Daily Alert Archives

The Debate over the Future of the Territories

(Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs) Amb. Dore Gold - Why is the future of the West Bank such a critical issue for Israel? The first reason is the geo-strategic location of this territory. It is adjacent to Israel's coastal plain, where 70% of our population and 80% of our industrial capacity are located. It was thought in the past that our territorial withdrawals would reduce the hostile intent of our adversaries, but we learned in the Gaza Disengagement in 2005 that withdrawal can actually increase the hostility on the other side. The number of rocket launches from Gaza into Israel mushroomed in the year after we pulled out - from 179 to 946. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) defines "annexation" as "a unilateral act of a state through which it proclaims its sovereignty over the territory of another state." But did the West Bank belong to "another state"? Only the UK and Pakistan recognized Jordanian sovereignty there after the end of the British Mandate. According to the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), annexation is a war crime. It is a subset of aggression. Back in 1967, when Israel captured the West Bank, it was plain as day that it was not an aggressor, but rather it was a victim of aggression and acting in self-defense. Another fault in the current debate is to call this a "unilateral act." This is an American plan in which both sides gain. We get 30% of the West Bank, the Palestinians get 70%. It is not a unilateral gain for Israel. It is ultimately a territorial compromise. The writer, a former Israeli UN ambassador and director-general of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is president of the Jerusalem Center. This is adapted from his remarks to the AJC Global Forum 2020 on June 15, 2020.
2020-06-16 00:00:00
Full Article