How can we argue why Israel has the right to exist without using the Bible?
Let’s look at Israel’s right to exist outside of scripture.
The first declaration by a nation supporting a Jewish national home in the land then known as Palestine came in 1917 when British foreign secretary James Balfour wrote what would become known as the “Balfour Declaration”
This declaration committed Britain to a solemn pledge to help the Jewish people establish a national homeland.
This declaration just didn’t happen out of the blue, but is the result of 20 years of effort on the part of the Jewish people lead by Theodore Herzl, author of “The Jewish State” in 1896, leading to the Basel Conference in 1897 unifying the global Jewish movement of its day and thus establishing what we know today as Zionism.
Zionism = The dream of the Jewish people to return to what was then their former homeland.
After Herzl’s death, the mantle was passed on to Chaim Weizmann who would champion the Zionist cause and helped lobby Great Britain, resulting in the “Balfour Declaration”
The “Balfour Declaration” was introduced in 1917, during World War 1, which not only involved Europe but also the Middle East.
When the war ended the victorious nations convened in Paris in 1919 for the Peace Conference. The allied powers who met were:
· United Kingdom (Great Britain)
· United States
During this conference, Weizmann presented the following political claims, like a statement in a court of law…
1. Recognition of the Jewish people as a people by international law
2. Recognition of their historical connection to the land known as Palestine.
3. The right to reconstitute what they used to have.
Reconstitution refers to Israel’s prior connection to the land…to where Winston Churchill not only endorsed the “Balfour Declaration” but agreed history had attached the Jewish people to the land.
“It is manifestly right that the Jews who are scattered all over the world should have a national centre and a national home where some of them may be reunited. And where else could that be but in the land of Palestine, with which for more than 3000 years they have been intimately and profoundly associated”
Also at this conference, the Arabs through Faisal Hussein presented their claims.
· They were seeking legal standing as well.
· Asking for their right to establish an independent Arab state
Each presented their political claims to the Supreme Council of the Principal Allied Powers.
These five nations had the legal power of disposition after the war. They were the key victorious nations who had legal title by way of peace treaties. Because of their authority, they were able to transfer that authority to others, thus being able to establish the right of territorial sovereignty for which the Jews and Arabs each made their claims.
One of the cornerstones associated with deciding the transfer of sovereignty was found in the Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations…
Since the war had destroyed what was the Ottoman Empire, the League adopted a mandate system that would put them (Ottoman) under the tutelage of more advanced nations. What they called big brother helping little brother
By the end of the Paris conference in 1919 the claims made by the Jews and Arabs had not been addressed. Those claims would wait until the following year in Italy at San Remo.
Again the Representatives listened to each one’s claims.
The final answer – they said yes to both sets of claims.
They agreed with the claims of the Jewish people as well as the Arab people.
Prior to San Remo, the “Balfour Declaration” carried political weight, but did not have international legal authority. Now in 1920 it obtained both.
Weizmann stated: “This is the most momentous political event in the whole history of our Zionist movement.
What the San Remo resolution did was enact the “Balfour Declaration” as part of the law of the nations of the world.
Great Britain and France would undertake the mandates that Article 22 stipulated. There were a total of three:
1. France would oversee the Syrian mandate (which would include what is today Lebanon)
2. Great Britain would oversee the mandates of Iraq and Palestine
The initial mandate for Palestine included territory on both sides of the Jordan River. However, to settle a dispute between the French and British, Churchill at the Cairo Conference in 1921 gave Trans-Jordan to Faisal Hussein.
This decision eliminated more than 3/4 of the territory originally given to the Jewish homeland and ended up creating an additional Arab state in the region.
Under Article 6, the following was stated…keep this in mind regarding today’s climate:
“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage in co-operation with the Jewish agency…
Article 6 encourages settlements. Quite a contrast to the views being expressed today. Today, settlements are viewed as illegal, because of the view that Israel’s right to exist and develop the land for its people is not real and legitimate.
Article 6 further conveys – “not only do the Jews have the right to establish settlements, but that the world has the obligation to help them settle.
The “San Remo Resolution” was internationally ratified on July 24, 1922 by the League of Nations, the predecessor to the United Nations. A total of 51 nations would ratify the resolution that included the following:
“Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”
Six days later, the United States House of Congress unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine”
What did the Arabs receive?
Basically they received the rest of the Middle East as we know it today…
· Syria that would include Lebanon
· All of Mesopotamia
· All of Arabia
Yet, James Balfour makes this statement:
“Why are you complaining? You are getting all these lands and we are granting a niche.
What is interesting, in the Resolution, there were no national or political rights granted to the local Arabs or the Arabs who resided in Palestine. Those rights were granted to the Jewish people exclusively.
Then there is the question of Articles 181 and 242 dealing with the partition plan of 1947 and redefined borders of 1967. Under Article 80 of the UN Charter, it states that all previous obligations enacted by the League of Nations would be preserved.
All this proves the right of Israel, without mentioning the Bible!