Melanie Phillips: Junking the Jews is behind our current Hobbesian nightmare
International pressure on Israel not to extend its sovereignty over parts of the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria is increasing. More than 1,000 European parliamentarians have signed a letter asserting that this proposal, which they term “annexation,” would “encourage other states with territorial claims to disregard basic principles of international law.”Unilateral Israeli Action Could Break the Negotiations Deadlock
Following the brutal death in police custody of George Floyd, racial anarchy in America is increasing. In Seattle and Washington, D.C., there have been attempts to set up “autonomous zones” that exclude the police. Statues and other artworks that have been targeted for toppling as representing “white privilege” include those of Abraham Lincoln, the 19th-century anti-slavery activist Hans Christian Heg and now even Jesus.
These events are connected. In this period of civilizational turmoil, supposed progressives campaigning against the sovereignty proposal falsely project onto Israel crimes of which not only is it innocent, but of which the progressive class itself is guilty.
Take the claim that Israel’s “annexation” is unlawful. Under international law, annexation has a precise meaning: the forcible incorporation by one state of the territory of another state. This does not apply to the disputed territories, which never belonged in law to any other state.
Israel has the only legally grounded claim to this land, including the never-abrogated duty given to the British in the 1920s to settle the Jews throughout what is now Israel, the disputed territories and the Gaza Strip.
Far from being an illegal annexation, extending Israeli law to these areas actually implements international law after some nine decades during which it was flouted and then ignored by Britain and the world community. It is those who oppose the sovereignty proposal who show contempt for the law.
The Israeli government is considering applying Israeli civil law jurisdiction and administration to parts of the Jordan Valley and/or certain settlement blocs. This possibility was proposed under the U.S. peace plan and agreed in the broad national coalition agreement between most of Israel's political parties.Report: Best Line of Defense: The Case for Israeli Sovereignty in the Jordan Valley
Israel has pursued a pragmatic approach to the area that was Jordan's "West Bank," one that would ultimately enable Palestinian Arab self-determination over most areas populated by them, while ensuring Israeli security, thus hopefully enabling a sustainable peaceful solution between them.
The Palestinians have rejected repeated Israeli offers since 1967 - for example, in 2000, 2001 and 2008 - of full self-determination in the majority of this land. There is no comparable international legal situation in the world today where a country that acquired territory in self-defense and offered to surrender it in exchange for peace was refused.
The International Law Commission Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind (1954) has endorsed the legality of acquisition of territory, unless by aggression or in violation of the UN Charter. International practice demonstrates that aggression, such as Jordan's in 1967, consistently leads to forfeiture of territory.
Unilateral Israeli action this year is likely to break the negotiations deadlock, pressuring a Palestinian side that has simply been refusing to negotiate since 2014.
JINSA’s new paper explains how U.S. national security interests would be well served if Israel enshrined its permanent control of the Jordan Valley by acting now to extend its sovereignty there. This will boost the security of Israel, as well as Jordan, two pivotal American allies in the region.
As the United States seeks to reduce its presence in an increasingly chaotic Middle East, Israel has stepped up its efforts to hold back the growing disorder, in the process protecting not just itself but regional partners like Jordan and Gulf Arab states.
To play this role effectively, however, Israel must remain secure. The Jordan Valley serves as a defensive buffer protecting Israel against attacks from the east, including from Iran and its proxies. The Valley also protects the West Bank from terrorist infiltration, and Jordan from potential instability or hostility originating from the West Bank or elsewhere.
Yet, previously Israel has faced pressure to relinquish control over the Jordan Valley. Thus, the Trump Administration’s support for Israeli sovereignty in the Jordan Valley could be a rare chance for Israel to assure its security and that of its tacit Arab allies, too.
There will certainly be costs associated with incorporating the Jordan Valley into Israel proper. But when it comes to the specific issue of the Jordan Valley, we believe that, given the benefits to enshrining permanent Israeli control, these regrettable costs are likely to prove manageable and short-term.
In this unique moment, the United States should support Israel’s extension of sovereignty to the Jordan Valley, which Israel must permanently and physically control to defend itself while advancing U.S. security interests.
Click here to read the report. (pdf)