Jerusalem and the Israeli settlements according to international law - Natasha Hausdorff
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 07. 2024
- Natasha Hausdorff, director for UK Lawyers for Israel, speaking to MIFF 6 November 2020.
This lecture is reuploaded, since the original upload to YT ( • Jerusalem and the Isra... ) was somehow damaged.
The previous occupation was by the British after the fall of the Ottoman empire. Jordan annexed the West Bank and lost it during the 6 day war. End of story, it's back where it belonged originally.
So simple.
The Ottomans signed All their lands over to the Allies after WW1. The Allies turned the responsibility of the lands over to the League of Nations. The British were made administrators under the League of Nations. It was not a colony of England!!
@@shainazion4073Exactly, not a colony and Britain did a lot of good- ended slavery of african peoples.
@@shainazion4073While it was not a colony of Britain it was handed over to Britain by league of Nations to be reconstituted to the national homeland of jews😂😂
@@bobbyjpg Yes, After the British illegally gave the Arabs 77% of the Mandate of Palestine lands to become transJordan, leaving only 23% to become the future Jewish state!
Natasha Hausdorff is amazing. I hope we see a lot more of her, she knows how to handle biased reporters. I don't know how she stays so calm. I've never seen someone so elegant.
Jerusalem the eternal capital of the Jewish nation. No one can change history and truth
Everyone should share this
Lecture and explanation. It does clear up a lot of ignorant questions that usually come from
Journalists who try to push their
Own Agenda.
This was a fascinating lecture. Thank you Natasha Hausdorff. I will be looking for more of your lectures.
This is the kind of logical precision that helps us see how inflated accusations often misuse terms. We ALL need to be remind ourselves of the core meanings of words so as to recognise their misuse, either out of (deliberate) ignorance or a political bias. THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logical to the uneducated
She puts across the FACTS in a very logical way. For someone .ike myself (a man from the street) this comes across with clarity and in a professional manner. I am amazed in the bias of certain msm that although using the International Law as a bettering ram against certain states (including Israel) are so up themselves that even a 5 minute search (especially on the internet) debunked their social biases when presented with FACTS such as this.
One must remember..we might not like certain things or actions or even Israel in this case..but they ARE following International Law..in fact with the IDF..they are going above and below to actually save lives by (losing) the military and tactical initiative by TELLING people BEFOREHAND..that they ARE going to demolish/attack
Israel. Never received. Credit.. For. Anything.. Telling. The. Enemy.; civilians. Get. Out. For. Your. Safety. True. Till. Till. Now. 2o2
OF COURSE THE SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK ARE ILLEGAL. No country has the right to take land militarily. No country has a right to expel people for having the wrong religion. No country has a right to establish new urbanizations in places that are not part of their recognized territory. No country has the right to demolish houses of people that have lived there for generations. No country has the right to claim rights on anything that happened over 3000 years ago. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone acted like Israel?
What settlements? Israel was attacked many times before and after any claim of a settlement. The West Bank is misrepresented, it was an area to be Israel’s. In 1947 Israel could not hold off Jordan’s occupation of West Bank or Samaria Judea. Fortunately in 67 after another 4 sides attack by Arabs. Israel won in 6 days, and won back Samaria Judea and the Golan Heights, huge misperception that these areas are settlements. They are Israeli land. It’s time Arab countries stop attacking Israel civilian population centers.
These are what I've been saying all along. People need to be informed.
Thank you sincerely for creating and posting this extremely informative video.
It is perhaps of interest since the barrister mentions Jordan controlling the territory of east Jerusalem: When Israel conquered this land in 1967, they discovered that ancient Jewish tombstones had been used to line Jordanian military latrines. These Jews were not colonizers and had nothing to do with modern wars or Zionism. Their existence is a clear indication of Jews having been in that area for centuries but also clear antisemitism -- desecration of the burial places of innocent people. If you really think that, Heaven Forbid, Hamas or any Palestinians who want to wipe out Israel will see a distinction between Zionists and Jews who even vocally oppose Israel (like the Neturei Karta dopes) and thereby protect such non/anti-Zionist Jews, you are naive.
the biggest mistake Israel made when it was a young, apologetic and peace seeking country, was not to remove ALL 1.3 million "Palestinians", from its borders after the 67 war.
dozens of millions migrated across new borders after the Ottomans fell leaving everything behind.
hundreds of thousands of Jews left Arab countries with only the clothes on their back.
and now a problem that used to be 1.3 is 5.3
So desperate to justify your internal myth of Judaism being persecuted by everyone, always. Jews were perfectly safe within islamic countries including Iran, and all religions lived alongside each other in Palestine for centuries too. It is zionism which has brought terror to non jews and caused people to be critical of the Occupation. Judaism is accepted. Zionism is poison.
Worse than naive. They have been indoctrinated by Islamist ideology that has permeated all levels of the American educational system
Great to hear a clear description of the origins of the region in law
Thank you so very much
Such beauty with such cutting intellect and analysis,,
Beauty? You have questionable taste😂
@@user-mu1vo2ys3xWell the jokes on you 😂😂Only shows you aren't able to understand beauty!
Butiful and smart Natasha❤
Love this video. The discussion is very fascinating. Natasha presented the material in a systematic way. Overall it was very informative. I feel like I was in a mini law class but enjoyed it very much...
Natasha, please try to give these amazing explanations on every media platform possible 🙏🏻
So important
Thank you
What? An exception is being made to Israel? Thank you for this thorough analysis.
This felt worth a watch for my learning efforts of different viewpoints :)
You are brilliant and sharp. it is really interesting to listen to your coherent and well structed answers and lecture. Thank you
The Muslim world: *crickets …!!!
I listened to Ms Hausdorff talk, what a strong determined young woman.
Ms Hausdorff is quoting historical matters of international law. Why is Israel having and issue with the UN. Is the UN ignoring these laws?
The UN is made up of 193 countries. Many are dictatorships and human rights abusers, they all vote and voice opinions according to interests and never with regard to justice. To expect the UN to "behave" with honesty, morality or justice is naive in the extreme.
Wonderfully clear explanation. Thank you very much.
Natasha Hausdorff must go mainstream. I am fed up uneducated people screaming occupation, apartheid.
Who are these uneducated people?
Amen
Thank you Natasha Hausdorff. You've articulated very succinctly my own views of the situation in Judea and Samaria (West Bank).
Judea and Sumeria are not in existence.
Fine - but will not impact the views of Muslims whose emotional/religious response to the very existence of Israel totally outweighs logical arguments
this woman is amazing, her heart is pure and her beauty is clear
She is incredible.......how she can justify the genocide of the Palestinian people on their ancestral lands and all the satanic evil of the illegal occupation whilst pretending to be someone who respects the common decency contained within the Law.
She has an Audry Hepburn thing in her style and looks .
@@philip5940 she looks like a witch..... people's exterior is a reflection of their internal state ......
Terrific post, Natasha.
More like terrorist post. Defending ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Great. Thanks to Natasha for the great presentation
Well done.
Thank you. I note well there's many war crime allegations against Israel but none against Hamas. Since when were rape, kidnap and torture not a war crime? Was not Putin named a war criminal for kidnap and torture?
Exactly!!
Wow! What a grasp on international law you have Natasha , even i could follow your clear presentation , i found it very interssting and informative
How do you know?
@@leslie-annmills-gomez8763 how do i know what ?
OF COURSE THE SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK ARE ILLEGAL. No country has the right to take land militarily. No country has a right to expel people for having the wrong religion. No country has a right to establish new urbanizations in places that are not part of their recognized territory. No country has the right to demolish houses of people that have lived there for generations. No country has the right to claim rights on anything that happened over 3000 years ago. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone acted like Israel?
@lbs7774 LMAO, when you make your own laws, you can call anything you want illegal.
There is nothing illegal about Israeli settlements.
Besides the fact that in many cases countries have the absolute right to take land militarily, for instance when countries are being attacked from that land, Israel did not *take* that land, it simply removed the illegal occupier, Jordan. Israel has every right to allow Jews to live where they wish, especially in territories which are its sovereign land under international law.
Every country in the world demolishes illegally built houses or other buildings.
3000 years of rights are indeed a very good "bonus" However, Israel does not rely on old rights, it has every right, legal, moral, logical and humanitarian right to self-determination.
We don't need to imagine the chaos that arises when people like you do not respect international law. We can see it happening in front of our eyes. Not only on October 7th but across much of the Middle East, for many years.
This lady explained on many occasions that she volunteers to tell the truth, your assertion that she is being paid by Israel is another indication that you are unable to recognize the truth even when it hits you in the face.
What a phenomenal lawyer, thinker and professional woman Natasha is!
Hear! Hear!
Wonderful. Thank you.🌺
Very informative. Thank you
G'd bless you! Israel forever!
She is incredibly beautiful and wise. I love her with whole my heart❤
That cleared up a lot of fuzzy areas for me. It's great to get such a clear explanation in one place.
Thank You Natasha , Thank You Med
Very interesting presentation and very clarifying . Thanks for this excellent explanation of International Laws and the status of the territories of Israel .
OF COURSE THE SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK ARE ILLEGAL. No country has the right to take land militarily. No country has a right to expel people for having the wrong religion. No country has a right to establish new urbanizations in places that are not part of their recognized territory. No country has the right to demolish houses of people that have lived there for generations. No country has the right to claim rights on anything that happened over 3000 years ago. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone acted like Israel?
Uti Possiditis Juris is particularly relevant to the West Bank and Jerusalem. In 1948 when Arab armies invaded the newly independent state of Israel, Jordan took over the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem, all of which Israel recaptured in 1967 and the Uti Possiditis Juris established Israel's right to take over under international law. This principle functions to maintain the boundaries of the territory that will be made into a State through a binding Mandate on Israel's Rights to its original boundaries which is also included in this principle.
The whole world should be compelled to pay attention to this wonderful persons brilliant discussions.
Wonderful presentation. Clear and concise. Thank you.
Thank you so much, wonderful talk 👍
HOW IS THE U N HELD ACCOUNTABLE ?
Is there an international law reference to the so called ‘Palestinians’ refugees and their residing in camps in Israel? And their confinement of them to camps out side of Israel in other countries who don’t integrate them into their respective counties, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and perhaps now Egypt.
Thank you, for a brilliant presentation
There are NO refugees within the State of Israel. All arabs who remained since 1948 became full citizens. Only their surrounding "brother" states keeps them in camps and don't allow them to become citizens.
Palastinians refugees in camps in Israel? What? First time hearing this.
Believe me there are no concentration camps inside of Israel.
Secondly they are not refugees, most if not all palastinians weren't born in the boarders of Israel 1948. Making them legally not refugees they were born in another land, they should be integrated to the country they were born in.
If you build refugee camps for 75 years, is it really refugge camp or is it just a reason for worlds attention
@@JohnPean-xy2ou -correct sir, they are attempting to denigrate israel on world stage to make their move to steal more ancient jewish land when they already own 99% of the lands around israel,predictable anti-jewish hatred festering for centuries
We have the best lawyers ever💎
This lady taught a Sa panel regarding misinformation regarding international law
Thank you. Very clear God bless you.
Thank you for dispelling so many prevalent myths. Very clear.
Did I not jest see you at a pro-Palestine channel. Do you think any of these asses will recognize any of this? I doubt it.
OF COURSE THE SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK ARE ILLEGAL. No country has the right to take land militarily. No country has a right to expel people for having the wrong religion. No country has a right to establish new urbanizations in places that are not part of their recognized territory. No country has the right to demolish houses of people that have lived there for generations. No country has the right to claim rights on anything that happened over 3000 years ago. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone acted like Israel?
Amazing presentation, thank you so much.
Brilliant lady!
Brilliant!!!!
Brilliant lady❤
So , all this lecture is informing me of is the fact that that there is an organisation named UK lawyers for Israel. One can always use the law to back up an argument. International law does not apply to the United States of America or Israel. While there may be certain laws that may apply
in certain situations it is always extremely difficult to extend the laws to certain countries that do not recognise same.
You got that right ! And now they are all crying to the big brother for help !
The lady is just marvelous, very attractive, very eloquent, very smart and adorable. We pray for her and the peace for Israel.
the original of this video was posted 3 years ago... just for information.
Well probably no more question cause the audience is dumb founded at the legal aspect of international that even the ICJ failed to see or do not want to hear or see. With all those high end lawyers commanding top dollars, one is wondering if they are worth their pay or salary. This is not an excuse to differ with Natashas legal view which is buttress by examples. These organization willingly and wild interpretation of the law is abhorring and condemnable. Their top officials should resign starting from the UN head for incitement of violence if I may say.Natasha has long way to go and would be a great asset to any organization!
OF COURSE THE SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK ARE ILLEGAL. No country has the right to take land militarily. No country has a right to expel people for having the wrong religion. No country has a right to establish new urbanizations in places that are not part of their recognized territory. No country has the right to demolish houses of people that have lived there for generations. No country has the right to claim rights on anything that happened over 3000 years ago. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone acted like Israel?
Superb!
What an amazing depth of analysis from the most qualified expert! Thanks for explaining! All, please share this video with the world. I've forwarded to Twitter. Thank you, Natasha Hausdorff!
Natasha, in regards to the status of the territory, even if that law would imply that the entirety of the territory is Israel's, wouldn't it seem to you counter intuitive to apply it while knowing that the territory was to be divided between two ethnic groups? Wouldn't it be two technical and lacking in nuance to apply that principle without understanding the complexities of the two nations present in the land?
What about the UN supported appropriation of West Papua by Sukarno's Indonesia?
Great presentation of Israel and international law. Thank you Natasha Hausdorff.
I have watched your three videos over the last day and must congratulate you on an excellent and objective summary.
In trying to understand the issue there is one point I am unclear on. As I understand it the declaration of independence in 1948 was not accompanied by a map. Is this correct?
If so, was it Israel’s intention to only include the land allocated to it as part of the proposed partition? If so, what is the status of the remaining land? There is an English international lawyer named Natasha Hausdorf who makes out a very cogent case that Israel has a rightful claim under international law to all of the land from the British Mandate left over from the creation of Jordan ie including the West Bank and Gaza. czcams.com/video/LCLPB2ibGNQ/video.html
By her arguments, the West Bank settlements cannot be illegal and Israel cannot have annexed any land because it is not owned by any other sovereign state. Her argument is weakened - but not entirely disproved - by Israel’s actions in handing Gaza over in 2005 and agreeing the three zones or areas in the West Bank.
It can be argued that the Palestinians, by rejecting the original proposals in the 1940s together with subsequent ones, have actually undermined their claim to the West Bank but perhaps that is more an academic than a practical point.
On a second point, in the second video in this series, you mentioned that Egypt refused to take over responsibility for Gaza as part of the Camp David discussions. Does anyone have a source for this? I saw it mentioned elsewhere but cannot find a direct source.
Thanks again for the excellent videos.
Mike, in several talks, she said that Israel can (like other countries can about their borders) negotiate agreements over its land. And Israel did so with the Arabs. Unfortunately, on October 7th we learnt the folly of that.
As for the Egyptians refusing to take Gaza back, I am sure that you will be able to find a reference for it if you look at the Kemp-David negotiations. But it is clear even today that Egypt does not want anything to do with the Palestinians.
@@user-ro5su9wc4o Thanks for your comment. Rather embarassingly, I meant my comment for Dr Henry Abramson rather than this channel! I thought CZcams had rejected it! He has prepared 3 excellent half hour talks giving the background to the dispute. You are correct that she has mentioned the ability of a state to change its boundaries by agreement. I presume you are in Israel. If so, please accept my best wishes at this very difficult time. Natasha is becoming quite a TV star here in the uk. Our national broadcaster, the BBC, has come in for some criticism for biased reporting favouring the Palestinian side. If you have the time and the inclination you may want to have a look at Natasha's interview with Katya Adler where Natasha puts her right on a few points. czcams.com/video/LdW6ISElci4/video.html
Oh my goodness!
Natasha sound good the other sound bad!
Please Natasha take BBC to court for creating anti Israel
ISRAEL (vis-à-vis Settlements) DOES NOT VIOLATE INTERNATIONAL LAW, period. ✡👍❤🇮🇱
And sun is black
Can you elaborate on your ignorance??
Say BiBi and IDF
Of course it does. Period. No other country has the right to do what Israel does to the original people from the land they want to expel them from. The world is watching how Israel is a terrorist state. Period.
And YES OF COURSE THE SETTLEMENTS IN THE WEST BANK ARE ILLEGAL. No country has the right to take land militarily. No country has a right to expel people for having the wrong religion. No country has a right to establish new urbanizations in places that are not part of their recognized territory. No country has the right to demolish houses of people that have lived there for generations. No country has the right to claim rights on anything that happened over 3000 years ago. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone acted like Israel?
Too complicated for me.
Fair enough. It's all about law which requires understanding concepts such as sovereignty and the difference between international and domestic law. It's worth persevering though, because law is at the heart of the conflict.
Наташа молодец.
ממש מקצועית, עבודה טובה
10:00 I couldn't follow this. Why does Israel automatically assumed the full mandate borders when there were always disputing sides?
uti possidetis juris (UPJ) is a principle of customary international law that serves to preserve the boundaries of colonies emerging as States. Originally applied to establish the boundaries of decolonized territories in Latin America, UPJ has become a rule of wider application, notably in Africa.
@@AdelinaMullerand there were no other states declared for the mandate of palastine, only Israel did it in 1948
@@SvenSteffenArndt correct.
But even if there were, it is not possible to split the land. Though Israel could enter into agreements on its terms.
But of course as you said, no other state has been declared.
I am not an expert, but I believe if the Arab residents of Mandatory Palestine had also declared their independence on areas offered to them, then they would have more legal standing in regard to "occupation". But because they decided not to declare independence, the borders default to Israel as the only country claiming independence within those borders.
thanks @@AdelinaMuller
Does the Sykes-picot Anglo French agreement 1916 concerning borders of Lebanon, Palestine Syria have any bearing on current International Law ? Ditto for the famous post first world war 1920 San Remo Conference which settled the British Mandate's territory ?
Natasha, I sincerely wonder what would be the boundaries of the states had two entities declared statehood and emerged. I guess it would have been impossible for both Israel and Palestine to have declared statehood independence at the same time--one would have preceded the other. So the first to declare statehood gets it all under Uti Possidetis Juris? Okay, I guess for two or more states to emerge from a territory would require agreements that would determine boundaries.
Israel 🇮🇱
Is the assumption, that IL is a belligerrent occupier, correct in Juda and Shomron as the souverän since 1948 ?
So the un has no powers whatsoever
We found that out in 1948 when after it voted for the partition plan, it set on its hands and watched as the Arabs were advancing to annihilate the Jews.
An amazing video, thank you so much
It´s not very interesting if the correct legal word for the presence of Israel on the Westbank since 1967 is `occupation` or not.
It´s much more interesting who the people were that lived there in 1967 and live there now, and how Israel is treating these inhabitants. And that does not make a nice picture for Israel, I´m afraid.
And by the way, if the Westbank is part of Israel, then Israel should give the inhabitants citizenship and the right to vote.
Stupidity of Palestiniannot to declare the establishment of their State and territory. They forfeit all their claims when they reject the partition and go to war.
You must also consider who was evicted in 1948, many Jews were evicted.
So in summary your opinion is it is legal to intimidate, terrorise and kick Palestinians out of their homes and drive them off of their land?
You are a demagogue.
Exactly. But don't you dare ask because then you are antisemitic.
Straw man. She said nothing approaching that.
@@lbs7774You can ask any question you like, even a silly one.
You
Thanks Natasha. I accept that Israel has the law on its side, but what about the conflicts between Palestinians and Israeli militia before 1948 and the way the Palestinians were forced off the land which was handed over to Israel? Israel may have the law on its side but what about its moral status? What about the blockade of Gaza? Lyn
you cannot persue a case on morality grounds! On that basis the Courts in all countries would be inundated. The status of Gaza is, I think peculiar and different. Save it was within the British Mandate and like the West Bank occupied by invasion of Egyptian & Jordanian forces (led by British Offivers equipment). So logically & in Interational Law it could claim Gaza as its own specially considering that Egypt has clearly abrogated any desire to reclaim the strip !
As we know Prime Minister Sharon of Israel in his wisdom decided to return Gaza to Palestine Authority rule in 2005. I am not sure if he had authoity of his role as PM to do so or authority from a majority vote in the Knesset ?
Effectively the Israeli residents were forced out and control was lost to PA Fatah then by force of present day Hamas.
It seems clear that Israel does not want to control/ incorporate Gaza into Israel and on that assumption its only concern is its security visa vis Israel.
@lynandrew4160 Natasha is a lawyer so this is her expertise. But
now that you accept Israel's right in this conflict on legal grounds, perhaps you can educate yourself on the pro-israel narrative on moral grounds. For instance, consider: what actions did Hamas do PRIOR to the "blockade" that might have warranted it. And regarding the "conflicts between palestinian and Israeli militia before 1948" really?! Why don't you go on over to wiki and see for yourself who was the aggressor throughout the 20s and 30s, not to mention that these so called "militias" were in fact defensive paramilitary units that were founded AFTER the mass murder of hundreds of Jews at the hands of arabs
@@gordonspicerLeaving Gaza was voted by the Kneset. It was very controversial, but it passed 59-40. A PM can’t decide something like that by himself. The disengagement program was very painful for a lot of Israelis who were forced to leave their homes, but we did it. We got nothing but terror in return, unfortunately.
1.6 million Pallestinians are still living in Israel with all equal rights and very happy!! The ones now appears the majority walk with the terrorists hamas and wish to wipe Israel off the map.Genocide!!!!!!!How can you reason with terrorists that continuously attack you with such hate!!
It seems palestinians did the forcing out of gaza!
She's cute
Is there not an obligation on Egypt to take Gaza on as it was a part of it territory upon its founding , and became part of Israel in 1967(?)
@@teeenn4593 You are wrong again.
Egypt is a signatory to a Pan-African agreement that requires it to take refugees in wartime and as a result of natural disasters.
Egypt is a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967
Protocol, as well as to the 1969 OAU Convention Governing the
Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa. There are
approximately 40,000 registered people of concern to UNHCR in
the country, from 38 different nationalities. At the end of 2009, 58
per cent were Sudanese, 17 per cent Iraqis and 17 per cent Somalis.
There was also a growing number of Eritreans and Ethiopians.
In the absence of a national asylum system, all activities
pertaining to registration, documentation and refugee status
determination (RSD), as well as the provision of assistance and the
search for durable solutions, are carried out by UNHCR under a
framework agreement signed with the Government in 1954.
Egypt is both a refugee-receiving and a transit country, often
for irregular movements of people, in particular through the
northern Sinai. Addressing the challenges posed by these
movements in a manner that is mindful of Egypt’s legitimate
security concerns, while respecting the principle of
non- remains a priority for UNHCR.
Egypt gave up gaza because of hamas terror activities
So fos natasha
Please wash your mouth with soap before writing a response. Thank you.
Are you saying that peoples(Jews Muslim and Christiens) who have been living there for hundreds even thousands of years does not have any right to their land.?
Many people living in Israel have and hold every right to their land. Of all races and faiths.
Some individuals lost their claims in a war of annihilation that was forced on Israel, BTW, a war that is still going on.
It is very sad for these people, and they should have a claim against the states that launched the war in an attempt to destroy Israel.
I wish them luck.
Israel, for its share, has already in the 50s absorbed more than 800,000 Jewish refugees who had to escape the same Arab countries that attacked Israel.
Like the Arabs who lost properties due to Arab aggression, the Jews also were not yet compensated.
What is her take on Israeli sovereignty over Golan and Sheba farms @27.50?
I don't know what is her take, but I can tell the IL rule that applies to the Golan height and that is that it was taken in a defensive war.
Not once, but twice. Given the strategic importance and the aggression from Israel's enemies, Israel has every right to hold it.
@@Mobile-ik8vr Israel attacked Egypt first, as a result this drew Syria and Jordan into their defense pact. It is also known that Moshe Dayan and Levi Eshkol deliberated on the necessity to seize the Golan and whether the Soviets would intervene. They were guaranteed no Soviet involvement. So on the fourth or fifth day of the war the Israelis attacked and seized Golan. I'm not sure if 73 can be called a defensive war on Israel's part, as the Golan was internationally recognized as Syria and they(Syrian) were taking it back. Barak offered most of the Golan Heights back but based on the pre-mandate borders and this was not acceptable to Syria.
@@beslanintruder2077And the moon is made of cheese.
Go and read history, not propaganda.
You are clueless.
Very interesting. Nothing mentioned though regarding Arab portion of UN partition. What happened with that
@@teeenn4593 " the Palestinian portions didn’t as it were cease to exist". An absolute nonsense, "the Palestinian portion" never existed.
History revisionists like you are a big part of the problem.
@teeenn4593
181 was an irrelevant recommendation. If it had been accepted it could have created an Arab territory, as it was not, it remains a meaningless resolution.
BTW, it is important to note that 181 never mentioned Palestinians, just Arabs.
Also, Arabs already have 21 states and 1 autonomy, and 1 of these 21 States was carved out from the geographical area that was called Palestine (the Land of Israel). 75% of it was given to the Jordanian Arabs.
@@teeenn4593 nothing bizarre about it. UN GA resolutions have no legal validity. They are declarations only, and 181 was rejected by the Arabs.
My understanding of what Natasha has said is that, since the partition (which was designed to create two states) was rejected by the Arabs, only one state actually came into being and thus inherited the territory of the former mandate. Jordan became an occupier of the West Bank and East Jerusalem and Egypt the occupier of Gaza. If the Arabs had accepted the partition plan at the time of the expiry of the mandate then two states would have come into being, and in the borders designated by the proposed partition plan. Basically, they gambled that the Jews would be wiped out by the invading Arab armies and they would have the entire country to themselves. It didn't happen, and they lost everything as a result. Sad, but true. Actions have consequences.
@@jakeedwards6639Thank you for explaining/ summary
Explain it all to people in Gaza.
But Israel didn’t get the West Bank or Gaza assigned to them according to the British plan in 1947.
She addressed that
@@gunsalves no she had the map as the entire Palestine region including the WB and Gaza. They weren’t part of the British/UN plan. That plan called for two states. So when Israel declared independence, it shouldn’t have covered all of the territory.
@@ericlind6581 it does legally. That's how it works as there is no other state in that land. She explained that.
@@gunsalves Yes she explained that part but my question isn’t about the claiming, it’s about the borders. Cause she had a map of the entire Palestine Mandate but it was to be divided into two states, not a single territory, so there was supposed to be another state in the land. So a claim by one party can’t be valid over the land designated for another party.
@@ericlind6581 the other party didn't agree... only one state was made.
if we take the position that Israel inherited its border from the mandatory period then that raises some major issues with Palestinians currently living in the disputed territories. If they're in Israel but don't have Israeli citizenship and therefore cannot vote and have limited freedom of movement, plus a legal system prejudiced against them then this only strengthens the Apartheid allegations against Israel.
Regarding article 49, why is Natasha not also applying it to Israels forced expulsions of Arabs during the 1948 war and their refusal to grant those refugees their right of return? Is there any reason that Israel is except from adhering to this international law?
The main problem with the settlements is not whether Israel considers them illegal, because of course they would not. Its because they're a clear obstacle to the establishment of a Palestinian state, none of those settlers would want to became Palestinian citizens. Its also a clear attempt by Israel to Jewify the West Bank and at the same time evicting Palestinians in the region, more attempts to block an establishment of a Palestinian state. If the West Bank is part of Israel, then the Palestinians there should have full rights.
In practicality Israeli courts are extremely prejudiced against Palestinians, acquiring Israeli citizenship or building permits chief among them. But also in what law applies to which people, i.e military law being applied to Palestinians when civilian law is applied to settlers.
The only thing Natasha has succeeded in bringing across is that Israel has been able to successfully bend international law to whitewash a pretty terrible situation in the West Bank.
An absolute demagogy.
Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria are citizens of the Palestinian autonomy whose government seat is in Ramallah. They are eligible to vote for their government if only it held elections. The fact that their president is in his 18th year of his four-year term in office, is a Palestinian issue, not an Israeli one.
The only “obstacle to the establishment of a Palestinian state” is the Palestinian refusal to accept the existence of a Jewish state. If the settlement were an issue, then the Palestinians should have come to the negotiation table sooner rather than later. Waiting for the settlements to grow bigger, works against your idea.
Your comment about “Israel's forced expulsion of Arabs during 1948” again proves that if a Palestinian supporter could not lie, he would have nothing to say. Israel did not expel Arabs in 48, they escaped the war of annihilation that the Arabs declared on Israel, despite many calls by Israel asking them to stay. Yes, in some places there were forced evacuations of villages that served as bases to attack Israeli towns, villages and roads, but the fact that there are two million Arabs living in Israel today proves the fallacy of your claim.
@@user-ro5su9wc4o "gain proves that if a Palestinian supporter could not lie" if you re-read what you said you'd realize that you actually corroborate what i said, Israel did forcibly expel Palestinians. Thats not a lie, we can point as much as you want to your token Palestinian population but that does not change the fact the Haganah employed psycological and in some place physical means to encourage mass exodus of most of the Palestinians. Do you honestly think the majority of those refugees of 1948 were actively fighting against Israel? Every single one of the Arabs forced to march after being expelled from Ramla and Lydda? Israel would not be able to exist if it absorbed all of those Arabs into it. That is why there was no real effort to combat the flight of those Arabs. Israel wanted to expel them.
@@user-ro5su9wc4o "If the settlement were an issue, then the Palestinians should have come to the negotiation table sooner rather than later. Waiting for the settlements to grow bigger, works against your idea." On this I agree with you, this conflict could have ended with Taba if not for the greed of Palestinian leaders.
That being said this does not negate the issue of settlements. How does exporting your rednecks to disputed territory benefit Israels security? It doesn't. It only serves to complicate any negotiations going forward. You're either delusional or completely brain rotted if you cannot recognize the Israeli right wings straight up refusal to consider a Palestinian state.
@@user-ro5su9wc4o "The fact that their president is in his 18th year of his four-year term in office, is a Palestinian issue, not an Israeli one." You're being intentionally disingenous. Abbas is widely hated because of how corrupt he is. Israel knows this and continues to support him. Clearly having a Palestinian regime who recognizes Israel is more important than any moral prescriptions Israeli politicians has. The only democracy in the middle east is perfectly fine with having cordial relations with a military dictatorship to the west and also wants to expand diplomatic relations with a repugnant theocratic relationship to its south.
יהוה
Prior of the creation of the state of Israel..there is not a place known as Palestine?There are no Palestinian peoples be them being Muslim,Jews or Christien?
Individual people were living in the geographical area called Palestine, the Land of Israel. (albeit very few in numbers).
They still live in Israel, Jews, Arabs Christians... the only democracy in the Middle East. There was only one nation (a People) living there and that was the Jewish nation.
You must be very careful not to conflate, individuals with nations, or private land with state land.
People who try to make a case for the Palestinians in Israel often pretend that the different terms mean the same thing. They lie, and they lie because if they use the right terminology they will not have a case to make.
@@AdelinaMuller Israel is not a democracy. Calling Israel a democracy is an insult to people's intelligence. So either you are not intelligent or you just lie. Israel can't call itself a democracy because it operates a brutal military regime in the Palestinian territories (i.e. West Bank and Gaza) and suppresses the rights of the majority of the population of those territories who identify as Palestinians.
Also Israel's claim to the land is of questionable value... Just because the supposed ancestors of Israeli Jews controlled the land 3,000 years ago this doesn't give a "divine" right to their alleged descendants to kick other people from their homes... Anyone who knows history knows that all those Jews who went to Palestine in the 20th century came from Europe or North Africa or some Middle Eastern country... and frankly the British colonialists who indeed helped the Jews against the Arabs in order to create Israel didn't do that because they thought that Jews had more historical rights to the land than Arabs but they did it because they thought that it's better for both Jews and non-Jews in Europe if Jews had their own state in Palestine... It was just a convenient solution for them and it had nothing to do with historical and religious claims to the land... But even the early zionists in early 20th century had alternative options for a Jewish state in other areas of the world if they weren't able to create a Jewish state in Palestine.
Search for funny video, name one Palestinian leader from 200 years ago
Israel is actually YASHAR ALAH, meaning Prince of God in reference to Jacob or Yakub. Jerusalem was formerly Urusalim - Urushalim - Urushalem, god of the dusk from the same root S L M - Shalom cognate with the Arabic Salam. He was a Canaanite god. The Palestinians, according to the latest DNA along with the Jews are descendants of the Canaanites. "Archeologic and genetic data support tat both Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites, who extensively mixed with Egyptians, Mesopotamian and Anatolian people in ancient times". National Institutes of Health (gov). "DNA from the Bible's Canaanites lives on in modern Arabs and Jews who have lived in the region". National Geographic. "Palestinians are Canaanites they are not originally from the Arabian Peninsula. This genetic analysis proves that Palestinians are mostly Canaanites; they have higher Canaanite DNA than the Jews. So what makes you native and not them. They were just Arabized". AskMiddleEast
U lie so much
can I raise a few questions to consider ? The Status of East Prussia incorporated into Poland 1945. Ditto Kaliningrad formerly Konigsburg Poland into then USSR now Russia? The forced deportation (transfer of population) of hundreds of thousands of ethic Germans from Poland to Germany in 1945? If, which I do not believe to be the case, do these people & the descendants have the right to return to, say Eeast Prussia and regain their homes & property? After all this is the proposal for Arabs & the descendants who left Israel in 1948 and 1967.
In each case what is there status in International law and do they have any relation to Israel's situation.? One final matter, understanding well as you clearly explain sovereign Israel legally extends to the Jordan River does the effect of a "DEFENSIVE" war of 6 June 1967 began by Jordan from their occupied West Bank & East Jerusalem have any bearing in International law in REAFFIRMING Israel's continued right to control/ incorporate the West bank into Israel proper and why, if possible, do you think the Government has not done so.? After all the Golan Heights are incorporated as Israel Sovereign territory. and now recognised by USA. and is united Jerusalem as the united capital. Thank you
"Don't you dare come asking fair questions antisemite! God only cares about it's chosen ones, not some silly prussians"
So, if Israel has Sovereignty over all the disputed territories in the West Bank what is the status of the Arabs in the West Bank who don't have Israeli citizenship? I do understand that Jordan gave all residents of the West Bank Jordanian citizenship in 1948 when the illegally annexed it. They then removed that citizenship in 1988 leaving them stateless. I would suggest that removal of citizenship was illegal and should be wound back making the West Bank Arabas Jordanian once again.
The Arabs on the West Bank are residents of the autonomy run by the Palestinian authority.
The legal concept of uti possidetis, ita possideatis might apply were it not for the fact that in 1955 Jordanian sovereignty over the West Bank and East Jerusalem was internationally recognized without objection. No country recognizes the uti possidetis, ita possideatis argument of Israeli sovereignty over yhe West Bank currently. As such it is an occupation. Assuming that Israel does have legal sovereignty which it is clear it does not, the 2.5 million Palestinians living under military law while Israeli citizens in the WB live under civil law, is the definition of Apartheid
The Uti Posidetis Juris principle isn't dependent on international recognition nor does it address the contingencies when a foreign country, in our case Jordan interferes with the situation. Besides, it's not the only law.
1. Jordan formally waived its claim on the West Bank and Jerusalem in 1988, this makes Israel sole sovereign.
2. Palestinians are residents of autonomous Palestinian Authority, whereas Israelis are citizens of state of Israel, thus, no apartheid.
3. There is no reason that Jewish people can't live in the future Palestinian state. any claims for their evacuation are racist.
4. Palestinians had refused several earlier Israeli propositions (97% of palestinian teritorial demands+ 3% land swap) to establish their state.
5 The reasons are: their leaders have no vision and can't transform themselves from being "hero generals" into being "mayors and governors"+ they are afraid of being named traitors (killed)+ they are satisfied with the state of affairs as is (corruption) + they dream of getting it all and just waiting for an earthquake to wipe Israel of the map+ plain stupidity and total disregard to the happiness of their own people and future of the next generation.
@@alexanderabramovitz6459 Jordan did not waive sovereignty over the west bank to Israel. Nobody recognizes Israeli sovereignty over she west bank. State your sources.
@@paulpollitt1731Jordan renounced any and all claims to the territory in its peace treaty with Israel in 1994. That includes sovereignty over the so-called ‘West Bank’. Do check.
In the interests of completeness: King Abdallah of Jordan recognised PLOs claim to sovereignty earlier (in 1988), but that does not mean that he (King Abdallah) was in a position to do so, because - as was demonstrated here - he did not have sovereignty in the first place, so it was not his to dispose of. QED
"Jordanian sovereignty over the West Bank and East Jerusalem was internationally recognized without objection" This is an absolute lie.
Another lie is about 2.5 million Palestinians living under military law. The majority of the Palestinians live under Palestinian self-rule. in Eastern Israel under the PA, and in Gaza, under Hamas.
Typically, if you could not lie, you would have nothing to say.
Natasha, you are asolutely amazing. I was glued to the screen throughout your lecture. Beautiful explanation. God bless you
What about the legal status of the State of Palestine that was founded in 1988 under the international law?
Legally it is an Autonomy. It was never founded as a state.
People who call it a state, lie, to falsely try to create facts.
Does the removal of some settlements and the removal of some settlers by the Israeli Government weaken Israel's position in the UN, when the matter of "illegal" settlements is raised?
I feel so clueless. This went right over my head. To me it just looks like a Jewish family picks a spot & just moves in on the property where a Palestinian family lives on. I support Israel on the most part, but somehow this is bothering seeing them just take land.
Utter nonsense, You have listen to too many lies.
If an Arab has a dispute over land ownership he has legal avenues open for him. On rare occasions when it was found that there was a doubt over a piece of land ownership the court ordered remedies.
.
@@Mobile-ik8vrno I'm not one of those yelling apartheid settlement colonization genocide & all those rhetorics. Believe me I am furious listening to their crap. What I said is something that I want to understand more. I want to learn more about it. To me all those people marching in the streets are like the Germans during world war II. I hear they're being called useful idiots. I support Israel.
@@Mobile-ik8vr Also thank you for explaining more about this.
Settlements are never built on land that requires the eviction of Palestinians living there and in possession of legal title to the land. Those termed by some as "illegal settlements" are communities that have been build within the boundaries of either zone A or B. Zone A is land that is under Palestinian administrative and police control. It constitutes 18% of the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority exercises administrative control over Area B but shares security control with Israeli authorities. This area makes up about 22% of the West Bank. Area C, which Israel administers, covers over 60 percent of the West Bank. An estimated 300,000 Palestinians live in 532 residential areas located partially or fully in Area C, along with some 400,000 Israeli settlers residing in approximately 230 settlements. In addition, around 30% of Area C is a designated “firing zone” for military training - 38 Palestinian communities are located within these training areas. Altogether, 60% of Area C is made up of these firing zones, other military land, or state land and nature reserves. Palestinian residents struggle to obtain land permits for housing and farming in the remaining 40%. It should also be pointed out, because it is never cited or included in either sides narrative, there are over 200 legal instances of illegal settlements or structures built by Palestinians. Illegal settlements and infrastructure have spread across 250 Area C locations occupying more than 2,000 acres. The PA has offered incentives, such as tax exemptions, discounts for vehicle registration, and jobs for those who settle illegally in Area C. In my experience the proPalestinian narrative always accuses Israel of violations and atrocities Palestinians and their governing bodies are themselves guilty of.
@@blackeyedturtlethank you for giving me a clearer understanding about this.