Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Interesting post by Volokh's Bernstein:
On a more personal level, I've had a few email conversations with Volokh Conspiracy readers along the following lines:
Reader: Israel is illegitimate because it violated international law by not allowing Palestinians who fled Israel during the War of Independence to return.
Me: I'm not an expert on international law, but I do know something about Israeli history. There is no practical way Israel could have permitted the return of most of these refugees. First, the Palestinian and broader Arab leadership remained committed after the war to Israel's destruction. The Arab community within Israel's border had participated in the war against Israel. The immediate result of allowing hundreds of thousands of generally hostile Arabs back into Israel (which had well less than a million Jewish residents at its founding) would have been constant intercommunal violence and ultimately another war. You can't expect Israel to have committed national suicide...
Much more, including long discussion thread, here. (via Instapundit)
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Cult of International Law.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.solomonia.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-renamedtb.cgi/6457
4 Comments
Leave a comment to: The Cult of International Law
Comment Info and Policy:
1) You must have Javascript enabled in your browser in order to comment (blame the spammers). If you don't know what that is, you're probably fine.
2) HTML is on, so basic html should work. Raw links will be made auto-clickable, too, so even if you don't know html you can just paste in the link and it should work fine. Keep the "http://" in it.
3) Comments are generally unmoderated, which means I don't necessarily agree with the tone and tenor of everything posted. In fact, sometimes people post things they don't really mean just to make other people look bad. The internet is an anonymous place for the most part. That said...
4) I welcome you to post here. I'd love to have your input, agree, disagree or just offer a different data point, really. If I didn't want any participation, I'd turn off comments. Be aware, however, that this blog and the comments section exist for my entertainment. Therefore, I reserve ALL RIGHTS here, including the right to remove any or all comments on nothing more than a whim. Please don't even bother complaining. I'm the one providing the space and the free news and thought buffet. I don't owe anyone anything.
Anyone who posts here will be treated as my guest. That means I'm happy to be polite as a default, but if anyone is rude to the host they'll be unceremoniously shown the door.
It may pay to recall a famous line from the Tom Selleck magnum opus, Mr. Baseball: "Jack-san, you want Yoji's advice about the babes, you come to Yoji with respect."
5) Enjoy your stay!
I'm having trouble getting onto the Volokh discussion, but I just wanted to make this point: what law are we talking about here? Unless we are told what law has allegedly been broken, we shouldn't accept assertions that this or that action is against international law. As far as I know, the crucial thing here is Security Council Resolution 194, itself a recommendation and not a binding resolution, which resolves that "the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return....
Mistake in above post: General Assembly resolution 194, not Security Coundil resolution 194, so no binding force at all (and even then it's unclear what it means in practice)
http://www.defenddemocracy.org//in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=245738
For a discussion thread of, I assume, mostly lawyers it was disappointing because of the lack of contextual facts.
The history of Turkish rule and the forced introduction of "newly "converted" to Islam Eastern Europeans" to the region; the British bringing in Syrians and Egyptians for the ports and other labor.
Sinai only became part of Egypt in the 1920s.
It's amazing that people will discuss UN and resolutions against Israel but ignore its negative impact on Palestinians:
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&x_article=960
"Why do Palestinians in Gaza still live in refugee camps? Did the Israelis force Palestinians to stay in the squalid, overcrowded camps?
Palestinians still live in refugee camps, even when the camps are in Palestinian Authority controlled areas, because the PLO opposes and prevents refugee resettlement. As the PLO slogan goes, A Palestinian refugee never moves out of his camp except to return home (ie, to Israel). "
"What is perhaps surprising is that the United Nations also opposed the program, and passed harsh resolutions demanding that Israel remove the Palestinians from their new homes and return them to the squalid camps. For example, UN General Assembly Resolution 31/15 of Nov. 23, 1976: ..."
"Similarly, UNGA Resolution 34/52 of November 23, 1979 declared that: ..."
Read the complete post because it points out UN machinations.
Maybe Volokh should read this link.