West Bank of what?
David Ha’ivri
Published: 23.03.12, 14:39
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
98 Talkbacks for this article
1. some people in israel just dont get it!
Gregg ,   Haifa   (03.23.12)
They keep being blind from their pseudohistorical fact and belief that the bible is the cadastre of the land of israel.... A light among the nations my foot!
2. Boker Tov
dave ,   safet israel - phila   (03.23.12)
about time somebody said this
3. #1 - Ok, let's refer to man-made law then
William ,   Israel   (03.23.12)
BY Intl Law, Britain was granted a mandate over much of the Middle East lands that were part of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI. BY Intl Law, they had the right to dictate borders, leaders, and issue land grants of PUBLIC land without hurting the rights of private land-owners. BY Intl Law, such land grants and actions were voted on by the League of Nations which included a majority of nations at that time. BY Intl Law, following an illegal war of annihilation at the hands of Arabs on the Jews in Palestine, Jordan's annexation of land that was part of the land grant to Jews was deemed ILLEGAL by the global community. The following theft of land, ethnic cleansing and influx of foreign Arab immigrants were all deemed WAR CRIMES per INTL LAW and the Geneva Convention. By Intl Law and the UN's own Charter, the granting of this land to a populace which can neither prove wholly ownership nor residency prior to 1949 (those that came through illegal immigration, I mean) is ILLEGAL. BY Intl Law, the building of homes on land that is still disputed (i.e. public lands in the West Bank) by Arabs is ILLEGAL until such time as the final status of the land, or their being granted Israeli citizenship, comes to bear. So - forget the bible completed, Gregg. There are tons of laws, conventions, precedents, rulings, and basic common-sense which support the argument in the article and Israel's own right to this land, especially to those Jews who lost it in 1949.
4. Judea and Samaria
DvorahTheProphetess ,   Landrum USA   (03.23.12)
Thank You for your informative essay. Growing up in the Diaspora most of us learned, heard, ingested the term "West Bank" as rote, from teachers and newscasters alike, with no thought to historical reference. Kol HaKavod
5. I don't get it
Martin   (03.23.12)
Israel "won" the land in a war that it didn't want at all. But why didn't Israel annex the complete land so far? OK most people who want the land but they don't want the (moslem) people there. But they wont' just vanish. If you claim it as a part of Israel you have annex it, give the people the Israeli citizenship or get somehow rid of them.
6. West Bank
josef Jesmore ,   Tene,Judea,Israel   (03.23.12)
Finially some one has the gut to speak the historical truth. But there is a greater issue tied to Jordan'West Bank. The King of Jordan took possesion of the land records from the Ottoman/British Mandate. Some thing like 95% of the public-NON-REGESTERED land became the possesion of the Royal Jordanian family. The king of Jordan granted very few land deeds to individuals;mostly for service/money by people who represented him. Second ; ther5e were many parciles of land,buildings already registered TITLES to Jewish enitiies/people. For example the Kibutsim in Gush Etzion and North of Jerusalem Atarot(Now a Industrial zone. Let alone all the houses or businesses owned by Jews in "East Jerusalem" A few years ago the King of Jordan asked the Israeli Government to evict Palestian squuaters from his fathers royal palace in Jerusalem. From there you can talk about building permits for all buildings Arab/Jewish in the West Bank.
7. The attempted Arab land grab of 1948-49
Raymond in DC ,   Washington, USA   (03.23.12)
Jordan's illegal annexation of Judea, Samaria, and eastern Jerusalem only exposes part of the attempted land grab on the part of nascent Israel's Arab neighbors. Whatever the objectives of the Palestinian Arabs, the intent of the surrounding Arab states was not to "defend" the Palestinian Arab peoples, but to grab as much as they could of former Mandate Palestine. That required eliminating the new State of Israel. Egypt's objective was southern Palestine down to Eilat. (They only got the Gaza Strip, which they did not annex but only held under military administration.) Syria intended to capture the Galilee down to central Israel. They failed. Jordan was only partially successful, as they hoped to grab *all* of Jerusalem. All this is documented in Karsh's "Palestine Betrayed".
8. Add to the invented terms
Gee ,   Zikron Yaakov   (03.23.12)
'Palestinian' which came into being for Arabs in 1964 when a group of Egyptians and KGB agents invented it in Kuwait.
9. What writer forgot to say
Jackie ,   Florida   (03.23.12)
I agree with this article in total, but the author omitted a few salient facts. Jordan's army was led by a British officer, John Glubb, and its aim was to erase every sign of the history of Jews in the area it held for 17 years. Indeed, Glubb was knighted for his success in killinhg Jews in Jerusalem. During the time Jordan held the land, only the king of Jordan visited Jerusalem and there was never an attempt made tyo create a state with its capital in Jerusalem. srael's prime minister at the time of the 6-day war pleaded with Jordan;s king not to join the attacks by Syria and Egypt against Israel. Jordan ignored the plea, hoping to gain control of all of Jeruselem and move west meeting with the armies of Syria coming down from the north and the Egyptian forces attacking from the south. The king was influenced by the false statements coming from Egypt about how their troops were invading Tel Aviv and bombing other parts of Israel, this after the Egyptian air force had been destroyed sitting on the ground, before the planes could take off.
10. No such thing as "west bank"!only Judea & Samaria!
Mike ,   Ohio   (03.23.12)
Ive been saying this for years!
11. #1 gregg - some people in israel just dont get it
solomon ,   bklyn   (03.23.12)
and you are one of them. You close your eyes to pseudohistorical facts, such as the existence of “Palestine” and “Palestinians” and believe that all history begins in 1949. You ignore real facts: Israel was attacked by the arabs (care to count how many times?), remember? They withdrew from Gaza and parts of the “WB”, remember? (and how did that turn out?). The land the settlements are on is “disputed territory”. You know what you’re talking about? My foot!
12. Thanks for the info
Yossi ,   Brooklyn   (03.23.12)
I would love to read more like this
13. i'll agree there was no palestine on the condition
abdalla   (03.23.12)
That Israel takes all three million Arabs as citizens and gives them rights
14. its the viability of the state stupid
avramelr   (03.23.12)
The issue is not in a name or the history as per the bible . The issue is how as zionists do we carve out a state that is majority Jewish, democratic and tolerant. Ben Gurion understood that real estate conflicted with viability and that borders must conform to demographic realities. The author whose terrorist past is well known believes neither in tolerance nor democracy . Nor does he have a grasp of reality. He is a fool wannabe martyr slouching is way to his next massada.
15. West Bank of David Ha'Ivri
John R ,   NYC USA   (03.23.12)
Mr. Ha'Ivri expresses concern that Israel would be only 15 kilometers wide if it gave up the West Bank. It is interesting to note that 3 of the last 4 Prime Ministers of Israel drew peace plan maps in negotiating with the Palestinians and, in all of them, Israel remained 15 kilometers wide. What changed in those peace maps was that Israel expanded east Jerusalem from 5 to 70 sq. kilometers and Israel seized the three main West Bank aquifers. More than 70% of that water is currently being used in Israel proper. The thought that Israel could not defend itself against the Palestinians who have already agreed to a demilitarized state is ridiculous. In Cast Lead Israel had only 1% of the total casualties with 99% being Palestinians. Ask the IDF commanders if they think they can defeat the Palestinians. As for calling the territory the West Bank, why is calling it Judea and Samaria better? That assumes it is already Israeli land which your own Supreme Court said in a 2005 ruling on the Gaza disengagement that is is not. They said Israel was a belligerent occupier and the land was not annexed and it was not Israeli land.
16. #14
BH ,   Iowa   (03.23.12)
Over twenty million muslims colonizing Europe had no problem leaving their homes. Any who don't want to live in a Jewish state can move to any of fifty-six muslim states or their European colonies.
17. Bible Maps with"Palestine in time of Christ"
MapOfHate ,   Jerusalem Israel   (03.23.12)
If you open any Christian Bible to the back you will find maps of the Holy Land the one ilustrating the time of Christ is always labeled" Palestine in the time of Christ" No where in the New Testament" is it ever called Palestine not by Christ or anyone else the word simply does not appear from cover to cover just as Jerusalem is not to be found in the Koran.Yet Christians & historians continue to use the term" Palestine" as the pagan Roman emperor Hadrian re-named it after Christ's time because of the wars with the Jews in an attempt to wipe out the Jews physically and historically &t both Roman pagan and Christian historians continued its use. Why does this ignorance continue to this day ?
18. #13, Abdalla
Ben ,   Chutzlaarets   (03.23.12)
Abdalla, will these "3 million" residents swear and uphold allegiance to Israel? Will they serve in the interest of all its citizens? Will they fight to the death in the IDF for their fellow Jewish, Christian and Muslim citizens? If so, the options is viable. If you truly want to be my brother citizen I will take you. If however, it is as it appears to be just a clever lie to get rid of me an mine... it is a non-starter. Your faith doesn't matter to me! Your true allegiance does! In 1948 when we formalized this enterprise, we begged, pleaded, and bribed the local Arabs to join us and be part of our new nation. The answer was a resounding NO! (Not all) The answer was "we would rather see all of us dead than be equals under one nation". I would welcome a change of heart, even now, but alas, I don't think it is genuine.
19. To: No. 15
Sarah B ,   U.S.A. / Israel   (03.23.12)
The United States Supreme Court held for a VERY long time that separate drinking facilities, bathrooms and waiting areas for black people and white people was perfectly constitutional. Took over one hundred years for the U.S. Supreme Court to change its mind. The Israeli Supreme Court will come around, have no fear. And why do you fault Israel for ersatz "Palestinian" casualties in Cast Lead? For one thing, over 80% of the casualties were terrorists. For another, most of the civilian casualties died while being used as human shields by terrorists. Thirdly, how many military confrontations have been civilian-casualty free? And where is your outrage at the over one million dead civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq and Waziristan, all deaths due to indiscriminate NATO bombing? Are you always such a hypocrite? Judea and Samaria, by the way, are non-sovereign lands which were acquired by Israel in the course of fighting a defensive war against Jordan. Israel's to settle, keep and annex. Once Judea and Samaria are annexed, of course, they will be part of Israel, and the 2005 Supreme Court ruling will become instantly null and void. Of course, all the illegal Arab squatters will be repatriated to Jordan, country of their citizenship. There are consequences to losing wars, and the Arabs have lost six -- all of which they started. There are also consequences to engaging in seven decades of vicious and violent terror -- as the ersatz "Palestinians" have. Israel was perfectly happy to co-exist peacefully with the ersatz "Palestinians," but the ersatz "Palestinians" were not interested in peaceful co-existence. They want only to supplant Israel. And that just isn't going to happen. The ersatz "Palestinians" have rejected three opportunities for a two-state solution including, most recently, an offer which would have awarded them 95% of Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem as a capital. They rejected the offer in favor of starting the second intifada. That did not work out so well for them, but how is that Israel's fault? And how many bites at the apple do you think violent terrorists should have? Germany lost 25% of its land mass following World War II; Italy lost Istria; Japan lost Iwo Jima (subsequently restored to Japan) and Okinawa (90% of which remains United States territory to this day). Like I said -- there are consequences to starting (and losing) wars. Those consequences accrue to Arabs, too, like it or not. The Jewish presence in Greater Israel predates any Arab presence by 6,000 years. It is not as if there is any shortage of Arab nations; only one tiny sliver of land called Israel. Finally -- why do you hate the State of Israel so much? Why are you so intent on applying a very different standard to Israel than that which exists for every other member of the international community? Are you just a hard-core Jew hater? You can tell us; we'd understand. Nothing we haven't encountered before ....
20. #16's one state solution would kill Zionism
Avramele   (03.23.12)
If you keep the territories you will sooner than later give residents the vote. You will also eliminate the only real solution for the refugees in Syria and Lebanon thereby perpetuating terror and war for generations. At some point Israel will become a bi national mess akin to Lebanon. Partition with border adjustments preserves the Jewish state and the Zionist dream.
21. @#17
Chris A ,   Los Angeles, USA   (03.23.12)
King James Bible Exodus 15:14 - Read it you moron!!!! PALESTINE is most defenitely mentioned.
StevieT ,   USA   (03.23.12)
The enthralling birth of the Jewish nation was met with wonder and admiration by most (who were not brain dead) in the free world. "the land of milk and honey" meant a place where the Jewish people could live as a majority, forever freed of the shackles of an inherent prejudice that came, part and parcel with being 'outsiders' in ethnically pure, non semitic lands. The dream of this homeland became reality through strength, diligence, and hardwork, and, through the generous help of so many non-Jews who eagerly bought into the purity of the fledgling State. Then came the demands, so very faint at their beginning. Sounds that most could only attribute to a narrow radical voice. That noise got louder and clearer and became understood, the original footprint, the one that all agreed on at the outset, was not enough. I do not wish to argue over the fine points of the ersatz movement, but I do wish to propose, that as a fact, it is a deal changer. And when you unilaterally change a deal, do not be surprised when the outcome is not what you are looking for.
23. Article concealing facts
Palestinian   (03.23.12)
Why didn't the writer mention that the UNITED STATES also recognized Jordan's annexation of the West Bank? Later in the 50's the Arab League said the annexation would be considered temporary but nevertheless DID recognize it. On the other hand, nobody, not even the US today recognizes Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem. So let's stop projecting and misinforming. No one's buying that the West Bank is not occupied. Nobody.
24. To: No. 23
Sarah B ,   U.S.A. / Israel   (03.23.12)
Britain, Pakistan and Iraq are the only countries that recognized Jordan's annexation of the West Bank. But that is all irrelevant. Jordan attacked Israel in 1967, and lost Judea and Samaria as a result. War is hell, you know? But there are consequences, and even the illegal ersatz "Palestinian" squatters in Judea and Samaria are not exempt from such consequences. On the bright side, all Arabs living in Judea and Samaria are Jordanian citizens. Israel will repatriate you, real soon now. It doesn't matter who recognizes what -- do you see any countries lining up to challenge Israel militarily over Judea and Samaria? Jerusalem has been unified for over 40 years. A lot of lip service; no boots on the ground, so to speak. Don't hold your breath waiting for the community of nations to do something substantive for you. Everyone's pretty much had their fill of your violence and terror. Have you forgotten your humiliation at the United Nations last fall? You need to keep that in mind, because that is what the REAL world thinks of you.
25. To: No. 13
Sarah B ,   U.S.A. / Israel   (03.23.12)
All West Bank Arabs are Jordanian citizens. It's not exactly as if they are stateless. Israel does not want to absorb a violent bunch of terrorists and thugs into the State of Israel. Seven decades of terror, two intifadas, suicide bombings, boulder throwing, rioting and violent protest have been enough. You have proven that you are unworthy of Israeli citizenship. Sorry, but the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, and you have all failed that test miserably.
26. A much needed piece of information and
Robert Haymond ,   Israel/Canada   (03.23.12)
education on the history of the term,"Westbank", and "The Green Line" as well. Thank you, Mr. Ha'ivri. An old soldier told me that after the War of 1967, the "Green Line" was established as nothing more than a ceasefire line between Israel and Jordan by Moshe Dayan and the Jordanian military supervisor (general) in the region. It was never meant to be a border. In actuality, it was drawn with a felt pen, green ink, and the line that it made was thick and may have covered over as much as two kilometres on the actual ground.
27. Response to#8
John R ,   NYC USA   (03.23.12)
"Palestinian" is a term mentioned in Article 7 of the Palestine Mandate and it is used to distinguish those residents in the Mandate ( in that case how Jews would qualify for citizenship upon statehood.) Jews and Muslim residents are included in the term which the British invented not the KGB.
28. Response to#19
John R ,   NYC USA   (03.23.12)
In the case of Israel being a belligerent occupier, the difference between your US Supreme Court example and my example is that the World Court and every country in the world happens to agree with the Israeli Supreme Court's judgement. As to your non sovereign land argument, under Article 4 of the 4th Geneva Convention, Palestinians on the West Bank are "protected persons. "The fact that they are stateless is irrelevant and under Article 6, it lists the Articles designed to safeguard protected persons. Art 49 is one of them. Article 49 paragraph 6 says :“The Occupying Power shall not deport or TRANSFER parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” Israel is doing exactly that and violating the law. The unanimous ruling in 2005 by the ICJ says it as well as 9 UNSC resolutions going back to 1968. As for the great deals that were offered the Palestinians in a peace accord, Israel kept all the West Bank aquifers leaving the Palestinians no water except for what Israel chooses to sell them. In addition Israel trades Negev desert( including a toxic waste site )for acquiring West Bank settlements which were illegally built to begin with. No one in their right mind would accept that deal. The Palestinians didn't start the war the surrounding Arabs countries started the war. Finally I don't hate Israel, I think it is an extraordinary asset to the community of nations based on its contributions to the world. I do hate people like you however, who are ignorant bigots who will ultimately destroy Israel. Our religion is based on the law and once we mask that with blind 3,000 year old history we will loose the very reason that Israel must exist.
YOAV ,   TEL AVIV   (03.23.12)
30. the promised land belongs to the jews
cristian ,   argentina   (03.23.12)
the arabs muslims murder,lie and steal their own people taking them to the wrong ways of perdition,death and destruction HELL!!!! also the arabs muslims want to do the same dirty to the holy land besides it does not belong to them,the upside down world!
Next talkbacks
Back to article