Caroline Glick: The 'legal' landmine on the road to sovereignty
There is a landmine on the road to Israeli sovereignty over parts of Judea and Samaria. It must be defused before it blows up Israel's efforts to secure its national interests and takes President Donald Trump's peace plan, and US-Israel relations along with it.David Collier: Those pesky Israelis just can’t stop disappointing diaspora Jews
The landmine is not an actual explosive charge but the clique of unelected lawyers at the top of Israel's legal system. Members of the clique have arrogated the power of the government to themselves to advance their radical, legally unsupported political views about Judea and Samaria.
Since 1967, the State of Israel has carefully left its position on the legal status of Judea and Samaria ambiguous to avoid unnecessary confrontations. At the same time, Israel has assiduously refused to make any concessions about its actual sovereign rights to the areas.
Since 1967, Israel has administered the areas through a military government and even agreed to do so in accordance with the prescriptions of the Geneva Accords and Hague Convention. However, as the Military Advocate General during the 1967 Six-Day War, and later Supreme Court President Meir Shamgar said at the time and throughout the intervening years, Israel has acted out of goodwill, not legal compulsion.
In other words, the State of Israel's longstanding position is that its control of Judea and Samaria does not fit the international legal definition of "belligerent occupation." Israel is not the "occupier" of the areas. Various Israeli jurists have presented various factual legal arguments over the years to back this position. Among them is the doctrine of "uti possidetis juri" which makes clear that as the heir to the British Mandate, Israel inherited the borders of the League of Nations Mandate, which included Judea and Samaria.
Israeli jurists have also explained that since the Jordanian occupation of the areas from 1949-1967 was illegal, Israel's assertion of control over the areas in 1967 was not a belligerent occupation.
Then too, since the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan ended the state of belligerence between them, there is no state of belligerence in Judea and Samaria, which Jordan illegally took control over during its illegal war of aggression against the Jewish state in 1948-49.
Some UK Jewish papers have already opened the ‘annexation front’, criticising Israel for unilateral action it may be about to take. I promised myself I would stay quiet on this until July – when I expected to be forced to stand up against an uproar from some of the small-but-vocal quarters of the diaspora community. It seems they are so eager to make a noise, they started early.Bibi 'Houdini' does it again - analysis
Most of those troubled by the annexation are also those deeply disappointed that Netanyahu successfully navigated every obstacle that he had to face. Fooled by the insane political analysis of those who actually believed their own hype, they somehow thought a coalition could be built to depose the right-wing block. For months they performed mathematical and ideological summersaults, building neverthere coalitions and putting numerous ideological enemies together in some farcical political alliance. Father Christmas had more chance of appearing in the halls of the Knesset.
According to certain elements in the Diaspora, those pesky Israelis just keep voting the wrong way. Oh, how they wish the Israelis were as clever or ‘woke’ as they are.
The ‘annexation’
To some, Israel assuming sovereignty over the Jordan Valley is merely an assertion of existing rights over highly strategic land, originally intended to be part of the Jewish homeland. To those still stuck in the mud of Oslo this is a blasphemous way of thinking. For them the Jordan Valley is in the ‘West Bank’ and therefore part of the future Palestinian state. If Israel is to hold onto it, it can only do so as part of a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians. If there are no talks – Israel must do nothing. They refer to this inaction as the ‘status quo’ and consider it holy.
This holiness only counts when it works in their political favour. When the Palestinians lobby the ICC to bring Israelis to the Hague or push the UNHRC to have companies operating in the ‘settlements’ named and then boycotted, they do not shout in protest. Some even applaud. Only Israel’s position vis-a-vis the ‘status quo’ must be maintained at all costs.
The land up for annexation comes as no surprise. In one of his final speeches to the Knesset, Yitzchak Rabin made it quite clear the Jordan Valley would remain in Israel:
jordan valley The original idea for annexation of this area had been put forward by Minister Yigal Alon to Levi Eshkol’s government as early as July 1967. All these people were on Israel’s political left. Control of the border with Jordan is of major strategic importance. Should Israel learn no lessons from its withdrawal from Southern Lebanon and Gaza, now both terrorist run enclaves. The failure of Oslo because of Arab violence taught Israel a hard lesson and has a cost – and that includes the necessity of Israel controlling the key border with Jordan.
This is, afterall, an emergency government. True, there is Iran in Syria to worry about, an increasingly volatile situation in Lebanon, Gaza, and that issue of whether or not to extend Israeli sovereignty over 30% of the West Bank before the US elections in November, but recovering from the virus is why this unusual government was set up in the first place, and which will be its main focus of attention.
One of Netanyahu’s top priorities now will be to ensure that the country is prepared so that if the virus makes a comeback in a few months, as most assume it will, Israel will be able to cope without having to lock down the entire country to ensure that the understaffed, underfunded and under-equipped health system is not overwhelmed.
The country's mood coming out of the lockdown is decidedly sour. Netanyahu, whose political ambitions extend beyond the next 18 months in the Prime Minister's Office, will labor intensively to change that mood, hoping that that the public will then be grateful to him for doing so, and show that appreciation the next time elections roll around.
Netanyahu has given no sign that his next stint in power will be his last – even if he is forced to switch seats with Gantz in the middle of a term, and even if he is standing trial.
And those who believe the prime minister must be in his last act are underestimating his unparalleled political staying power and durability.
In February, just before the last election, Yisrael Beytenu head and Netanyahu nemesis Avigdor Liberman famously declared “the Netanyahu era has ended.” But look where Netanyahu is, soon to be sworn in again as prime minister, and where Liberman is – on the opposition backbenches – and draw the conclusion: don't count Netanyahu out. Ever.
On this day 48 years ago, 4 terrorists hijacked Sabena Flight 571 with 100 passengers on board.
— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) May 8, 2020
This is what happened: pic.twitter.com/QCRu6LXvtX