According to the opinion of anti-Semites, and also according to the opinion of most of the American Jews who voted for Obama and Clinton, the Jewish settlements of Judea and Samaria are placed in the occupied territory of Palestine. Our enemies (and even a part of our friends and neutrally minded people) refer to the 4th Geneva Convention. They argue, that Israel violated the Geneva Convention, that the Jews settled in the West Bank illegally, live there and raise children illegally. That houses of settlers should be destroyed, and they must be evicted from those cities and villages, where most of settlers were born and raised up.
But I believe, that such an opinion is baseless. Me personally insist, that all existing Jewish settlements of Judea and Samaria are legal under international law, so the transfer of Jews from Judea and Samaria, which all anti-Semites seek, will be completely illegal.
Well, let’s analyse the situation from legal point of view. The only legal argument for «illegality» of the Jewish settlements in the «occupied» («controlled», autonomous, independent Palestinian) territories is one sentence of paragraph 49, «IV Geneva Convention (IV GENEVA CONVENTION RELATIVE TO THE PROTECTION OF CIVILIAN PERSONS IN TIME OF WAR OF 12 AUGUST 1949). Here is the sentence:«The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies». Let’s consider, how this provision is applicable to the West Bank, where all Jewish settlements in dispute are placed.
After creation (1948) of independent Jewish state (which occupies just 17% of original British Mandate of Palestine), Jordan and Egypt occupied Palestine up to 1967. They didn’t create there the Palestinian State, so violating the UN General Assembly resolution from 1947 (Partition resolution). Jordan formally annexed the West Bank (however, nobody recognized this annexation). Egypt didn’t annex Gaza but didn’t create Palestinian state in Gaza, too. The Palestine government, created in Gaza by infamous Amin al Husseini, didn’t obtain financial and political support, and was dissolved.
In 1967, Israel liberated Palestine from the Jordanian and Egyptian occupation, and concluded a ceasefire agreements with Jordan and Egypt. West Bank and Gaza came under Israel’s legal management under the name «controlled» (not occupied) territories. This way the 1949 Armistice line ceased to exist, it was replaced by 1967 line along Jordan river and Suez Channel line. These lines included all the West Bank and Gaza into Israel borders.
The 242 Security Council resolution (22.11.1967) demanded Israel’s withdrawal from (Arab States’) territories, but didn’t specify to what a line we should withdraw. Instead, the Security Council proposed «acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force». Namely, Arab states and Israel should establish peace and mutually recognized borders through mutually signed agreements. The 242 resolution didn’t mention Palestine, at all.
But the Arab states refused to obey the 242 resolution, refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist, and continued their war for annihilation of Israel (with USSR assistance). Palestinian paramilitary and political organisations (FATAH etc) participated this aggressive war, and proclaimed annihilation of Israel as their goal. This period (1967-1993) no Palestinian organisation was ready to conclude peace treaty with Israel. Therefore, the Palestinian state wasn’t created up to 1993. After all, to create a state, and to establish its borders, peace agreement is inevitable, and this is what SC resolution 242 spoke about. Otherwise, the boundary is established de-facto, for example by the the armistice line. So, because of their incessant attempts to annihilate the Jewish State, the Palestinians have disabled both peace and the creation of Palestine State in the West Bank and Gaza.
After all, Israel didn’t take these territories from the non-existing Palestinian State, nor from Palestinian paramilitary organisations. The Arab states captured Palestine illegally, then abandoned it, while Palestinian terrorists didn’t enter these territories, just because of their attempts to annihilate Israel. This way, Israel turned the only «Power» (State), legally responsible for the West Bank and Gaza.
Nobody knew, where the future «secure and recognized border» should be placed. Israel reasonably insists, up to this day, that such a «secure border» must be placed along the Jordan river. On their side, the Palestinians refuse to establish any legal border. Up to this day, most of Palestinians vote for HAMAS’ Charter, that is for annihilation of Israel, namely no «secure and recognized» border.
But let’s return to the 1949 Geneva Convention. It deals with «Powers» (namely States) participating conflict. The 242 SC resolution has abolished the pre-1967 armistice lines.Palestine turned disputed territory with undefined boundaries. Such a territory isn’t «occupied» territory, by definition. The militant organisations, acting from third states’ territory, aren’t «government». And even Palestinian Autonomy, established by the State of Israel in 1993, by no means is «occupied territory». So the West Bank could not be considered occupied in the period between 1967 and 1993, and later, up to this day. Obviously, the requirement of the Geneva Convention (not to transfer the civilian population to the occupied territory) couldn’t be applied to the West Bank and Gaza, since these lands weren’t and aren’t «occupied territories».
Let’s imagine, that the international community would apply «Israel example» to all disputed territories of the World. So, India and Pakistan, former Yugoslavian states Croatia, Serbia and Kosovo, Falkland islands, few Caucasian republics, Ukraine and Russia, few African states, etc, etc, would be required to transfer millions of their citizens, and if not, sanctions would hit the respective states.
True, Israel didn’t annex Palestine lands, out of two reasons. First, we sincerely seek peace, based on compromise. Secondly, after annexing Palestine, millions of Palestinians, hungry for Jews’ blood, aliens, endangering our lives, would turn citizens of the Jewish State. Simply, Israel will stop its existence as a Jewish State. For 2.000 years we Jews were minority, persecuted by antisemitic majority. Now, we desire to be majority, and remain independent Jewish State.
Let’s give look at South Africa. 25 years after White South Africans passed the rule to Black elite, Apartheid turned even stronger. Simply, the Whites found themselves imprisoned in their luxurious concentration camps, while Blacks remained hungry beggars. We are unwilling to go the same path.
Thus, the only «legitimate» reason for the ethnic cleansing of Judea and Samaria from the Jews doesn’t pass a legal examination. The only reason to deny human rights for Jews of Judea and Samaria, including the right to live at home, is racist anti-Semitism.
Contrary to the claims of anti-Semites, Jewish settlers in Judea and Samaria did not violate any international or local laws. So they should be granted all the human rights prescribed to any other people, that is: the right to live in their homes, built in full compliance with laws. The demand of anti-Semites to cleanse Jews from Judea and Samaria, is immoral and illegal.
All Israelis, all Jews and all honest people, have a moral duty to protect the Jews of Judea and Samaria from persecutions, to recognize their legitimate rights, including the right to live in their homes on their land. No to sanctions, no to BDS — this is what any honest and sensible person has to say.
The demand to forcibly evict Jews from their homes means a genuine Palestinian apartheid. Why cannot Palestinians live peacefully together with the Jews in Gaza and the West Bank, in the independent state of Palestine? Why do they demand that Jews be evicted or killed, first in Judea and Samaria (Fatah’s demand), and then all over Israel (Hamas’ demand)? And why are the alleged anti-apartheid fighters (American Democrats, the European Parliament and many others) supporting the racist apartheid demand of Palestinians to ethnically cleanse the Jews? Why did the Irish Parliament prohibit the import of goods produced by Jews in Judea and Samaria? They enforce anti-Semitic apartheid! It is Palestine that demands and enforces apartheid, with the broad support of anti-Semites. It is the corrupted UN that decided to evict the Jews from their homes illegally!
From the point of view of morality, the Jews of Judea and Samaria are the best part of the Jewish people. They tried to settle as many lands as possible not for the sake of their own enrichment, but for the sake of those Jews who need refuge from persecution. Defeat of settlers means in practice, that the idea of a state of asylum for the Jews has already failed. The Jews of Europe, USA, Australia, Latin America and other countries, who may want to leave these countries just because of the anti-Israeli, Islamist, Globalist, «pro-Palestinian” anti-Semitic assault, will have to find a more secure and spacious refuge, than Israel. Israel played its role, as far as it could. Zionism was stopped, forcibly. Now, we have to create another, alternative Jewish state of asylum.
The settlers need our protection and solidarity. Our moral duty is to protect them. It is necessary to create a worldwide solidarity movement that will explain to us and the whole World how Palestinian anti-Semitic apartheid is immoral, and that the Jews of Judea and Samaria became a victim of this apartheid. If the annexation of settlements will help protect the Jews of Judea and Samaria from treachery and persecution, long live annexation! Such an annexation is legitimate and morally justified. Since the Palestinians leave no other choice, we must annex unilaterally at least the settlements of Judea and Samaria. This means that the rest of zone «C» must pass under the effective civilian control of Palestine.
Another way to get out of the trap prepared for us by the Palestinians together with external anti-Semites, is annexation of whole Zone “C”, while granting Israeli citizenship to the Arabs living at this zone. I would prefer just this last, strictly anti-apartheid solution.
The Palestinians have closed for us the way of compromise. The already discussed idea of an exchange of territory with Palestine, in particular the idea of »Judea and Samaria in exchange for the Gaza Environs», cannot be performed, because Hamas wages war from Gaza. HAMAS refuses any compromise resolutely. Expanding Gaza Hamas’ State will endanger our existence.
Any Trump Peace Plans will crash while confronting Palestine realities. Leading Palestine party is HAMAS, which rejects any compromise. Mahmoud Abbas has lost his influence. The Palestinian authority has no authority. Any «treaty» with Mahmud Abbas would unviable, while treaty with HAMAS is impossible.