Napoleon and the Jews By Ben Weider, CM, PhD

Napoleon and the Jews

By Ben Weider, CM, PhD

Napoleon was the first leader in Europe to grant liberty, equality and fraternity to all religions. In this lithograph of the period, Napoleon is granting liberty to the Jews.

Conference given at:

International Congress of the International Napoleonic Society Allessandria, Italy June 21-26, 1997

&

28th Consortium on Revolutionary Europe Florida State University Tallahassee, USA, March 7, 1998

Napoleon Napoleon as Emperor at the moment of his corononation, wearing the collar of the Legion of Honour, which he founded in 1802. If ever a ruler owed his position to what is called the "will of the people," Napoleon did. Napoleon won it by his success with the sword, not the sword of execution, nor the sword of the guillotine, but the sword of battle against the enemies of France. The people of France elected Napoleon as the Emperor, because he saved France from its enemies and he defended the gains of the Revolution at home. Napoleon established both the Bank of France and the French bourse (stock exchange) as well as National and Departmental Tax Boards, to insure equitable taxation for all. Consequently, the income of the French peasants skyrocketed. Napoleon established awards such as the "Legion of Honour" to reward those whose services to the nation merited special recognition; the recipient could be scientist, composer, legislator, clergyman, writer, as well as a soldier. In the area of public works, over 20,000 miles of imperial and 12,000 miles of regional roads were completed, almost a thousand miles of canals were build, the Great Cornice road was constructed along the Mediterranean coast, mountain roads were constructed across the Alps by ways of Simplon Pass and Mont. Cenis, and harbors were dredged and expanded at many ports, including Dunkerque and Cherbourg. Not only was Paris beautified with the construction of boulevards, bridges and monuments, but the National Archives received a permanent home. Napoleon also saved the Louvre. Monument buildings were constructed throughout the Empire and structures, such as the Imperial Cathedral of Speyer, made famous by Luther, were preserved while work on the spires of the great cathedral of Cologne were continued on Napoleon's orders. In fact, Napoleon's architectural handiwork can be found scattered across Europe, from Rome to Vienna. "Think tanks" and research centers were established in France to work on projects vital for national economy. An Industrial Board was organized to provide data and information to French Industry, as exemplified by the success of the sugar beet farming and the canning industry. For religion, Napoleon ended the schism and restored the Catholic Church to France by the Concordat in 1801. He insured freedom of religions and equality to the Protestant sects, and he declared France the homeland of the Jews, after it became obvious he could not establish their national home in Palestine. The Code Napoleon established equality before the law, emphasized the sanctity of the family, and assured the legal gains of the Revolution. The Code of Civil Procedure insured widespread user of mediation in the courts and the laws, and the courts were secularized. Napoleon created the Imperial University to administer French Education. Specialized engineering and technological schools were established along with the famous lycées to insure a scientific education. The establishment of a Professional School of Midwifery and first School of Obstetrics were formed during the consulate and the School of Veterinary Science was professionalized under Napoleon. In the military, Napoleon pioneered in what we describe today as the "principles of war" which are studied by almost every military academy in the world. The armies of today are based on the organization created by Napoleon for his Grand Army and it has been used ever since. Many historians claim that Napoleon created his own legend on St. Helena. The truth is that his legend started in Toulon in 1793. Lord Holland, speaking in the British House of Peers, spoke about the deceased Emperor in August 1833. He stated: "The very people who detested this great man have acknowledged that for 10 centuries there has not appeared upon earth a more extraordinary "character." This is indeed a tribute to the Emperor.

THE TRUTH GOES THROUGH THREE STAGES:

First, it is ridiculed;

Second, it is violently attacked;

Finally, it is accepted as self-evident.

It is easy to succumb to the temptation of quoting recognized authorities and obtain information from secondary sources rather than do primary research. A quote from a written document made by one historian and uncritically repeated by another soon acquires the authority of "Common Knowledge." This research did not rely on accepted HISTORIAN EVALUATION, but on primary research. After having completed years of research, basically on primary sources, and having access to the archives in Cairo, Alexandria, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, and researching Jewish literature that deals with Napoleon, I am pleased to present this part of Napoleonic history that is not very well known.

The Pursuit Of Factual Detail Is The Religion Of Perfection

One of the many contributions that Napoleon has made to improve the quality of life of the people, and perhaps one of his most important and lasting one, was his Civil Code. He felt a personal responsibility for its realization.

This at a time in history when discrimination was rampant. It was then that Napoleon decided to liberate and offer, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity to Jews, Protestants and Free Masons. He also opened the churches that were closed for years.

Napoleon was the first leader in Europe to grant liberty, equality and fraternity to all religions. In this lithograph of the period, Napoleon is granting liberty to the Jews.

The Civil Code of 1804 was to grant religious freedom to all of them. At that time, there were about 480,000 Calvinists and 200,000 Lutherans living in France.

In 1804, Napoleon arranged for the public regulation of the Protestant communities and then decided that the State would assume the responsibility for the salaries of their pastors.

How Did Napoleon's Involvement With The Jews Come About?

Napoleon Bonaparte had not met any Jews in his youth, and perhaps not even during his school years in France. His first contact with the organized Jewish community probably took place on the 9th of February 1797 in Italy during the Italian campaign.

When Napoleon and his army entered Ancona, the Jewish community was living in a small ghetto. Napoleon, at that time, remarked that certain people were walking around with yellow bonnets and a yellow arm band with the "Star of David" on it. He asked one of his officers, what was the purpose of the yellow bonnet and the arm band. The officer replied that these were Jews who had to be identified in order that they return to the ghetto every evening. Napoleon immediately ordered that the arm bands and the yellow bonnets be removed and replaced them with the tricolor rosette. He closed the ghettos and gave instructions that the Jews could live wherever they wanted and they could practice their religion openly. The Jews of Ancona were overjoyed when they discovered that the first French soldiers who entered the ghetto were Jewish!

Later, Napoleon also closed the "Jewish Ghetto" in Rome. He liberated also the Jews of Venice, Verona and Padua.

The "liberator of Italy" abolished the Laws of the Inquisition, and the Jews felt free at last. (See: Appendix 1)

Why Did Napoleon Do This?

Did He Have A Motive?

And yet, here is another incident of interest. On the 12th of June 1798 when the French occupied Malta, Napoleon learnt that the Templar Knights did not allow the Jews to practice their religion in a synagogue. The Knights enslaved their Jewish prisoners and mercilessly used them or sold them. He immediately gave permission to the Jews to build a synagogue.

Again I Ask - Why Did Napoleon Do This?

What Could Be Napoleon's Motive?

Now here is an amazing incident which is not generally known.

When the French troops were in Palestine, and besieging the city of Acre, Napoleon had already prepared a Proclamation (See: Appendix 2) making Palestine an independent Jewish state.

He felt confident that he could occupy Acre and the following days he would enter Jerusalem and from Jerusalem he would issue his proclamation. He was unable to realize this project because of the intervention of the British.

This proclamation was printed and dated the 20th of April 1799, but his unsuccessful attempt to capture Acre prevented it from being issued. The Jews had to wait more than 150 years before their state was proclaimed.

The proclamation, however did bear fruit. It was a precursor to Zionism, heightening awareness of the cause of Jewish statehood. The ideas Napoleon expressed found the admiration of many who saw Napoleon's gestures as a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy, which foretells of the restoration of the Jews to their land. The idea drew many adherents, especially in England.

One hundred and eighteen years later, the British would issue the "Balfour" declaration which called for a Jewish homeland and ultimately - 31 years later in 1948 - Israel would be recognized as a sovereign state by popular vote in the United Nations General Assembly. Perhaps it can be said that Napoleon's premature announcement on that first day of Passover in 1799 played an important role in the creation of the state of Israel.

In the Paris Moniteur Universel, on 3 Prairial of the year VII (22 may 1799). It was announced: "Bonaparte has published a proclamation in which he invites all the Jews of Asia and Africa to gather under his flag in order to re-establish the ancient Jerusalem. He has already given arms to a great number, and their battalions threaten Aleppo."

On the 16th of August, 1800, Napoleon declared: "If I governed a nation of Jews, I should reestablish the Temple of Solomon."

Why Did Napoleon Do This?

It just does not make sense, because he had nothing political to gain. However, the answer could be discovered in a private conversation that Napoleon had with Dr. Barry O'Meara, which took place on the Island of St. Helena.

On the 10th of November 1816, Dr. O'Meara (who was Napoleon's personal physician at the time) asked the Emperor point blank as to why he was encouraging and supporting the Jews.

The Emperor Napoleon replied, and I quote:

"My primary desire was to liberate the Jews and make them full citizens. I wanted to confer upon them all the legal rights of equality, liberty and fraternity as was enjoyed by the Catholics and Protestants. It is my wish that the Jews be treated like brothers as if we were all part of Judaism. As an added benefit, I thought that this would bring to France many riches because the Jews are numerous and they would come in large numbers to our country where they would enjoy more privileges than in any other nation. Without the events of 1814, most of the Jews of Europe would have come to France where equality, fraternity and liberty awaited them and where they can serve the country like everyone else."

During the different periods of Napoleon's career, his sympathy for the Jews were clearly noted. He did everything he could to assure that the Jews were treated on an equal basis as Catholics and Protestants.

The French Revolution in 1789 was to change all the various restrictions that Jews had to face in France. It was on the 27th of September 1791 that France adopted a decree which accorded the Jews of France full citizenship.

However, the Legislative Assembly did not take any specific measures to apply this new freedom that was granted to the Jews. The National Convention closed the synagogues, forbid the use of the Hebrew language and in general made their lives difficult.

Under the Directory, the synagogues were opened again and Jews got involved in business and in political life. But, in general, the Jews were barely tolerated.

Before Napoleon took over the leadership of the French government, the political situation of the Jews was precarious, unstable, and had to submit to negative laws, and according to specific regions of France, they were some times treated in a liberal manner and some times in a tyrannical manner.

Napoleon's religious opinions were the height of modern philosophy; he was completely given to tolerance. Everywhere that Napoleon went, he led tolerance by the hand; everywhere that he found several religions, he ended the domination by which one took precedence over the others. "Faith," Napoleon would say, "is beyond the reach of the law. It is the most personal possession of man, and no one has the right to demand and account for it."

He wanted the Jews to have their Jerusalem in France.

One of the most respected Jewish poet and philosopher was Christophe Martin Wieland. Napoleon made a point of meeting with him when he was in Germany.

Metternich-Winneburg, who was the Austrian consul in Paris in a letter to Count Standion, Austria's foreign minister, on September 1806 stated: "All Jews look upon Napoleon as their Messiah."

Napoleon was the only government leader that gave Jews equality when most other nations kept them in bondage. He also abolished the special taxes on Jews in Germany and gave them, for the very first time, civic and political equality. When strong opposition in France manifested itself, Napoleon stood firm in his support of Jewish equality.

When Napoleon came to power, he did not liberate the Jews for political reasons because there were not much more than 40,000 in all of France, and they were living in various provinces.

The province where Jews were most persecuted was Alsace, where half of the Jewish population of France was living. In Paris, there were approximately 1,000 Jews. They were excluded from doing business, excluded from government positions and from the purchase of property.

The principle leader of the new law dated the 8th of April 1802, which dealt with the organization of various religions was Jean-Etienne Portalis, the Minister of Religion. He said: "Jews should participate as equals, like all other religions, as permitted by our laws."

Although there was tremendous opposition by the anti-Semites, one of the leading Jewish citizens, Isaac Cerf-Berr, presented to Minister Portalis, a specific plan that would ensure Jewish integration into the population. The plan was brought to Napoleon at his camp in Boulogne in 1805. He approved it and instructed Portalis to implement it as quickly as possible.

As far as the Jews are concerned, it can hardly be doubted that Napoleon's laws regulating the life of the French-Jewish communities were a turning point in their development in modern free-society.

Cerf Berr has been instrumental in securing the abolition of the poll tax which was required of any Jew wishing to spend the day in Strasbourg.

It was in 1806, after the Austerlitz campaign, that Napoleon aggressively supported total liberty for the Jews. Notwithstanding this, the French newspaper, the Mercure de France, published a violently anti-Semitic article stating that the Jews could have freedom in France, provided they all converted and became Catholics.

Great opposition to Napoleon's plan to make equal citizens out of the Jews living in France was led by Molé, Beugnot, Segur, and Regnier.

Notwithstanding this heavy opposition, including anti-Semitism generated by numerous newspapers, Napoleon was quoted as saying, I quote, "This is not the way to solve the Jewish question. I will never accept any proposals that will obligate the Jewish people to leave France, because to me the Jews are the same as any other citizen in our country. It takes weakness to chase them out of the country, but it takes strength to assimilate them."

The decree issued on the 30th of May 1806 requested that a Special Assembly of Jewish leaders and Rabbis, from all of the French departments, would meet in Paris to discuss all outstanding matters, including answering questions dealing with accusations against the Jews made by the anti-Semites.

It was on the 23rd of July 1806, when all of these representatives met in Paris, at which time Napoleon stated:

"My desire is to make Jews equal citizens in France, have a conciliation between their religion and their responsibilities in becoming French, and to answer all the accusations made against them. I want all people living in France to be equal citizens and benefit from our laws."

One hundred and eleven representatives of the Jewish community, representing all the departments of France and Northern Italy met at City Hall. Napoleon had requested answers to accusations made against the Jews so he could understand their position clearly. The reunion of so many Jews from the different parts of France represented the renewal of the famous "Sanhedrin" which ruled Israel from 170 to 106 before Jesus Christ.

The Grand Sanhedrin, was the Supreme Assembly of the Jewish nation, and had not been reunited for 18 centuries. Napoleon had the idea of assembling the principal Jewish notables of all of Europe, in order to permit them to solve the problems that concerned him. Convened by decree on the 23rd of August 1806, the Grand Sanhedrin met from the 9th of February to the 9th of March 1807. At the time of their last reunion, Napoleon was proclaimed the modern "Cyrus." Napoleon was warmly and unanimously praised.

The Sanhedrin continued to be an important force in Israel until 72 AD when the Roman General Titus destroyed Jerusalem. The Sanhedrin replaced the monarchy in Israel in those days and it was their authority that administered the country.

They interpreted the law, and sat as judges in major cases. This was the first time since the Sanhedrin was disbanded in Israel that it was reconvened, by the great liberator "Napoleon."

The reconvening of the Sanhedrin drew a historical comparison between Napoleon and the ancient heros, one of whom was "Cyrus the Great." Cyrus, the King of Persia, was the initiator of Israel's first restoration.

Tsar Alexander of Russia, protested violently against the liberation of the Jews and encouraged the Orthodox Church in Moscow to protest aggressively. He called Napoleon the "Anti Christ and the enemy of God" because he liberated the Jews. Austria also protested. In Prussia, the Lutheran Church was extremely hostile towards Napoleon's decision and reaction in Italy was also not favourable but not as aggressive.

A most venomous attack on the Sanhedrin came from the "Holy Synod" of Moscow, which issued an open manifesto against the Sanhedrin. This proclamation dated December 1806 states: "In order to bring about a debasement of the Church, he (Napoleon) has convened to Paris the Jewish Synagogue, restored the dignity of the Rabbis and founded a new Sanhedrin."

Napoleon was concerned about these protests, which also included some leading personalities in France.

Therefore, in 1806, after the campaign of Prussia, and shortly after the victory at Jena, he made a speech in the city of Posen on the 29th of November 1806, where he gave the results of the deliberations of the Sanhedrin, which pleased him very much.

The Sanhedrin was convened again on 31st of January 1807 for two months, in order to fine-tune the law that would make the Jewish religion equal. The special decree of 1806 liberated the Jews from their isolation.

Judaism became the official third religion of France and the method Napoleon implemented to have Rabbis serve the nation is still in effect today and is the basis of the government's relation to the Jewish population.

Napoleon's uncle, Cardinal Fesh, also got involved. He told Napoleon, "Sire, so you wish the end of the world to come with your Laws to give the Jews equality like the Catholics. Do you not know that the Holy Scriptures predict that the end of the world will happen when the Jews will be recognized as a corporate nation."

Even Marshal Kellermann supported by Mole mobilized opposition to Napoleon's laws about the Jews and recommended strongly that the Jews be prohibited from dealing in commerce. The Emperor replied formally and strongly, "We must prevail in encouraging the Jews who are only a very small minority amongst us. In the east departments, we find a great number of Jews that are very honest and industrious."

Because of the tremendous amount of criticism that Napoleon was receiving from such famous personalities as Chateaubriand, Cardinal Fesh, Marshal Kellermann, Tsar Alexander and numerous others, Napoleon felt obligated to introduce a "Restrictive Decree."

On the 17th of March 1808, this Decree limited the freedom given to the Jews. His plan was to reduce criticism to a manageable level and then gradually, over time, remove the restrictions one-by-one.

On the 11th of April 1808, Napoleon received into a special audience, Mr. Furtado and Maurice Levy of Nancy, who wanted to express the emotions of their co-religionists about the Restrictive Decree. After hearing them out, he immediately ordered 13 departments, including those of Le Midi, The Southwest and Les Vosges to eliminate the Decree. In June of that same month, Livourne and the lower Pyrenees were also ordered to remove the "Restrictive Decree."

Therefore, within three months of this Restrictive Decree, more than half of the departments involved were able to reinstate the liberty extended to their Jewish citizens. The last hold-out was Alsace. This province eventually removed the restrictions.

Therefore, in 1811, all restrictions were removed and nothing from a political or civil activity distinguished the Jews from non-Jews in France.

Here is a true anecdote that proves how Napoleon was sympathetic to his Grognards. A young member of the Army served with exceptional bravery. He was from Alsace. The Emperor decided to decorate him with a medal in front of his troops. The Emperor said, "David Bloom, you are a brave soldier. Your place with the Old Guard is inevitable." Then he took off his own silver medal, which he wore proudly, and pinned it on David Bloom's uniform.

David Bloom responded by saying, "Sire, I am from Alsace and I find it difficult to accept this decoration as long as my family is being dishonored by French laws that limit their equality and freedom." Napoleon was visibly upset and was reported to have said, "They have lied to me again, and I will correct these unfair restrictions immediately."

Due to the close collaboration between the administration officials and the local Rabbis and leaders, the Jews were able to leave the ghettos where they were confined and to participate freely in the life of France.

Jews were able to enroll in the universities, participate in whatever professions they wanted and were able to work for various government agencies. Nothing was prohibited any more.

The Imperial Almanac of 1811 reported that the Jewish religion was now one of three religions accepted by the French government. The efforts of Napoleon to liberate the Jews was effective, not only in France, but in all the other countries where France ruled. The new Civil Code, which Napoleon created, assured liberty, fraternity, and equality of all peoples regardless of their religion or station in life.

In 1811, thanks to Napoleon's efforts, Portugal allowed Jews complete freedom and permitted them to open their synagogues that were closed for over 200 years.

The Napoleonic period brought to the Jews of France, the Netherlands, Western Germany and Italy the first intimations of modernity. It brought equality before the law, an end to oppressive taxation and enforced residential restrictions, and the opportunity to participate as free men in public and political life.

In those parts of Spain to which French authority did not reach, the Inquisition continued to function. The sovereigns of the post-Napoleonic era had a weakness in learning nothing and forgetting nothing.

After Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, the Holy Alliance was convened at the Congress of Vienna. At that time the laws permitting equality, liberty and fraternity were retracted and were not applied again until 1830, when the principles fixed by the French Revolution and the First Empire, were re-instated.

Prussia retracted the liberal laws in 1815 after the Battle of Waterloo. The worst setback was inflicted upon the Jews of the Papal states. It would almost seem as if Pius VII had taken revenge on the Jewish population of his territory for the humiliation he had suffered at the hand of Napoleon. He was not content with their confinement behind the walls of the re-erected ghetto but he obliged the Jews to wear the "Yellow badge" again. In Sardina, the Jews were thrown back into ghettos and not allowed to build synagogues.

Much later some European nations assimilated the Jews between 1824 and 1867. Notably, Holland in 1830, Sweden in 1834 and Switzerland in 1838.

It is remarkable that in England, it was only in 1858, after Lord Lionel Rothchild was elected five times, that he was permitted to take his seat in parliament. It is also interesting to know that the laws that were passed in France, in 1808, are still in existence even to this day.

Bitter irony covers the historical fact that Napoleon's defeat stopped Emancipation and plunged the Jewish youth into utter disillusionment and despair.

The encounter of the Jewish people with Napoleon was a turning point of Jewish history. For the first time, a modern statesman had envisaged the Jewish problem as a fundamental issue of international politics.

Napoleon did more than any other leader prior to his time, to give security and religious freedom to the Jews in nations under his control. He had little in the way of political motivation for his policy, as there were no more than 40,000 Jews living in France at that time.

The Jews of France and the Empire recognized that this was a reflection of his humanity towards mankind and his respect for other nationalities and religions. They were so thankful to him for having granted them equality and religious freedom, that they offered a special prayer in his honor. This prayer was inserted into the prayer books in every synagogue in countries under Napoleon's control. As a result, all Jews who attended prayers in these synagogues would recite this prayer.

	These pages are a reproduction of the original Hebrew Prayer, for its English translation see Appendix 1.

Appendix 1

Prayer of the Children of Israel

Citizens of France and Italy
for the success and prosperity of our Mater's Army
The Emperor, the King Napoleon the Great
(may his glory shine)

Composed in the month of Cheshvan, year 5567 (1807)
Psalms chapter 20,21,27, 147

I implore Thee, Creator of Heaven and the Universe and all who inhabit it. Thou hast established all boundaries and limitations of the world and each nation with its respective language. Thou didst give the Sceptre of power into the hands of their kings to lead the people under their reign with righteousness, justice, an uprightness; that each person in his own place should live in peace.

How fortunate we are, how good is our lot, that from Thy hand glory and beauty were poured out upon the head of a powerful man, full of vibrancy, NAPOLEON the Great, to sit on the Throne of France and Italy. Could another be found as worthy as NAPOLEON deserving of such honours and kingship, who shepherds his people with sincerity and with the understanding of his heart? Thou, GOD, hast wondrously bestowed Thy kindness upon him. As other Kings of the world approached to fight him, Thou didst protect him on the day of war, Thou didst save him from those who stood up against him, until he subdued them and they sought peace from him. With his kind spirit, he spoke words of peace to them.

Kings have now untied to break their treaty and replace peace with the blood of war. They have gathered armies to fight against him and against all those who admire him. They have come to our borders, and our master, the Emperor, the King, is standing with the might of his army to confront them.

O GOD, master of greatness, strength, power and beauty, we implore Thee to stand next to his righteousness; help him, support him with Thy mighty arm: guard him as the apple of Thine eye with an abundance of strength and health. Save him from all evil and tell him "I am your salvation."

Send Thy light and truth, that they may lead him. Render foolish all those who rise against him for evil. Let Thy light shine upon his plans. Strengthen his armies and those of his allies.

May he succeed in all his endeavors and reign over his enemies. May they seek peace from him, for he is a man who loves peace, and peace he will exercise among his nation.

Father of compassion, Master of Peace, implant in the heads of all Kings and their advisors thoughts of peace and tranquility for the benefit of all mankind. Let the Sword not pass through our land and spill the blood of our brethren. Let all nations unite in total peace and tranquility forever. Amen.

(May the words of our prayers be acceptable to Thee.)

Appendix 2

Letter to the Jewish Nation from the French Commander-in-Chief Buonaparte
(translated from the Original, 1799)

General Headquarters, Jerusalem 1st Floreal, April 20th, 1799,
in the year of 7 of the French Republic

BUONAPARTE, COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE ARMIES OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC
IN AFRICA AND ASIA, TO THE RIGHTFUL HEIRS OF PALESTINE.

Israelites, unique nation, whom, in thousands of years, lust of conquest and tyranny have been able to be deprived of their ancestral lands, but not of name and national existence!

Attentive and impartial observers of the destinies of nations, even though not endowed with the gifts of seers like Isaiah and Joel, have long since also felt what these, with beautiful and uplifting faith, have foretold when they saw the approaching destruction of their kingdom and fatherland: And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads; they shall obtain joy and gladness and sorrow and sighing shall flee away. (Isaiah 35,10)

Arise then, with gladness, ye exiled! A war unexampled In the annals of history, waged in self-defense by a nation whose hereditary lands were regarded by its enemies as plunder to be divided, arbitrarily and at their convenience, by a stroke of the pen of Cabinets, avenges its own shame and the shame of the remotest nations, long forgotten under the yoke of slavery, and also, the almost two-thousand-year-old ignominy put upon you; and, while time and circumstances would seem to be least favourable to a restatement of your claims or even to their expression ,and indeed to be compelling their complet abandonment, it offers to you at this very time, and contrary to all expectations, Israel's patrimony!

The young army with which Providence has sent me hither, let by justice and accompanied by victory, has made Jerusalem my headquarters and will, within a few days, transfer them to Damascus, a proximity which is no longer terrifying to David's city.

Rightful heirs of Palestine!

The great nation which does not trade in men and countries as did those which sold your ancestors unto all people (Joel,4,6) herewith calls on you not indeed to conquer your patrimony; nay, only to take over that which has been conquered and, with that nation's warranty and support, to remain master of it to maintain it against all comers.

Arise! Show that the former overwhelming might of your oppressors has but repressed the courage of the descendants of those heroes who alliance of brothers would have done honour even to Sparta and Rome (Maccabees 12, 15) but that the two thousand years of treatment as slaves have not succeeded in stifling it.

Hasten!, Now is the moment, which may not return for thousands of years, to claim the restoration of civic rights among the population of the universe which had been shamefully withheld from you for thousands of years, your political existence as a nation among the nations, and the unlimited natural right to worship Jehovah in accordance with your faith, publicly and most probably forever (Joel 4,20).

Bibliography

1. Anchel, Napoléon et les juifs, 1928
2. Roth, C. The Jews of Malta in: Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England, XII (1931).
3. The Jewish Press Magazine, April 1998, page 69
4. The Memoirs of Dr. Barry O'Meara
5. The New Judea, vol 16, September 1949
6. Schwarzfuchs, Simon. Napoleon, the Jews and the Sanhedrin
7. The Memoirs of Baron Fain, First Secretary of the Emperor Cabinet, Proctor Jones Publishing, 1998.
8. Kobler, Frans. Napoleon and the Jews (1975).
9. Yahuda, A.S. Conception d'un état juif par Napoléon, Evidences publication, 1951, no 19, May-June.

Why Are We Scared To Speak The Truth about Israel?

Yosef Y. Jacobson In this week’s Torah portion, 

Moses, bidding farewell to his nation just weeks before his death, narrates the experiences of the young nation during their forty-years of wandering in the Sinai wilderness, en route to the Holy Land. 

Their long trek, from Egypt through the Sinai Peninsula, to the Eastern bank of the Jordan, forced them to pass neighboring countries, all of them antagonistic toward the Israelites. 

Moses records his instructions to the Israelites on how to treat these neighboring nations. 

His words are both shocking and stunning; their moral power resonates to this very day. “G-d said to me,” Moses recalls (1), “Give the people the following instructions: ‘You are passing through the borders of your brothers, the descendants of Esau, who dwell in Seir [Southeast of Israel]. Although they fear you, you must be very careful. You shall not provoke them, for I will not give you even one foot of their land. As an inheritance to Esau I have given Mount Seir.’” Moses continues the instruction: “You shall purchase food from them for money so that you may eat; also water shall you buy from them for money so that you may drink.” 

From Seir, also known as Edom, the Hebrew’s continue their journey northward toward the territory of Moab, located at the East of the Dead Sea. This is Moses’ message to the Hebrews once again: “G-d said to me, ‘You shall not distress Moab and you shall not provoke war with them. I will not give you their land as an inheritance, since I have already given Ar [the capital of Moab] to Lot’s descendants as their heritage.” 

As the Jews continue their voyage up north toward the country of Ammon, today’s Jordan with the exception of the territory east of the Jordan River given to three tribes, Moses has this to say to his people: “G-d spoke to me saying… ‘You will be coming close to the Ammonites. You shall not distress them and you shall not provoke them, for I shall not give any of the land of the descendants of Ammon to you as an inheritance; to the descendants of Lot have I given it as an inheritance (2).” These words, uttered 3,276 years ago (in the year 1273 BCE), one month before Moses’ dies, are startling in their noble character. 

When the world was still a moral desolate desert, a barbaric pagan society, Jews were barred from taking even a single inch from the territories of Seir, Moab and Ammon. “I will not give you even one foot of their land,” G-d declares to Israel. Not only can you not build territories on their territory, you mustn’t even stand on their soil without permission to enjoy a falafel with humus. Why? Because their land does not belong to you, the Israelites; it belongs to another nation. 

Do not lay a finger on that which is not yours. The eternal lesson Why does the Hebrew Bible, a book of moral teaching rather than historical data, record this apparently insignificant instruction of Moses concerning the Jewish encounter with the three countries of Seir, Moab and Ammon? 

What relevance does this tale possess? The answer, we can safely assume, is dramatically clear. The Torah is communicating to us the circumstances surrounding the ultimate Israelite conquest and settlement of their homeland, Eretz Israel so that when the United Nations, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the European Union, the State Department and all of the Arab “moral” countries will decry Israel as an apartheid state, occupying Arab/Palestinian soil and controlling land annexed from another nation, the Jewish people will be able to open their own constitution, the Torah, and present its unwavering message of moral truth: “Listen ye, defenders of morality and human rights! Do not preach to us about stolen land. 

At a time when most tribes and nations were slaughtering their very own children to pagan gods (3); in a milieu when parents regularly practiced infanticide, murdering their weak newborn children; in an era when cannibalism was a routine diet, and most people lacked the slightest idea about the very notion of right and wrong — Jewish children growing up in a desert were taught that they could not touch that which did not belong to them. 

They could not step foot into a territory that was not theirs. When your great-great grandparents were still entrenched in barbaric Pagan rites, our children were studying G-d’s instruction to cultivate absolute respect for the property and nationhood of others. “It was under these guidelines that the nation of Israel conquered and settled the Land of Israel, knowing full well that this was their land to embrace. 

The very same G-d who instructed them not to set foot on foreign soil, granted the Land of Israel – the entire territory from the Jordanian till the Mediterranean – as His gift to the Jewish people. It is not stolen land; it is the eternal heritage of the Jewish people.” 

Israel became a nation in 1313 BCE, 2,000 years before the birth of Islam. Forty years later, in 1273 BCE the Jews conquered Eretz Israel and enjoyed dominion over the land for a thousand years. Even after the Babylonians and then the Romans put an end to the Jewish sovereignty, Jews continued to reside there throughout all of their history. 

In short, the Jews have had a continuous presence in the land of Israel for the past 3,300 years. “You are thieves” The great 11th Century French biblical commentator, Rashi (Rabbi Solomon Yitzchaki), one of the greatest sages in the history of the Jewish people, asks the following question in his commentary on the opening verse of Genesis. If the Hebrew Bible is a book of Jewish theology and law, why does it begin with the story of creation, and not proceed immediately to the story of Exodus and the first mitzvah given to the Jews? Rashi, who wrote these words as Christian crusaders were attempting to “purge” the land from Muslim rule, presents an incredible answer. One day in the future, Rashi says, the nations of the world will turn to the Jewish people and declare, “You are thieves! You have stolen the land of Israel from non-Jewish tribes.” 

What ought to be the appropriate Jewish response? To answer this question, the Bible commences its text with the story of creation of the universe, this in order to grant the Jew the best and truest answer to the accusation that he is a bandit. 

The entire universe, the Bible is saying, belongs to G-d. He created it. Every piece of land belongs to Him, and He chose to give the Land of Israel to the Jewish people. To call Israel occupiers of the West Bank aka Judea and Samaria, Gaza and Eastern Jerusalem is akin to calling France occupiers of Paris or Britain occupiers of London. 

The Bible — a book embraced by billions of Muslims and Christians as the word of G-d — states clearly that the entire country, including the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem, is G-d’s eternal gift to the Jewish people. In fact, our ownership of the land of Israel surpasses that of any other nations ownership of its country. 

Every other nation in the world bases its claim to its land on conquest. A people came, conquered the indigenous people, took the land, settled it, and called it by a new name. “Might makes right” is the historical claim of almost all nations in history. 

With one exception: Eretz Israel. This country belongs to the Jewish people because, as the Bible states hundreds of times, G-d gave it to them as their eternal heritage. It is the most moral claim, because G-d is by definition the essence of morality. 

What about the Palestinian people? How about the ingrained notion that the Arab/Palestinians are fighting for their ancient homeland annexed by the Jews? The truth about this matter has been so deliberately obscured that even to raise the issue seems strange to many people. 

Let us reflect on some undisputed historical facts. In the 1967 war, did Israel annex territory from an Arab/Palestinian nation? No, not a single inch. There is not, nor has there ever been, an Arab/Palestinian nation. 

Israel liberated and captured the West Bank aka Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem from Jordan’s King Hussein and the Gaza Strip from Egypt, after they declared war against the Jewish State. 

It was only following the Six-day War in 1967 that Arab refugees living in these territories began identifying themselves as part of an Arab “Palestinian people.” One can’t help but wonder why these Arab/Palestinians suddenly discovered a national identity after Israel won the war, but not during the “Jordanian occupation”? 

Yashiko Sagamori, a spokesman for the National Unity Coalition for Israel, made the point very well in a recent article: ”If you are so sure that Arab/Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history, I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about this country of Palestine:                                                       “When was it founded and by whom?                                                                         What were its borders?                                                                                                 What was its capital?                                                                                                    What were its major cities?                                                                                         What constituted the basis of its economy?                                                                What was its form of government?                                                                                 Can you name at least one Arab/Palestinian leader before Arafat?                                Was Arab/Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?                                                                               What was the language of the country of Arab/Palestine?                                           What was the prevalent religion of the country of Arab/Palestine?                             What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date.                      And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?                                                                                                                        “And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call “Palestinians” are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over – or thrown out of — the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War?”                                                                  Mr. Sagamori stated the facts correctly. There has never been a land known as Arab/Palestine governed by Arab/Palestinians.                                                  Arab/Palestinians are regular Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, Egyptians, etc., who have all lived for hundreds of years under Turkish rule, and then, after World War I, under British rule.                                                 There is no language known as Arab/Palestinian.                                                        There is no distinct Arab/Palestinian culture.                                                           There is no such an entity as an Arab “Palestinian people.” The name “Palestine” was created in the year 70 CE when the Romans committed genocide against the Jews, smashed the Temple and declared that the land of Israel would be no more. From then on, the Romans promised, it would be known as Palestine. The name was derived from the Philistines, a Goliathian people conquered by the Jews centuries earlier. It was a way for the Romans to add insult to injury. (They also tried to change the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina, but that had even less staying power.) 

The present conflict between Israel and the Arabs has absolutely nothing to do with any occupation. In 1967, when there was not one standing Jewish settlement and no occupation, five Arab countries — Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Lebanon joined by Saudi Arabia — contrived a plan to annihilate Israel and “drive the Jews into the sea.”  

Israel fought back and won the war — and liberated the territories from which it was attacked. Keep in mind that in 1967 the Arabs controlled 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. 

Israel represented less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the land mass. But even that was too much for the Arabs. They wanted it all. No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough. During the summer of 2000 at Camp David, Yasser Arafat was offered by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak 98 percent of the so-called “occupied territories” and a first time ever an Arab/Palestinian State with its capital in East Jerusalem. Arafat rejected the Israeli offer and initiated three years of horrific bloodshed in Israel. 

The history of the Arab/Palestinians In Hal Lindsey’s book “Everlasting Hatred: The Roots of Jihad,” he traces the history of the people now being deceptively called the “Palestinians.” I want to quote a few critical paragraphs. “In the 7th century, the Muslims took control of Jewish Palestine for the first time. From 635 CE until 1917, the Muslims ruled it, with only a few interruptions by the European Crusaders. During that span of time, the land was plundered and reduced to total desolation. Many people who traveled the land in the 19th century remarked on the fact that Palestine was as desolate as the moon and very few people lived there. 

”In 1867, Mark Twain remarked about his visit to the Holy Land in his book, ‘The Innocents Abroad.’ He lamented: ‘Stirring scenes occur in the valley [of Jezreel] no more. There is not a single village throughout its whole extent – not for 30 miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Bedouin tents, but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride 10 miles hereabouts and not see 10 human beings.’ Twain described the country as ‘A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds. A silent, mournful expanse. We never saw a human being on the whole route. There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country.’

”By all eyewitness accounts of that era, Palestine was a total desolation. There were virtually no trees and no people. Because of lack of trees, the weather changed and it rarely ever rained. The irrigation systems of the once fertile valleys were all destroyed, rendering most areas into malaria-ridden swamps. The terraces of the mountainsides were torn down, causing terrible erosion that left only barren rocks. This was the condition of Palestine by the beginning of the 19th century. 

”It was at this time that Jews began to flee severe persecutions in Russia and Eastern Europe. In the mid-1800's, some Jews came to Palestine and, with the generous aid of some successful Jews, began to buy property from Muslim Ottoman Turks. The Muslims thought the land was worthless anyway, so they sold it to the ‘dumb Jews’ for extremely inflated prices. ”To everyone’s amazement, the Jews were very successful at reclaiming the land. Many of them died from malaria and the rigorous life the work demanded, but they performed an agricultural miracle that made the land green and very productive again. As a result of their success, poor migrant workers from the surrounding Muslim countries began to flood in to work for the Jews. The Jews literally became victims of their own success – almost all of the people calling themselves “Arab/Palestinians” today are the descendants of those migrant workers. 

”When the Hashemite Tribe, who were rulers over Mecca and Medina for centuries, were driven out by the Saudis, the British gave them control over the vastly greater numbers of ‘migrant workers’ in Trans Jordan. The British said this would be, in effect, “The State of Arab/Palestine.” Instead, the Hashemites, who make up only about 20 percent of the population, turned it into their own kingdom and called it the Kingdom of Jordan. ”When the Jordanians and Egyptians controlled the so-called West Bank aka Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip for 19 years (1948 to 1967), there was never a thought of giving the disorganized mass of ‘migrant workers’ a state. Why? Because they knew there was no cohesive, homogeneous people known as Arab ‘Palestinians.’ 

”The current efforts of Jordan and Egypt and all the rest of the Muslim Middle East nations to give these same people a state is clearly a ploy to get a foothold inside Israel. It is a strategic accommodation to establish a base from which the final assault against Israel can be made. What they couldn’t do militarily is now being facilitated through the advisory recommendation of the United Nations and the E.U. ”Muslims will never accept a permanent presence of infidels in what they claim is sacred Islamic soil. Especially Jewish infidels, for which the Koran reserves its most vehement condemnations. In their minds, the Koran and Allah will not let them accept Jews in what they view as their third holiest site.” 

The truth about the refugees Harvard University professor Ruth Wisse wrote these wise words in The Wall Street Journal (June 16, 2003): “Unfortunately, the Arab war against Israel is no more a territorial conflict than was al Qaeda’s strike against America, and it can no more be resolved by the ‘road map’ than anti-Americanism could be appeased by ceding part of the U.S. to an Islamist enclave.                                                        From the moment in 1947 when Jewish leaders accepted and Arab rulers rejected the recommendation of the U.N. partition plan of Palestine, the Arab-Israeli conflict bore no further likeness to conventional territorial struggles. Arab rulers defied the U.N. charter by denying the legitimacy of a member state. 

Arab countries refused to acknowledge the existence of a single Jewish land. Arab rulers did not object to Israel because it rendered the Arab/Palestinians homeless. Rather, they ensured that the Arab/Palestinians should remain homeless so that they could organize their politics around opposition to Israel. “At any point during the past 55 years, Arab governments could have helped the Arab/Palestinians settle down to a decent life. They could have created the infrastructure of an autonomous Arab/Palestine on the West Bank aka Judea and Samaria of the Jordan and the Gaza territory that Egypt controlled until 1967, or encouraged the resettlement of Arab/Palestinians in Jordan, many Arabs did relocate to Jordan, which constitutes the lion’s share of the original mandate of Palestine. Rather than fund the Arab/Palestine Liberation Organization to foment terror against Israel they could have endowed Arab/Palestinian schools of architecture, engineering, medicine and law. 

What Israel did for its million Jewish refugees from Arab lands, Arabs could have done much more sumptuously for the Arab/Palestinians displaced by the same conflict. Instead, Arab rulers cultivated generations of refugees in order to justify their ongoing campaign against the ‘usurper.’” 

The best kept secret The early founding fathers of modern Israel, even if they were not religious, were deeply steeped in the realization of the Jewish Biblical connection to the land. David Ben Gurion, for example, had an appreciation of the necessity of anchoring a modern, even secular Israeli state in biblical and Jewish tradition. Yet, tragically, this has changed dramatically in recent years. You will rarely, if ever, hear an Israeli leader state the truest and most moral justification for a Jewish presence in the Holy Land: G-d’s gift to the Jewish people. I am sure our leaders are trying to do the best for their country, but the practical consequences of this policy are counterproductive. 

Take the latest International Court of Justice (ICJ) recommended decision in Hague as an example. Much of the Jewish world is furious at the ICJ who reached a decision last week that Israel had a right to build a separation wall for self-defense only within its own national borders, not within the disputed territories. Build the wall as high as you like, the ICJ declared, but only inside Israel, not inside territory which has been annexed. 

Israeli leaders, sadly, did not present to the world an authentic response to this decision. Ariel Sharon declared, “We have a right for self defense.” The response of the ICJ was simple: “Great! So build a wall inside your own home; do not build it on Arab/Palestinian soil.” This pattern, in one form or another, has been repeating itself for years now. The Arabs are protesting against Israel, saying, “You have annexed our land; you are building settlements on our soil; you are intruding into our territories.” And Israel routinely responds: “Yes, you have the right to create on these territories an Arab/Palestinian state, but we have a right for self-defense.” 

The world, we know, has embraced the Arab point of view. Condemnation of Israel as an apartheid state has become the norm. Is this pure anti-Semitism? I do not think so. The world is sympathetic to the Arab propaganda against Israel, because Israel itself has embraced the Arab version of “truth.” 

Israel never refuted the core Arab claim that the territories liberated and captured in the 1967 war constitute ancient Jewish Palestinian land. Israel only states, that notwithstanding the questionable validity of the Arab claim, she has a right for self-defense. So the world says: “OK, so defend yourself in your territories, not in theirs.” 

This, I believe, remains Israel’s profoundest diplomatic and strategic error. In many of its actions, it treats the 1967 territories as though they belonged to Israel which is a fact of history; yet in its words, Israel agrees to the Arab claim that this is Arab/Palestinian land. So the world is confused: The Arab position is clear to all; the Israeli position is shrouded in mystery. Do they believe this land belongs to them or not? If yes, let them stop saying that they consent to create an Arab/Palestinian State there. If not, why do they still maintain a presence there? The Arabs are not confused. Israel is. And when Jews are confused about who they are and what they believe in, the world resents them. 

“You are the nation who heard G-d speak at Sinai; if you guys can’t speak moral truth, you must be up to something really devilish.” As long as the status of the entire country remains ambiguous, the terror campaign against Israel will, Heaven forbid, continue. The Arabs will view Israel’s moral and political ambiguity as a green-light to proceed with their aspiration to “liberate all of Palestine from the Zionist entity.” And the world will sympathize with this craving for statehood and freedom. Israel must stand up and put an end to the ambivalence around Jewish ownership of the land. Israel must state clearly that “There will be no more negotiations on even a single inch of the land of Israel. We have attempted to negotiate land for peace with our neighbors; we have offered them 98 percent of the territories and an independent Arab state side-by-side with our state. Yet they have reciprocated by sending suicide bombers to our pizza shops, cafés, supermarkets, schools, and private homes. They have blown to pieces hundreds of innocent Jewish men and women. They have stabed many Israelis and used cars to ram people. They consistently fire rockets at Israeli communities. One cannot give land to leaders who teach their followers to play soccer with Jewish skulls and who inculcate in their children’s hearts, from infancy onward, with venomous hatred toward the people of Israel.” 

Israel should allow anybody who wishes to depart for another country to do so. There are 22 Arab countries in the Middle East, and one tiny Jewish country, the size of New Jersey. Israel must reclaim its permanent sovereignty over all of the territories and crush every vestige of terror to oblivion. Jews should be encouraged to live in their entire homeland. This will save not only countless Jewish lives, but also scores of Arab lives. It will once and for all purge the region from continuous bloodshed and terror. 

This is not occupied territory. It is the land of Israel, given by G-d to the Jewish people. Let’s set the record clear: This is Jewish land, not Arab land. Let all Jews and people of moral standing unite and encourage Israel to bring life and peace to all good people in the region, Jew and Arab alike. 

Footnotes: 1) Deuteronomy chapter 2:2-6. All of the subsequent quotes are from this chapter. 2) Later on, Moses relates the story of the two kingdoms of Sichon and Og, located on the Eastern bank of the Jordan who, in response to Israel’s request for peace, declared war against Israel and were subsequently wiped out. 3) When paganism ruled, it was common to see human beings sacrificed to pagan gods. Child sacrifices were common rituals of the Canaanite Baal worshipers in ancient times. Moses warned the Jews a number of times that if they would leave the Canaanite tribes in their midst, they might begin to emulate their cruel and barbaric pagan practices. This indeed transpired. It was this practice of many Jews that caused the prophet Elijah, with G-d’s approval, to condemn and destroy 450 prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:6-40). Near Mount Carmel on the site of the ancient city of Meggido, archaeologists have discovered the remains of infants who, under the corrupt rule of the Israelite King Ahab and Queen Jezebel in the ninth century B.C.E., had been sacrificed in a temple of Ashtoreth, the goddess of Baal. In the eighth century B.C. the corrupt King Ahaz of ancient Israel sacrificed (by burning) his own son to the Canaanite god Molech (2 Kings 16:3). Not too long after Ahaz, another immoral monarch of Israel, King Manasseh, sacrificed his son (also by burning) in the Valley of Hinnon (2 Kings 21:6). And during the latter part of the seventh century B.C., the prophet Jeremiah condemned numerous Israelites for

STAKING OUT ISRAEL’S LAWFUL CLAIMS TO THE WEST BANK

Why the Jewish State has a superior case for sovereignty in Judea and Samaria than the Palestinians.

October 29, 2013

 

Ari Lieberman

 

0

Proponents of fairness and equity who have advocated against some of Israel’s most pernicious detractors have often advanced several well-reasoned arguments against further Israeli West Bank withdrawals and Palestinian statehood. Key among those arguments are that the Palestinian leadership is rejectionist, duplicitous, incites violence, is non-democratic and, in general, is not committed to a two-state solution recognizing Israel’s rights to exist within safe and secure boundaries. While all of these positions are accurate and by themselves would constitute sound reasoning to reject additional Israeli territorial concessions, there exits one reason above all others that favors the Israeli viewpoint; simply that Israel’s legal claims to the West Bank are far superior to those of the Palestinians’ under international law.

International laws are generally created by nations when entering into treaties with one another or more informally, through international custom.  General Assembly resolutions have no binding legal authority. In fact, the United Nations charter which spells out the powers of the General Assembly does not convey rule-making powers to that body.

Israel’s legal claims to the West Bank are rooted in the San Remo Conference of 1920, an international meeting of the post-World War I Allied Supreme Council. On July 24, 1922 the League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations and a body which, under its charter had the authority to enact international laws, confirmed decisions hammered out at San Remo and resolved to establish the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

The League’s preamble, adopting the principles enumerated in the Balfour Declaration, recognized the Jewish “historical connection” to the Land of Israel and resolved to help facilitate the establishment of a Jewish nation there. At the time, Palestine consisted of land east and west of the Jordan River, encompassing all of modern Israel, Judea & Samaria, Gaza and what is referred to today as Jordan. The League entrusted Britain with being the mandatory authority whose aim would be to facilitate Jewish immigration to Palestine and to act as trustee until an orderly transition could be made to full Jewish sovereignty.

Article 5 of the Mandate prohibited Britain from ceding or leasing any part of the mandate territory to a foreign power. However, in 1923, Britain acting in contravention of Article 5 did precisely that and despite Jewish protest, gifted Eastern Palestine to Emir Abdullah thus creating a new Arab entity called Emirate of Transjordan. In so doing, Britain ceded 76% of Palestine to Arab rule leaving a paltry 24% for a Jewish homeland.

In February 1947 Britain announced that it would unilaterally terminate its mandate thus setting the stage for UN intervention. Following Britain’s announcement, the UN sent a team of international observers, known as UNSCOP, to Palestine to investigate and suggest a blueprint for the future of the territory and its inhabitants. After completing its investigation, UNSCOP formulated a plan, based on demographic patterns that involved the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states on roughly a 50-50 basis. Jerusalem and its environs were to be designated international zones.

In November 1947, the UN adopted UNSCOP’s findings and voted in favor of the partition. The UN General Assembly’s partition plan was merely a suggestion and had no legal binding authority. The Jews accepted the partition plan and the Arabs flatly rejected it, setting the stage for the first Arab-Israeli War and an Arab invasion.

Had the Arab’s accepted the partition, international boundaries between Jewish and Arab states would have been established and the matter settled. In the absence of such a settlement, the only legal, binding authority was the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, which designated the whole of Palestine, including the West Bank, as the future Jewish homeland.

The first Arab-Israel War ended in 1949 and resulted in an Israeli victory and strategic defeat for the Arabs. Israel and Jordan negotiated a ceasefire agreement that was formalized into an armistice agreement. Neither side recognized armistice demarcation line as an official border. The agreement left Jordan in control of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, territory that it illegally seized during its land grab. Shortly thereafter, Jordan annexed these territories, an annexation not recognized internationally save for Britain (only with respect to the West Bank) and Pakistan.

The Jordanian occupation of the West Bank lasted for 19 years. During that time, there was not a single UN resolution condemning Jordan’s illegal occupation. While this fact alone does not buttress Israel’s legal position, it does lend credence to the notion that the General Assembly can hardly be considered an impartial body.

On May 22, 1967, Egypt, in violation of international maritime law, closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping. The act was accompanied by aggressive Egyptian military deployments, violations of Israeli airspace and genocidal rhetoric. On June 5, 1967 Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egypt, destroying the bulk of Egypt’s air force in under 3 hours.

Contrary to the realities taking place on the ground, Egypt’s Nasser convinced King Hussein of Jordan that Israel was reeling. Hussein, lulled into believing these false claims, ordered his army to attack Israel. Jordanian Hunter jets bombed Kfar Saba and Netanya while Jordanian artillery shelled Israeli population centers in West Jerusalem. Jordanian infantry then began to take up positions in the demilitarized zones. In response to Jordanian aggression, Israel counter-attacked, taking over East Jerusalem and the West Bank in a matter of days.

While the UN considers war and conquests therefrom to be illegal, Article 52 of the UN Charter provides an exception to the illegality of war in cases involving self-defense. Israel acquired the West Bank (territory illegally seized by Jordan in 1948) through defensive conquest. Since Israel had the legal right to defend itself against aggression, its territorial conquest resulting from a defensive war is legal and binding. There is not a single case in history where a nation was forced to relinquish territory it had acquired through defensive conquest.

Following the war, a Soviet sponsored resolution requiring Israel to withdraw from all the territories acquired during the war was rejected by the United Nations Security Council. Several additional drafts were submitted and rejected. The UNSC finally settled on Resolution 242 with a language formulation that deliberately omitted the word “all” and merely required Israel to withdraw from “territories occupied in the recent conflict.” The omission of the word “all” was extremely significant in that it provided implicit recognition to at least some of Israel’s territorial gains.

Israel has fully complied with Resolution 242 by virtue of its withdrawal from Sinai, Gaza, Kuneitra (in the Golan Heights) and some 40% of the West Bank. Thus Israel maintains a strong legal claim to the West Bank, superior to all other claims, based on the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, Resolution 242 and basic principles of International law.

Notwithstanding Israel’s valid legal claims, Israel has been widely condemned in various quarters for its “settlement” activity in the “occupied” territories. The strongest condemnations emerge from the EU and the Muslim world though the United States position has been more equivocal and has varied from administration to administration. The United States has in the past opposed settlement activity as a matter of policy but with some very minor exceptions, has refused to term such activity “illegal.”

President Ronald Reagan explicitly stated that settlements were “not illegal” a position reinforced by President George W. Bush who provided implicit recognition of the legitimacy of settlements when he noted that, “In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949…”

Those who condemn settlement activity rely on Article 49, Clause 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention which states that, “the Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”

As previously noted, the claim that Israel is an “Occupying Power” as defined in Article 49 is dubious at best. Israel maintains a valid, legal claim to the West Bank, far superior to those of the Palestinians or any other entity. But even if Israel was to be given the designation of “Occupying Power,” Article 49 would still be inapplicable.

Israel has not transferred or deported any part of its population into the West Bank. Individual Jews, with varied motivations, voluntarily moved into these territories. Moreover, many Israelis were born in the West Bank thus further highlighting the inapplicability of Article 49. Article 49 does not impose on Israel any duty to prevent its citizens from developing or moving into the West Bank.

Ambassador Morris Abram, a member of the U.S. staff at the Nuremburg Tribunal who was intimately involved with the drafting of the Fourth Geneva Convention, forcefully noted that Article 49(6) “was not designed to cover situations like Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, but rather the forcible transfer, deportation or resettlement of large numbers of people.” Other acclaimed and notable scholars such as Eugene V. Rostow, Dean of Yale Law School and former US Assistant Secretary of State, Stephen M. Schwebel, President of the International Court of Justice, Nicholas Rostow, university counsel and vice chancellor for legal affairs of the State University of New York, David M. Phillips, professor at Northeastern University School of Law and Fulbright Scholar and Professor Julius Stone, international lawyer and prolific author have voiced similar positions and have highlighted the absurdity of applying Article 49(6) in the context of Israeli settlements.

On July 9, 2012 a committee, headed by the respected former Israeli Supreme Court justice Edmond Levy, concluded that Israel’s presence in the West Bank was not an “occupation” within the meaning of Article 49 and that the settlements were not illegal. Recently, 1,000 jurists of various nationalities signed a petition supporting the findings and conclusions of the Levy Report and submitted it to the EU's foreign policy chief and one of Israel’s shrillest critics, Catherine Ashton.

It is unlikely that Ashton was moved by the petition but it is demonstrative of the wellspring of support that Israel maintains internationally and that in at least some circles, sanity still prevails. The settlement enterprise, inspired by the original Zionist ethos of building and developing the land will continue to be a source of controversy but from the perspective of international law, it is on rock-solid footing.