The Legal and Historical Basis for Israel's Sovereignty over Mandatory Palestine
There are many opposing views surrounding the legal and historical claims of Israel over Mandatory Palestine. Some argue that Israel’s claims are based on a mistaken ideological belief that the land was given to the Jews by God, while others support Israel’s sovereignty based on legal and historical grounds. This essay aims to examine the legal and historical basis for Israel's sovereignty over Mandatory Palestine, addressing both the ideological perspectives and the factual evidence.
The Ideological Belief in Divine Right
One of the primary ideological beliefs that underpin the support for Israel's sovereignty over Palestine is the assertion that God gave the land to the Jews. This belief, often supported by proponents of Zionism, is rooted in the religious and historical narratives cited by these groups. However, it is crucial to note that this belief does not hold up under scrutiny from a legal or historical perspective. Many of those who support this view, such as former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, even themselves do not hold a religious belief, highlighting a significant dissonance in their worldview.
The idea that God gave the land to the Jews is often accompanied by a sense of racial or cultural superiority over the Palestinians, further complicating the discourse. However, these beliefs do not have a legal or historical basis, and it is imperative to address them with critical analysis.
Legal and Historical Grounds for Sovereignty
On the other hand, there are well-established legal and historical grounds that support Israel's sovereignty over the territory known as Mandatory Palestine. The borders of Mandatory Palestine, established by the Great Britain and France in the Paulet–Newcombe Agreement of 1923 and approved by the League of Nations and the United States, form the basis for Israel's territorial identity. This objective was further endorsed by the Balfour Declaration, the resolutions of the San Remo Conference, and Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.
The principle of utis possidetis juris is instrumental in supporting the legal basis for Israel's sovereignty over Mandatory Palestine. This principle stipulates that newly formed countries inherit the borders of the administrative entities that preceded them. Israel was established within the borders of Mandatory Palestine, fulfilling the purpose of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, which aimed to establish a national home for the Jewish people in Mandatory Palestine. As such, Israel is the only entity to have emerged immediately following the Mandate's dissolution with the mission to create a national home for the Jewish people in that territory.
The Arab League's Claim and Its Limitations
It is important to consider the Arab League's claim on Mandatory Palestine, which was established in 1948. The All-Palestine Government declared its intention to lay claim to all of Mandatory Palestine. However, this claim was made after the termination of the Mandate and the establishment of Israel, making it essentially irrelevant. Moreover, Israel remains the only existing country within the Mandate's territory, reinforcing its legitimacy based on historical and legal grounds.
Further, Israel's control over the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem in 1967, which it gained through the Six-Day War, is also based on the principle of utis possidetis juris. Although this principle is not formally part of international law, it has been used by international organizations on multiple occasions, such as the ICJ's Frontier Dispute case of Burkina Faso versus Mali in 1986 and UN General Assembly Resolution 68/262 in 2014. Additionally, when Lebanon gained independence from France in 1943, the principle was applied similarly, reinforcing its legitimacy.
Conclusion
While the ideological perspectives that support Israel's claims over Mandatory Palestine are rooted in a sense of religious and cultural superiority, the legal and historical evidence strongly supports Israel's sovereignty over the territory. It is crucial to separate these ideological views from the factual and legal evidence to understand the basis for Israel's claims properly. Understanding the legal and historical context can help foster a more informed and constructive dialogue about the complex issues surrounding the region.