The US has already made clear its position for Israeli sovereignty in the Occupied Territories and the Jordan Valley • But for us, in a continuous process, some of the judicial system's officials insist on sticking the wheels
Before applying Israeli sovereignty to parts of Judea and Samaria, the landmine who stands on the road should be heeded, lest it move. This is the click of jurors at the top of the Israeli judicial system, which harms its members the government's authority to define the state's position with regard to Judea and Samaria.
Decide which position represents Israel. The settlement of me in Samaria // Photo: Miriam Tzahi
Since 1967, the State of Israel has been diminishing its access to this field, avoiding any waiver of its just and legal rights to sovereignty. Israel managed the territory through military rule and even undertook to control it according to the art of Geneva and the Hague. However, as the Chief Military Advocate in the Six Day War, Meir Shamgar, made clear, the state did so as a courtesy and not out of legal obligation. Israel, in fact, insisted that its control of Judea and Samaria was not, as defined in international law, a "belligerent concept," and there were many reasons for this position - the acquisition of Israel's territorial sovereignty in 1948 under the mandate, the illegality of the Jordanian occupation, the peace treaty with Jordan who ended the war situation and more.
But then came Judge Aaron Barak. In a 2004 ruling in the Beit Sourik High Court, Barak erased the state's position without blasphemy. In the first section he wrote: "Since 1967, Israel has held belligerent occupation in the territories of Judea and Samaria." In fact, he supported the state's position regarding the legality of the separation fence. His unsubstantiated and unthinkable determination passed relatively quietly.
Games played by Israeli opponents
In the years since, the State Attorney's Office and the State Attorney's Office have continued in lightning. One of the leaders of Israel's sovereign rights in Judea and Samaria is the Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit. In 2017, during discussions on the passage of the law governing the legal status of Jewish settlement built outside declared state land, Mandelblit issued a brief opinion in which he incorrectly argued that the bill violated international law. He even stated that, if enacted, this would put Israel at risk of lawsuits from international parties such as the EU. Mandelblit's stance has damaged Israel's international standing when government spokesmen and foreign organizations took advantage of it to attack the Knesset.
Last year, Mandelblit headed a work team drafting a position paper on the ICC's authority to prosecute Israelis for alleged war crimes in Judea and Samaria. Contrary to the government's position that Israel has sovereign rights in Judea and Samaria, the Attorney General has coined a new term - which has no grip on international law - according to which there is a state of "delayed sovereignty" in Judea and Samaria. This strange position has already been used by the ICC prosecutor to justify prosecuting Israelis.
In their actions, Israeli judicial officials have for many years been striving against Israel's sovereign rights in Judea and Samaria, without support for international law and contrary to the position of all Israeli governments since 1967.
In the coming months, this independent activity that Mendelblit and his people - supposedly - as representatives of the State of Israel may not only hurt and even thwart the government's intention to apply sovereignty in Judea and Samaria in accordance with the American government's plan and thus harm national interest - could also seriously harm Israeli-Israeli relations. B.
Precedent recognition
In November of last year, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the administration was renouncing the Obama administration's stance that Israeli settlement in Judea and Samaria was illegal. In a New York Post article published Tuesday by US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, he reiterated this position and made it clear that applying sovereignty is not against international law.
Furthermore, in an interview with him in this issue, Friedman makes it clear that the US is ready to recognize Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria according to the Trump outline in a very short time frame. The fervor with which the ambassador speaks shows how Americans want to see the move perfect, and soon, as part of implementing the Trump plan.
You can understand this position. Friedman published his article in The New York Post in response to an article published two weeks ago by Obama administration officials - Philip Gordon and Robert Mally. The latter strongly attacked the Trump program and called on Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to prevent Israel from applying its sovereignty, in part by announcing a government he would not recognize during Israel, hurting US military aid in the Middle East, and supporting anti-Israeli decisions in the Haitian Security Council Among the lines, it is a call for Biden to adopt unequivocal anti-Israeli policies during the election campaign, in part to influence the Israeli government's conduct in a way that would undermine Trump's policies.
Here is the place to highlight how innovative Trump's policy is towards Judea and Samaria. When Israel united Jerusalem immediately after the Six-Day War, applying Israeli law in all areas of the United States, as well as applying Israeli law at the Golan Heights in 1981, it worked with very friendly American governments. Still, both the Johnson administration in 1967 and the Reagan administration in 1981 refused to acknowledge its sovereignty and even condemned it against the UN Security Council. Today, not only does the Trump administration not oppose Israeli law in the Occupied Territories and the Jordan Valley, it encourages Israel Implement it and be ready and interested in recognizing it in a short period of time.
If the judicial elite in Jerusalem works to prevent the implementation of Israeli law in these areas, not only does it prejudice the country's first-rate strategic interest, it will severely damage Israel's international status and greatly weaken the alliance with the United States.
Democrats will understand that they can hurt Israel and its supporters in America without paying a price, and the current administration, as well as Israeli supporters in general, will conclude that it is not a reliable ally.
In the face of this situation, and before Mendelblit and his friends act to thwart the application of sovereignty, the government must officially announce that the USSR's position on Israel's sovereign rights in the Occupied Territories - if it does so and indeed adopts such a position - is incorrect and does not reflect its own position. Yes, the government should make it clear to the State Attorney's Office that its people represent the government's position that Israel does not hold Judea and Samaria by virtue of a belligerent concept but by a sovereign right in accordance with international law.If the prosecutors present a different position before legal courts, the government should renounce this representation.
For more views of Carolyn Glick