A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty Over the Land of Israel
Author: Howard Grief
Publisher: Mazo Publishers
"The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" offers a comprehensive and systematic legal treatment of Jewish national and political rights to all of the Land of Israel. The author, Howard Grief, is the originator of the thesis that de jure sovereignty over the entire Land of Israel and Palestine was vested in the Jewish People as a result of the San Remo Resolution adopted at the San Remo Peace Conference on April 24, 1920. Yuval Ne'eman, a former Israeli government minister said: "For about 400 years, the Ottoman Empire ruled over all the Balkans, the Middle East and North Africa. The struggle for the liberation of those areas began in the Balkan lands at the beginning of the 19th century and ended in 1913. In the First World War, the job [of liberation] was completed and Turkey was reduced to the Anatolian Peninsula. All of this was contained in the San Remo Agreement of April 1920. The fact that it was precisely at that place and time that Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the states of the Arabian Peninsula obtained [thanks to the victory of the Principal Allied Powers over the Central Powers] the very same liberation from the Ottoman yoke, strengthens the approach of Grief who presents the proof for the inclusion of Palestine [i.e., the Jewish People] in the list of beneficiaries in regard to the "settlement [or disposition] of the inheritance of the Ottoman Empire." Dr. Ya'akov Meron, former Adviser on the Law of Arab Countries at the Ministry of Justice, Jerusalem, Israel and Professor of Moslem Law in the Faculties of Law of Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv wrote: "The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law" is a forceful and erudite pleading for the respecting of the letter and spirit of the law, not only Israeli law but also the international law that came into existence in the wake of World War I. This law, now largely forgotten or neglected, is still relevant today in regard to the status and borders of the Land of Israel. The author makes a thorough analysis of the international documents which recognized the rights of the Jewish People to the land of their ancestors, most significantly the San Remo Resolution on Palestine, agreed to by the victorious Allies at the Peace Conference of April 1920.
Palestine as a territorial entity has experienced a curious history. Until World War I, Palestine was part of the sprawling Ottoman Empire. After the war, Palestine came under the administration of Great Britain by an arrangement with the League of Nations. In 1948 Israel established itself in part of Palestine's territory, and Egypt and Jordan assumed administration of the remainder. By 1967 Israel took control of the sectors administered by Egypt and Jordan and by 1988 Palestine reasserted itself as a state. Recent years saw the international community acknowledging Palestinian statehood as it promotes the goal of two independent states, Israel and Palestine, co-existing peacefully. This book draws on evidence from the 1924 League of Nations mandate to suggest that Palestine was constituted as a state at that time. Palestine remained a state after 1948, even as its territory underwent permutation, and this book provides a detailed account of how Palestine has been recognized until the present day.
This book recounts the author's meetings with some of Israel's political and intellectual leaders after he immigrated to Israel in 1976. He reveals the flawed mentality of Israel's elites and their policy of 'land for peace.' Contributing to this failure is Israel's unstable system of multi-party cabinet government and the country's lack of a written Constitution. Eidelberg offers a Jewish-democratic version of the American Constitution, whose Hebraic roots were recognized by learned men of the eighteenth century.
Honouring Professor A.H.A. Soons, scholar and practitioner of international law, this Liber Amicorum identifies gaps or 'wrong norms' in specific fields of international law, and addresses the fundamental question of what is wrong with international law as a system for creatiing global public order.
The book examines in detail one of the most controversial topic in current international law, namely the scope and extent of the right of individual self-defense. The book carefully traces the paths which have been followed in the developing legal debate on self-defense. The author uses numerous case-studies of incidents involving the use of force in alleged self-defense (such as the Entebbe Incident 1976, the Nicaragua Case 1986 or the Israeli-Lebanese conflict of 2006) which have formed the central point of scholarly debate. The author's conclusions are based not only on thorough analysis of academic discussions but also of the practice of States and international bodies, especially of the United Nations Organization. At the outset of the book the author reviews the historical context and the customary evolution of the right of self-defense. Reference is made to the famous Caroline Case of 1837, which set the necessary conditions of lawful exercise of self-defense. Next, the author examines the concept and legal nature of self-defense, carefully assessing the customary conditions of necessity, proportionality and immediacy derived from the Caroline Case. As the occurrence of an "armed attack" is a conditio sine qua non of lawful invocation of self-defense, several modalities of an armed attack are attentively evaluated such as its constituent elements, beginning or scale. The author explores, whether reactions to acts of international terrorism committed by a non-State may be based on the right of self-defense. In times of global terrorist networks it is highly desirable to attach special attention to use of force in self-defense as a remedy against serious acts of terrorism. Thorough analysis of State practice is shown on several examples from recent history - the U.S. air raid on Libya in 1986 and on Baghdad in 1993 and relatively recent air strikes on Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998. Reference is also made to the most striking example - the Al-Qaeda attack on the United States in 2001. The validity of claims of anticipatory/preventive self-defense is examined on a theoretical level and then applied to the specific details of the Israeli air strike on the Osiraq Nuclear Reactor in 1981. The two main approaches to preventive self-defense - "restrictive" and "traditional" - are then discussed in detail. Brief analysis is also devoted to the nature of the so-called - pre-emptive - self-defense indicating its current position under international law.
And The Implications For The Proposed New Palestinian State
Author: Cynthia D. Wallace
Publisher: Charisma Media
It is no secret that the debate over the nation of Israel’s claim to the city of Jerusalem has caused great controversy. While many who support the rights of the Jewish people present compelling emotional appeals, most fail to substantiate their arguments with hard evidence. To truly defend Israel on the political front will require more than emotional outcry; we must explore the legal and historical facts surrounding this conflict in order to preserve the rights of the Jewish people. Dr. Cynthia Wallace uses her thirty years’ experience in the field of international law to delineate the legal and political rights of the nation of Israel as well as the ramifications of the proposed Palestinian state. Using a comprehensive approach, Dr. Wallace presents compelling evidence authenticated by the community of nations to establish Israel’s rightful legal claim to its capital and most holy city.