document. It speaks about not prejudicing the civil or religious rights of the others there, i.e., those who would live under the "National Home for the Jews". In other words, not prejucing what would eventually become minority interests in the "National Home" because of Jewish immigration. The "National Home" in the entirety of the British Mandate is exactly what Balfour was referring to. "Palestine" was understood in law to be both areas East and West of the Jordan. I don't see why that is difficult for you to understand.

So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state.

Maybe we can sharpen your concern without having to go back and forth. It is accepted that the British never noted "state" in the "Balfour Declaration". Neither do they suggest that the Jews "are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state." The Balfour Declaration was as close as possible, however, to advancing a state and national claim for the Jews in that area without explicitly stating same. But the issue is not limited to that obviously. The national aspirations were inevitable after the seeds were sown. Both respect to Arab nationalism and Jewish nationalism.

I note you either knowingly or otherwise slipped in your characterization of this issue. You state in one place:

"Please show me a single document that promised the Jews the entire area West of the Jordan.". You then use the quite different verbiage here:"So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state."

These obviously mean different things as I have stated to you above. My answer was to your first query. The second was not part of your initial query.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.