'Settlements are illegal and invalid'- how it works.

JacquesHughes

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
1,244
The purpose of this thread is to discuss how to give UN Resolution 2334 effect, not the rights and wrongs of the resolution, or the reactions since (see threads elsewhere for those discussions).

The West Bank and Gaza are that 22% of mandate defined Palestine within which Palestinian self-determination will be exercised in an internationally supervised form of liberal democracy ie presidential/parliamentary/unicameral/bicameral.

Settlements are illegal and invalid. The settlers, now illegal migrants, do not have a vote in the Palestinian elections. They've not been disenfranchised ( no pity is needed)-already voting in Israeli government elections, and in some cases US government elections. They will be subject to Palestinian criminal law.

Palestinian gun control laws are likely to be strict- individual armed actions by passionate citizens will not be in the national interest. Home-based weapons will be rapidly withdrawn and menacing one's neighbours with high-powered firearms will cease.

As homes in the settlements become available, through house moves, natural turnover, leases expire, probate issues, the Palestinian state would exercise compulsory purchase ( eg for a nominal one Shekel) and the property would be added to the council housing stock for allocation to those on the housing waiting list on a basis of need.

'There'll be no jews'. Not true. Palestinian jews are a constituent people of the Palestinian nation, with a very long well-attested history, and their equal rights with other religions and ethnic groups Druze, Bedouin, Christians within the secular state of Palestine are already recognised. There will also be jews married to Palestinian citizens, and converts to Judaism (reform branches most likely), and whatever naturalisation laws the legislature enacts, or grants.

'That Palestinian State will [successfully] invade Israel, finishing it off, taking us back where we started' Very unconvincing. It would take a State in the West Bank and Gaza at least twenty years to achieve military parity with Israel. It starts a long way behind. It's starting point is one of extreme underdevelopment of the West Bank, and such development as there is, is in the wrong place. The envisaged target of the aggression is not an invitingly incompetent third world country but a place that is well able to look after itself. Besides, with probably 4 or 5 million utterly impoverished Palestinian refugees to take in; 'where will we attack next?' is unlikely to be the policy priority. Next there's the wiles of diplomacy curbing the careers of the next Genghis Khan/Napoleon- constitutional neutrality, arms control treaties, demilitarised zones, international monitors; he's more likely to spring up elsewhere in the world than from the stony soil of the West Bank.

Any other ideas? Be constructive. Above all, be optimistic.
 


agamemnon

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
1,058
You state:

"Palestinian gun control laws are likely to be strict- individual armed actions by passionate citizens will not be in the national interest. Home-based weapons will be rapidly withdrawn and menacing one's neighbours with high-powered firearms will cease."

Wishful thinking I'm afraid. Firstly, there is a very good reason why the Israelis are heavily armed, and its a consequence of the second reason: the proliferation of arms in Palestinian hands.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
39,552
It's a Chapter VI resolution and has no coercive or binding power.

It will be ignored.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
It's a Chapter VI resolution and has no coercive or binding power.

It will be ignored.

Sound cracking cynicism.

Except the UN has actually reaffirmed that the settlements are illegal and hence the Occupation. That leaves it open for the ICC and ICJ to act on criminal allegations.

Also clause 5 calls for all nations to treat the Occupied Territories and Israel itself differently. so that gives international imprimatur to any boycott of Israeli products and services tied to the settlements.

That is why Israel is screaming its head off. They are not quite so confident that their 70 year run will last.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
39,552
Sound cracking cynicism.

Except the UN has actually reaffirmed that the settlements are illegal and hence the Occupation. That leaves it open for the ICC and ICJ to act on criminal allegations.

Also clause 5 calls for all nations to treat the Occupied Territories and Israel itself differently. so that gives international imprimatur to any boycott of Israeli products and services tied to the settlements.

That is why Israel is screaming its head off. They are not quite so confident that their 70 year run will last.
Unfortunately, the enthusiasm which created the momentum for this will dissipate as Trump starts strongarming the scene with his bluster and bulk.

I was sort of optimistic to see the UK involved in this and to also see France doing the necessary. Additionally, it has been shocking to see the Israeli reaction - including open threats to NZ. This should have happened some time ago, when Obama was in a position to carry through on the thing.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Unfortunately, the enthusiasm which created the momentum for this will dissipate as Trump starts strongarming the scene with his bluster and bulk.

I was sort of optimistic to see the UK involved in this and to also see France doing the necessary. Additionally, it has been shocking to see the Israeli reaction - including open threats to NZ. This should have happened some time ago, when Obama was in a position to carry through on the thing.

Thats why this is important. The US is losing ground in the ME so
Israel no longer has a strong protector.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
39,552
Thats why this is important. The US is losing ground in the ME so
Israel no longer has a strong protector.
I wish it were so, but despite the current WH initiative, I think and fear that the next occupant will row back on this. OK, the Isrealis will have suffered a minor kick in the balls, but they will (well, they have already) be dealing with Trump. He already insinuated himself in the process. Alarmingly.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
I wish it were so, but despite the current WH initiative, I think and fear that the next occupant will row back on this. OK, the Isrealis will have suffered a minor kick in the balls, but they will (well, they have already) be dealing with Trump. He already insinuated himself in the process. Alarmingly.
Its not the next occupant of the WH, its the UN.

Trumps insinuations are only another example of how the US has lost it big time in the ME. They dont get to dictate anything. Not any more.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
54,540
Colonisation in the 21st century is unacceptable anywhere. It is a throwback to colonial times which we in Ireland are very familiar with.

It is particularly eggregious that Israel is passing a bill to legalise settlements that even its own courts say are illegal, known as "outposts" privately owned Palestinian land. Building on Palestinian private land is supposed to be illegal under Israeli law. So they are breaking their own law to enrich themselves, and then legalising the theft retrospectively.
 
Last edited:

Billixed

Active member
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
271
There's nothing stopping Obama pushing through a binding resolution of his choice on the matter, maybe outlining a two-state deal and putting a time frame on it. He'd get no opposition.

Can't see it though..
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
39,552
Its not the next occupant of the WH, its the UN.

Trumps insinuations are only another example of how the US has lost it big time in the ME. They dont get to dictate anything.
Believe me, I hope you're correct. I just can't see Trump failing to start leaning on others and maybe even purely as a statement of personal ability to do a deal rather than from any fiercely held personal conviction. Unlike their claimed position re the Iraq invasion, any action to positively enforce action on Israel may imply further UN resolutions demanding specific actions of Israel. The veto might suddenly magically reappear, with the Trump administration also equally suddenly demanding the most strict compliance with UN rules.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Believe me, I hope you're correct. I just can't see Trump failing to start leaning on others and maybe even purely as a statement of personal ability to do a deal rather than from any fiercely held personal conviction. Unlike their claimed position re the Iraq invasion, any action to positively enforce action on Israel may imply further UN resolutions demanding specific actions of Israel. The veto might suddenly magically reappear, with the Trump administration also equally suddenly demanding the most strict compliance with UN rules.
It has nothing to do with strict compliance with UN rules. The UN is simply registering that the US no longer calls the shots and Israel is not a special state. And that has been proved by the last decade and a half.

The old order is over.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
39,552
It has nothing to do with strict compliance with UN rules. The UN is simply registering that the US no longer calls the shots and Israel is not a special state. And that has been proved by the last decade and a half.

The old order is over.
As I say, I hope that you are right and am prepared to put a good bottle of champagne down as a one-way bet in the event of your being correct. The cost of such a bottle and its P&P to you would be happily met on my behalf. It's not really a bet in the sense that you cannot lose; your predictions could always happen at any stage in the indeterminate future so I could never claim victory. Just let me know when you want that happy bottle.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top