Page 31 - SAN REMO 100 - BOOKLET-08-04-20-Inner Pages-MB.indd

“the Mandate promoting settlements in what had status of these territories to be

required Britain to become known as the “West Bank” “disputed”.
and “East Jerusalem”.
allow Jews to Occupied or Disputed? Challenging the Consensus
So there is a conflict between
immigrate and settle” Yet in the early 1970s, the the idea of “close settlement

“international community” started in Palestine” in the Mandate,
to reason that these territories and the current “consensus”
Despite Britain’s best efforts to were “occupied” by Israel; that interpretation of the FGC. The
frustrate the Mandate’s purposes, they belonged, not to a sovereign Mandate encouraged Jews to
that is what in fact happened. state that had previously governed immigrate and settle in Judea and
Between 1920 and 1948, the there, as the word “occupied” Samaria; the modern interpretation
Jewish population in Palestine would normally assume, but rather of international law makes such
increased tenfold from about to a future Palestinian state; and settlement illegal.
60,000 to 600,000. By 1948, that Israeli policies promoting
Jews had legally established settlements thus infringed the FGC, It is arguable that San Remo is
communities in several places that making them illegal. still relevant via the Mandate for
later (in 1948/9) were illegally Palestine, because Article 80 of
conquered by Jordan and Egypt – “the word ‘occupied’ the UN Charter states: “nothing in
including the Old City of Jerusalem, this Chapter shall be construed […]
Atarot and Neve Yaakov, Mount would normally to alter in any manner the rights
Scopus, Hebron, Etzion bloc, Ma’ale whatsoever of any states or any
Adumim, and Gaza. assume a previous peoples…” This so-called “Palestine
not a future state” clause” was intended to protect the
When Jordan and Egypt took control rights of the Jewish “people” under
of Gaza and the West Bank, these the Mandate to “close settlement”
territories were ethnically cleansed Israel has always disagreed. While in the Mandate territory.
of Jews. But in 1967, Israel took Israel undertakes voluntarily to
(back) control of the whole of East comply with the humanitarian On this view, US Secretary of
Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and provisions of the law of occupation State Mike Pompeo was right
Gaza, and Jews naturally started until a negotiated peace is when he recently stated that
to move back to their former established, it does not consider Israeli settlements are “not per se
settlements, and to establish new these territories to be occupied inconsistent with international law”.
ones. And from the early 1970s, within the meaning of the FGC
Israel adopted official policies (“de jure”). Rather, it considers the

SAN REMO 100 29