P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, our friend "Phoenall" is correct. To not recognize the right of the Arab Palestinian to take this action, would have been a "denial" of the right to self-determination. And none of the parties to the crisis wanted to be accused of that.
(COMMENT)Then what was Palestine in 1978?P F Tinmore, et al,
Where and in what context?
(COMMENT)The UN did say "in Palestine" so I assume they meant in Palestine.
What are you referring to in this context?
Remember, in 1978, the West Bank was sovereign Jordanian territory; under occupation.
v/r
R
Remember that the world did not recognize Jordan's annexation of the West Bank. It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
Pity that the world did recognise Jordans annexation of the west bank when the arab muslims accepted Jordanian rule and citizenship. In 1978 Palestine was the same as it had been for the last 2000 years or so just a place on the map much like the Pampas and the Steppes. It was not a nation in any form accepted by any other nation until 1988.
The Arab Palestinian people exercised their inalienable right to self-determination on the matter of annexation. It was they who accepted it annexation through parliamentary action.
History - The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion. SOURCE: Unification of the Two BanksCommunication concerning the annexation of the Arab part of Palestine to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
The PRINCIPAL SECRETARY reported that he had received, for purposes of information, from the Headquarters Secretariat of the United Nations, the full text of the resolution of the Jordan Parliament as approved by the King providing for the annexation of the Arab part of Palestine. The text which was defective in places, was the English translation of an Arab original.
The Commission, since it was in direct relation with the States of the Near East after noting Jordan’s decision, might think it opportune to write to the Jordan Government requesting official communication of the text in question.
The CHAIRMAN thought it would have been natural for the Jordan authorities to have sent the text in question to the Commission without having to be asked for it. In his view the text sent to the Secretary-General was intended for the Members of the United Nations. In those circumstances the Principal Secretary should he instructed to as for the text of the Jordan Parliament’s resolution, in order to emphasize the direct relations existing between the Commission and the Governments interested in the Palestine question. SOURCE: SUMMARY RECORD OF THE ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-EIGHTH MEETING Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on Friday, 28 April 1950, at 11 a.m.III. THE TERRITORIAL QUESTION --- UNITED NATIONS CONCILIATION COMMISSION FOR PALESTINE ---- THE PALESTINE CRISIS
Regardless of the reservations contained in the Armistice Agreements on the temporary character of the Armistice lines, it is certain that with the simple passage of time these lines are increasingly acquiring the validity and permanence of formal frontiers. This natural process is inevitable and has been considerably assisted by the two following events whose profound significance need not be underlined; the annexation of the greater part of Arab Palestine by Jordan, and the guarantee given to the Armistice lines by the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and France. SOURCE: A/AC.25/W/51 9 October 1950
The Arab Palestinian action on self-determination was never rejected by the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) OR the General Assembly.
Most Respectfully,
R
From your link:P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, our friend "Phoenall" is correct. To not recognize the right of the Arab Palestinian to take this action, would have been a "denial" of the right to self-determination. And none of the parties to the crisis wanted to be accused of that.
(COMMENT)Then what was Palestine in 1978?P F Tinmore, et al,
Where and in what context?
(COMMENT)The UN did say "in Palestine" so I assume they meant in Palestine.
What are you referring to in this context?
Remember, in 1978, the West Bank was sovereign Jordanian territory; under occupation.
v/r
R
Remember that the world did not recognize Jordan's annexation of the West Bank. It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
Pity that the world did recognise Jordans annexation of the west bank when the arab muslims accepted Jordanian rule and citizenship. In 1978 Palestine was the same as it had been for the last 2000 years or so just a place on the map much like the Pampas and the Steppes. It was not a nation in any form accepted by any other nation until 1988.
The Arab Palestinian people exercised their inalienable right to self-determination on the matter of annexation. It was they who accepted it annexation through parliamentary action.
History - The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion. SOURCE: Unification of the Two BanksCommunication concerning the annexation of the Arab part of Palestine to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
The PRINCIPAL SECRETARY reported that he had received, for purposes of information, from the Headquarters Secretariat of the United Nations, the full text of the resolution of the Jordan Parliament as approved by the King providing for the annexation of the Arab part of Palestine. The text which was defective in places, was the English translation of an Arab original.
The Commission, since it was in direct relation with the States of the Near East after noting Jordan’s decision, might think it opportune to write to the Jordan Government requesting official communication of the text in question.
The CHAIRMAN thought it would have been natural for the Jordan authorities to have sent the text in question to the Commission without having to be asked for it. In his view the text sent to the Secretary-General was intended for the Members of the United Nations. In those circumstances the Principal Secretary should he instructed to as for the text of the Jordan Parliament’s resolution, in order to emphasize the direct relations existing between the Commission and the Governments interested in the Palestine question. SOURCE: SUMMARY RECORD OF THE ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-EIGHTH MEETING Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on Friday, 28 April 1950, at 11 a.m.III. THE TERRITORIAL QUESTION --- UNITED NATIONS CONCILIATION COMMISSION FOR PALESTINE ---- THE PALESTINE CRISIS
Regardless of the reservations contained in the Armistice Agreements on the temporary character of the Armistice lines, it is certain that with the simple passage of time these lines are increasingly acquiring the validity and permanence of formal frontiers. This natural process is inevitable and has been considerably assisted by the two following events whose profound significance need not be underlined; the annexation of the greater part of Arab Palestine by Jordan, and the guarantee given to the Armistice lines by the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and France. SOURCE: A/AC.25/W/51 9 October 1950
The Arab Palestinian action on self-determination was never rejected by the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) OR the General Assembly.
Most Respectfully,
R
(a) The fact that the emotional trauma suffered by the Arab peoples as a result of the creation of the State of Israel in Palestine and the displacement of almost a million Arabs is still far being healed...
There is that pesky "in Palestine" thing again.
Why should the Palestinians accept a foreign state being created in Palestine?
Who else in the world would accept such a thing.
Give me some names.
Rocco, according to you:
Jordan occupied the West Bank in 1949 even though there was no war between Jordan and Palestine.
Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1950.
Israel won the West Bank from Jordan in 1967.
Now it is occupied Palestinian territory.
The thing about propaganda is that even though it makes no sense, some people still believe it.
India when it had two foreign states created on its land, Yugoslavia when it had a foreign state created on its land there you go 3 instances of this happening and in each case it was the muslims. Now why is it nothing is said about muslim states being created on non muslim land around the world, but let an indigenous people exercise their rights and declare independence on land they own and the muslims go ballistic.
You forget that the only Palestinians for nearly 2000 years were the Jews, the arab muslims called themselves Syrians. So the Jews have a perfect right to lay claim to the land and then invite those they want to come and settle there.
So what is your timeline of events in the west bank, and remember to include the reason why Jordan threw the Palestinians to the dogs ?