INTERNATIONAL LAW AND JERUSALEM

INTERNATIONAL LAW AND JERUSALEM

Tom's Perspectives

by Thomas Ice

The Bible teaches that God gave to the Jewish people the land of Israel.

This is repeated many times throughout the Bible. God’s viewpoint on this matter

is what ultimately matters since He will at some point in the future implement His

will. If God says something then that settles it, that decree will surely come to pass.

However, it is interesting to note that international law is and has always been on the

side of the reestablishment of the modern state of Israel. Furthermore, the law also

supports the claim that Jerusalem belongs to the Jews and that the Arabs have no

legitimate legal claim upon Judaism’s most holy location.

JACQUES PAUL GAUTHIER

Canadian lawyer Jacques Paul Gauthier recently finished a twenty-year

project in which this Gentile Christian researched at the University of Geneva

political science department and international law school, the legal issues relating to the

ownership of Israel and Jerusalem. Gauthier’s PhD thesis was completed in 2007 and is

entitled: “Sovereignty Over The Old City of Jerusalem.”1 Dr. Gauthier has

demonstrated in painstaking detail in his thesis of over 1,200 pages the following

conclusion: 

After our examination of the principles of international law pertaining to

belligerent occupation, we have concluded that Israel has the right to occupy

the territories under its control since 1967, including East Jerusalem and

its Old City, until a peace treaty is concluded.2

Since Gauthier’s publication was a PhD thesis, he had to painstakingly

document every opinion or conclusion with legal and historical facts. Had the

readers of his thesis not agreed with the information in his work they would not have accepted

Gauthier’s thesis. This means that Gauthier’s work is the most authoritative opinion

covering the international status of the old city of Jerusalem and the land of Israel.

So what is Dr. Gauthier’s argument?

GREAT BRITAIN’S ROLE

Gauthier notes that the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917 did not

have the status of international law, at least not when issued. However, it did

become the official policy of the British government that bound Great Britain to pursue the

founding of a future state of Israel and granting them self-determination. The United

Kingdom took the next step toward founding the Jewish state when General Allenby captured

Jerusalem on December 11, 1917 and then the rest of Palestine (Israel).

On January 3, 1919 Chaim Weizmann, who was the leader and representative

of the

Zionist Organization on behalf of the Jewish people, met with Emir Feisal,

who represented the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz. Included in an agreement that both

parties agreed upon was that the Jewish people should get the land west of the

Jordan River and that the old city of Jerusalem would be under Jewish control.

The Paris Peace Conference began on January 18, 1919 and lasted about six

months in which new borders were decided upon for parts of Europe and the Middle

East and were given the force of international law. The conference was made up of the

victorious Allied powers from World War I. The “Big Four” were made up of the

Page United States, Great Britain, France, and Italy. Lord Balfour represented

Britain. It was during the summer of 1919 that Arab opposition began to be voiced against

the Feisal-Weizmann agreement. As a result that aspect of the conference stalled and

was never agreed upon. Nevertheless, Balfour issued the following statement on

August 11, 1919:

“The four great powers are committed to Zionism. And Zionism be it right

or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age long traditions, in present needs in future

hopes of far profounder import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who

now inhabit that ancient land.”3 The Paris Peace Conference ended without a final

solution reached concerning the status of Palestine, even though there was much discussion

about the matter.

THE SAN REMO CONFERENCE

A meeting to deal specifically with the unfinished business of Palestine,

which was to be seen as an extension of the Paris Peace Conference was commenced on

April 19, 1920 in San Remo, Italy. It was attended by the four Principal Allied

Powers of World War I who were represented by the prime ministers of Britain (David Lloyd

George), France (Alexandre Millerand) and Italy (Francesco Nitti) and by Japan's

Ambassador K. Matsui. The San Remo Resolution adopted on April 25, 1920 incorporated the

Balfour Declaration of 1917 issued by the British government. The San Remo

resolution and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which was adopted at

the Paris Peace Conference on April 28, 1919, were the basic documents upon which

the British Mandate for the stewardship of Palestine was constructed. It was at San

Remo that the Balfour Declaration went from being just a statement of British foreign

policy to international law.

The British Mandate was fully implemented upon approval by the Council of the

League of Nations on September 22, 1922. However, when the parties left

San Remo in April 1919 the future state of Israel was to be made up of what now

constitutes the Kingdom of Jordan, as well as all the land West of the Jordan River. After

September 22, 1922 what is now the Kingdom of Jordan was taken away from Palestine and

became another Arab nation. This was the beginning of the trend still

operative today that Israel needs to give up more land in order to be promised peace. The

reality is that every time Israel gives up land, she experiences even less peace.

THE MANDATE

On July 1, 1920 the British military administration, which had controlled Palestine

since December 1917, was replaced by a British civil administration covering all of

Palestine on both sides of the Jordan River, with its headquarters in Jerusalem. The

Mandate instructed Great Britain that she would oversee Palestine with the

goal of the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine. At

the time of the issuance of the Mandate, it was believed that there were not enough Jews

in the land to establish a nation. Thus, Great Britain was to oversee the immigration of

Jews to the land and when there were enough then Palestine would become the national

homeland for the Jewish people. However, normally, Britain obstructed the goal of

developing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

As the League of Nations was dissolved in 1946, the United Nations, which was

founded in 1945, began to deal with the Palestine issue. The UN General Assembly

passed a Partition Resolution (Resolution 181) on November 29, 147. This UN

resolution adopted the necessary legal status from the League of Nations

needed for Israel to declare her independence on May 14, 1948. Under 181, the land of

 Palestine Page was partitioned and part of Palestine was given to the Arabs and the rest

was given to Israel, except Jerusalem was to become an international city. Gauthier

tells us, “The special international regime for the corpus separatum which was to be

established on or prior to October 1, 1948 was to remain in force for a period of ten years.

At the end of that period, ‘the residents of the City shall be . . . free to express by

means of a referendum their wishes as to possible modifications of the regime of the

City.’”4 The Arabs rejected resolution 181 and attacked the Jews resulting in a larger

land area for Israel when the fighting stopped in 1949. Israel’s war for independence

also prevented Jerusalem from becoming an international city. The promised election by

October 1959 to determine to whom Jerusalem belonged never took place. There is no

doubt that the city would have voted for Israel if an election had taken place. Thus, all

of the legal rights to the Old City of Jerusalem belong to Israel and the Jews.

CONCLUSION

Gauthier’s work, which I have only provided a glimpse into, demonstrates that both

the land of Israel and the Old City of Jerusalem belong to Israel and the Jews based

upon the standards of international law. When commentators appear on the media

today and start talking about how Israel is violating international law with their

occupation, they are absolutely without any basis in the truth. These advocates for the

Arab occupation of Jewish land have no legal basis to stand. However, that does not

seem to bother them since they are lawless and many hope through jihad to take over

Israel. Most of these spokesmen really do not care about the law, international or

otherwise.

The facts are that both the Bible and even international law says that the land of Israel and Jerusalem belong to the Jewish people. The fact that many within the international community know this information means nothing. Today the Gentile nations are in an uproar, while increasingly clamoring for the extermination of the nation and people of Israel. Yet, the hand of God’s providence has restored His people to their land while still primarily in unbelief. We increasingly see the lawless attitudes of the nations constantly on display as they certainly do not care about God’s Word, nor do they heed the clear mandates of man made international law. So it will be in the end, as at the beginning and throughout her history, that Israel will have to be saved by the actual hand of God as He interrupts history in order to save His people.

Today’s hatred toward Israel is just a warm-up for the real heat of the furnace of the

tribulation, from which God will redeem the nation of Israel through the coming of Messiah.

Since mankind does not recognize God and His law, nevertheless, He will impose it upon

humanity one day. Maranatha!

ENDNOTES

1 Jacques Paul Gauthier, “Sovereignty Over The Old City of Jerusalem: A Study of the Historical,

Religious, Political and Legal Aspects of the Question of the Old City,” PhD Thesis, University of Geneva International Law School, 2007).

2 Gauthier, “Sovereignty Over Jerusalem,” p. 848.

3 Cited by Gauthier, “Sovereignty Over Jerusalem,” p. 356 from Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919–1939, vol. IV, No. 242, p. 345. Page

4 Gauthier, “Sovereignty Over Jerusalem,” pp. 599–600. Citation by Gauthier is from Article D, Part III of the Partition Resolution.