Inalienable rights of the Palestinian people

The right to self-determination without external interference; the right to national independence and sovereignty; the right of Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they had been displaced and uprooted.  General Assembly Resolution 3236 (XXIX).

Jerusalem

Jerusalem (Al-Quds in Arabic, Jerushalayim in Hebrew) is the site of the Western (Wailing) Wall, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and the Passion of Crucifixion; and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the first kibla and third holiest sanctuary of Islam. The City has been the object of conflicting claims by Jews and Palestinian Arabs, both peoples consider it the embodiment of their national essence and right to self-determination. The UN adopted in 1947 the Partition Plan for Palestine (Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947) which retained the unity of Jerusalem by providing for an international regime under UN control. That formula, however, did not materialize. With the all-out war between the two communities in 1948, which was joined by the neighboring Arab States, Jerusalem was placed at the heart of the conflict. The Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement of 1949 formalized the de facto division of the City into the eastern sector, including the Old City, controlled by Jordan, and the western sector, or the new City controlled by the new State of Israel.

The 1967 war, which resulted in the occupation by Israel of East Jerusalem, reopened the debate over the two competing claims. Israel, which annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, considers that "Jerusalem, whole and united, is the capital of Israel", and wants the City to "remain forever under Israel's sovereignty." It invested vast resources into changing the physical and demographic characteristics of the City. The Israeli claim has not been recognized by the international community which rejects the acquisition of territory by war and considers any changes on the ground illegal and invalid. On the other hand, the Palestinians have claimed East Jerusalem as the capital of a future independent State of Palestine to be established in the territories occupied since 1967. The status of the Holy Places has a special significance in that debate and proposals have been made for their internationalization. With the developments in the peace process since 1991, there is great concern that the evolving de facto situation on the ground should not prejudge the outcome of negotiations on the status of the City. (DPR Study - The Status of Jerusalem).

Refugees

In 1947, the United Nations proposed the partitioning of Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized (General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947). One of the two States envisaged in the partition plan proclaimed its independence as Israel and in the 1948 war it expanded to occupy 77 per cent of the territory of Palestine. 750,000 Palestinians, over half the indigenous population, fled or were expelled. In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control. The war brought a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at more than half a million. (DPR study: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem: 1917-1988)

General Assembly resolution 194 of 11 December 1948 states that: "...The refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors 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 and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible." 50 years later, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) continues to provide education, health care, relief assistance and social services to the 3.6 million Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, the Syrian Arab Republic, and the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Living standards in refugee communities remained poor throughout the area of operations, and were characterized in some fields by high unemployment, falling household income, overburdened infrastructure, and restrictions on employment and mobility. (Report of the Commissioner-General of UNRWA A/54/13)

Israeli settlements

The building of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory began soon after the 1967 War. That policy has accelerated since the beginning of 1990. The Israeli Government encourages settlers to make their homes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem. The establishment of Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has been the subject of various resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. For example, in its resolution 446 (1979) the Security Council determined that the Israeli policy and practice of establishing settlements had no legal validity and constituted a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. That position was reaffirmed  in Security Council resolution 465 (1980) which determined that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Tenth Emergency Special Session of the General Assembly in February 1999 recommended in an overwhelmingly adopted resolution the convening of a conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to enforce the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, and to ensure its respect in accordance with common article 1.

Water

In the region, characterized by an arid and semi-arid climate, scarce water is increasingly considered crucial for the welfare of its countries and peoples. The Occupied Palestinian Territory, especially the elevated areas of the West Bank, is endowed with an abundance of renewable water resources compared to the rest of the Middle East. However, Israel's severe restrictions on drilling for water, planting and irrigation placed on the Palestinians have maintained at a low level the amount of water made available to the Palestinian population. Israeli policies ensure that most of the water of the West Bank percolates underground to Israel and that Israeli settlers are provided with preferential access to water resources. As a consequence, a "man-made" water crisis undermines the living conditions of the Palestinian people. A comprehensive and fair allocation of the water resources of the Jordan River basin, West Bank aquifers and the Gaza aquifer remains to be negotiated by the relevant parties. Water is one of several issues which are being dealt with at the multilateral talks.

Why did the UN recommend the partition of Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state?

"By this time (November 1947), the United States had emerged as the most aggressive proponent of partition... The United States got the General Assembly to delay a vote to gain time to bring certain Latin American republics into line with its own views... Some delegates charged U.S. officials with diplomatic intimidation. `Without terrific pressure from the United States on governments which cannot afford to risk American reprisals', said an anonymous editorial writer, `the resolution would never have passed'."  John Quigley  "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice"

Was the Partition Plan fair?

"Arab rejection was based on the fact that, while the population of the Jewish state was to be (only half) Jewish with the Jews owning less than 10% of the Jewish state land area, the Jews were to be established as the ruling body - a settlement which no self-respecting people would accept without protest, to say the least... The action of the United Nations conflicted with the basic principles for which the world organization was established, namely, to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determination. By denying the Palestine Arabs, who formed the two-thirds majority of the country, the right to decide for themselves, the United Nations had violated its own charter."  Sami Hadawi  "Bitter Harvest"

"At Lausanne, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinians were trying to save by negotiations what they had lost in the war: 'A Palestinian state alongside Israel'. Israel, however, preferred tenuous armistice agreements to a definite peace that would involve territorial concessions and the repatriation of even a token number of refugees. The refusal to recognize the Palestinians' right to self-determination and statehood proved over the years to be the main source of the turbulence, violence, and bloodshed that came to pass."  Israeli author, Simha Flapan  "The Birth Of Israel"

Were the Zionists prepared to settle for the territory granted in the partition?

"While the Yishuv's leadership formally accepted the 1947 Partition Resolution, large sections of Israel's society, including Ben Gurion, were opposed to or extremely unhappy with partition and from early on viewed the war as an ideal opportunity to expand the new state's borders beyond the UN earmarked partition boundaries and at the expense of the Palestinians."  Israeli historian, Benny Morris, in "Tikkun, March/April 1998"

"The Lausanne conference officially opened on 27 April 1949. On 12 May the UN's Palestine Conciliation Committee reaped its only success when it induced the parties to sign a joint protocol on the framework for a comprehensive peace. Israel for the first time accepted the principle of repatriation of the Arab refugees and the internationalization of Jerusalem. But they did so as a mere exercise in public relations aimed at strengthening Israel's international image. Walter Eytan, the head of the Israeli delegation, stated: `My main purpose was to begin to undermine the protocol of 12 May, which we had signed only under duress of our struggle for admission to the U.N.  Refusal to sign would have immediately been reported to the Secretary General and the various governments".  Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe  "The Making of the Arab-Israel Conflict, 1947-1951"

Israel admitted to UN but then reneged on the conditions under which it was admitted

"The Preamble of this resolution of admission included a safeguarding clause as follows: `Recalling its resolution of 29 November 1947 (on partition) and 11 December 1948 (on reparation and compensation), and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the ad hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions, the General Assembly...decides to admit Israel into membership in the United Nations'...

...Here, it must be observed, is a condition and an undertaking to implement the resolutions mentioned. There was no question of such implementation being conditioned on the conclusion of peace on Israeli terms as the Israelis later claimed to justify their non-compliance."  Sami Hadawi  "Bitter Harvest"

U.N. Resolutions on "Right of Return"

"The first UN General Assembly resolution (194), affirming the right of Palestinians to return to their homes and property, was passed on December 11, 1948. It has been repassed no less than twenty-eight times since that first date. Whereas the moral and political right of a person to return to his place of uninterrupted residence is acknowledged everywhere, Israel has negated the possibility of return... and systematically and juridically made it impossible, on any grounds whatever, for the Arab Palestinian to return, be compensated for his property, or live in Israel as a citizen equal before the law with a Jewish Israeli."  Edward Said  "The Question of Palestine"

U.N. Resolutions on "Territories occupied in the 1967 war"

"Under the UN Charter there can lawfully be no territorial gains from war, even by a state acting in self-defense. The response of other states to Israel's occupation shows a virtually unanimous opinion that even if Israel's action was defensive, its retention of the West Bank and Gaza Strip was not... The General Assembly characterized Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as a denial of self determination and hence a 'serious and increasing threat to international peace and security'."  John Quigley  "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice"

U.N. Resolutions on "Jerusalem"

The Security Council Resolutions Condemn the Annexation of Jerusalem and Do Not recognize it as the Capital of Israel: The Israeli decision to make Jerusalem its permanent capital represented a sharp challenge to its international legitimacy, while at the same time contradicting all the international laws as well as the Security Council resolutions, especially resolution 250 and 253 in 1968, which nullified all the Israeli legislative and administrative activities that might change the condition of the city, specifically the buildings and the land. Moreover, this was emphasized in resolution 267 in 1969, which also nullified all of the Israeli legislative and administrative activities. Then there was resolution 465 in 1980, which asked Israel to remove all of the settlements in the occupied territories, including Eastern Jerusalem, and resolution 478 in 1980, which confirmed the two previous resolutions and asked all the Member countries not to transfer their diplomatic corps to Jerusalem. Finally, resolutions 672 and 673 in 1990 and resolution 904 in 1994, all of which considered Jerusalem an occupied territory and condemned all of the violent actions against the Palestinians, especially the massacre in the yard of Al-Aqsa Mosque in October of 1990.

U.N. Resolutions on "Jewish settlements in territories occupied in the 1967 war"

"The Geneva Convention requires an occupying power to change the existing order as little as possible during its tenure. One aspect of this obligation is that it must leave the territory to the people it finds there. It may not bring its own people to populate the territory. This prohibition is found in the convention's Article 49, which states, 'The occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies'."  John Quigley  "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice"

Irrespective of the passage of time

"Reiterating the permanent responsibility of the United Nations towards the question of Palestine until it is solved in all its aspects...

...Aware that Israel, the occupying Power, has not heeded the demands made in the resolutions of the tenth emergency special session and that it continues to carry out illegal actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in particular settlement activity, including the construction of the new Israeli settlement at Jebel Abu Ghneim, the building of other new settlements and the expansion of existing settlements, the construction of bypass roads and the confiscation of lands...

...Reaffirming that all illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, especially settlement activities and the practical results thereof, remain contrary to international law and cannot be recognized, irrespective of the passage of time."  The UN Resolution adopted by the General Assembly, "ES-10/6. Illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory"

U.N. Resolutions on "Torture"

"The U.N. Committee Against Torture reached an unequivocal conclusion: `The methods of interrogation, used in Israeli prisons, are in the Committee's view breaches of article 16 and also constitute torture as defined in article 1 of the Convention. As a State Party to the Convention Against Torture, Israel is precluded from raising before this Committee exceptional circumstances'. The prohibition on torture is, therefore, absolute, and no 'exceptional' circumstances may justify derogating from it."  Report from B'Tselem, The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, "Routine Torture: Interrogation Methods of the General Security Service"

U.N. Resolutions "Condemning Israel's use of force"

In an emergency session Friday 21 October 2000, the United Nations General Assembly approved 92-6 a resolution critical of Israel's role in the latest Middle East violence. Both the United States and Israel voted against the resolution, and 46 countries abstained. The resolution "condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force by the Israeli forces against Palestinian civilians." It also condemns Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, calling them "illegal" and an "obstacle to peace." The resolution also called for an "immediate cessation of violence and use of force" and a resumption of peace talks between the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships...

...Yehuda Lancry, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations, said the resolution was "useless," and that his country rejected the measure...

...Compared to a resolution adopted Thursday (20 October 2000)  in Geneva by the U.N.'s Commission on Human Rights, which fiercely condemned Israel for "crimes against humanity," the language of the General Assembly's resolution is mild. This is a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, which Israel has signed.