The State Department’s omission of the word ‘occupied’ when referring to the territory of Judea and Samaria may ultimately facilitate a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
By: Daniel Krygier, World Israel News
A US State Department report recently dropped the word ”occupied” in reference to Judea and Samaria for the first time since 1979. In isolation, this move may seem insignificant, but it may also indicate a new US Middle East policy in the making that could facilitate a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Ever since the Arab countries failed to destroy Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967, the international community has increasingly framed the conflict as an “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” However, the international term “Occupied Palestinian Territories” is political and not rooted in international law or documented history. “Palestine” is the Roman name for occupied Judea, and no “Palestinian” Arab state has ever existed in the Land of Israel.
In his monumental work “The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law,” late scholar Howard Grief argued that the legal title of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel was recognized by the international community at the San Remo Peace Conference in 1920.
Judea is not French Algeria
The implications of this recognition are that Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria are legal under international law even if regularly condemned by the politicized United Nations and the European Union. Unlike formerly French-occupied Algeria, Judea and Samaria constitute the ancestral heartland of Israel. Israel won the territories in a defensive war after being attacked by Arab forces. Since “Palestine” is fiction, Judea and Samaria should legally be defined as disputed rather than “occupied” territories. This means that Israel has legal rights in Judea and Samaria that the French colonialists in Algeria or Vietnam did not have.
This does not mean that Israel will annex the entire disputed territories anytime soon. It is not in the Jewish state’s interest to add another 2 million Arabs to its population. However, parts of Jewish-populated areas of Judea and Samaria could eventually be annexed by Israel in a future Arab-Israeli peace deal. This is consistent with the spirit of the key UN resolution 242, which envisions that Israel will retain some of the disputed territories.
Core of the Arab-Israel conflict
This brings us back to the State Department report’s omission of the word “occupied” when referring to Judea and Samaria. This is important because the core of the Arab-Israel conflict was never about “occupation,” but a deeply entrenched Muslim Arab opposition to a reborn Jewish state within any borders. It is the Arabs, not the Jews, who have systematically rejected a two-state solution since it was first suggested by the British Peel Commission in 1937.
Israel is not an “occupier.” Nor was it established as a “haven for refugees from the Holocaust,” as recently claimed by Hollywood actress Natalie Portman. Israel’s final borders are yet to be defined. However, what is beyond any doubt is the fact that modern Israel is the historical and legal realization of the Jewish people’s return to its ancestral homeland. The path to genuine peace requires a recognition of this fundamental truth.
国务院在提到犹太和撒马利亚领土时忽略“被占领”一词可能最终有助于解决阿以冲突。
作者：Daniel Krygier，世界以色列新闻
美国国务院最近的一份报告最近在1979年以来首次提到“占领”这个词是关于犹太和撒马利亚的。这一举动可能看起来并不重要，但也可能表明美国制定新的美国中东政策。为解决阿以冲突提供便利。
自从1967年阿拉伯国家在六日战争期间未能摧毁以色列以来，国际社会越来越把冲突定义为“以色列对巴勒斯坦的占领”。然而，国际术语“被占领的巴勒斯坦领土”是政治性的而不是根深蒂固的在国际法或有记录的历史中。 “巴勒斯坦”是被占领的犹太人的罗马名字，在以色列的土地上从来没有“巴勒斯坦”阿拉伯国家存在。
晚年学者霍华德·格里厄在他的着作“国际法以色列的法律基础和边界”中争辩说，犹太人在以色列国的合法头衔在1920年圣雷莫和平会议上得到了国际社会的承认。
犹太不是法国的阿尔及利亚
这种承认的含义是犹太人和撒马利亚的犹太人社区在国际法下是合法的，即使联合国和欧洲联盟政治化也经常受到谴责。不像以前法国占领的阿尔及利亚，犹太和撒马利亚构成了以色列的祖先中心地带。以色列在受到阿拉伯军队的袭击后在一场防御性战争中赢得了领土。由于“巴勒斯坦”是虚构的，犹太和撒马利亚应该在法律上被界定为有争议而不是“被占领”的领土。这意味着以色列在犹太和撒马利亚拥有合法的权利，即在阿尔及利亚或越南的法国殖民者没有这种权利。
这并不意味着以色列不久将会吞并整个有争议的领土。向犹太人增加200万阿拉伯人是不符合犹太人国家利益的。然而，犹太人和撒马利亚犹太居民区的一部分最终可能会被以色列并入未来的阿以和平协议。这符合联合国第242号决议的精神，该决议设想以色列将保留一些有争议的领土。
阿以冲突的核心
这使我们回到国务院报告中提到犹太和撒马利亚时忽略“被占领”一词。这一点非常重要，因为阿拉伯 – 以色列冲突的核心从来不是“占领”，而是一个根深蒂固的穆斯林阿拉伯人反对在任何边界内重生的犹太人国家。自1937年英国皮尔委员会首次提出建议以来，阿拉伯人而不是犹太人，已经系统地拒绝了两国解决方案。
以色列并不是一个“占领者”，正如最近好莱坞女星娜塔莉波特曼所称，以色列也不是“大屠杀难民的避难所”。以色列的最终边界尚未确定。然而，毫无疑问的是，现代以色列是犹太人回到祖国的历史和法律实现。走向真正的和平需要承认这一基本事实。