The UN's Paradox: Fighting to Abandon Palestinians
The Fight to Keep UNRWA Alive Moves to the ICJ
Nothing says 'neutrality' more than the United Nations asking the United Nations 'Legal' body to provide an 'opinion' on the 'legal obligations' of Israel to allow their terrorist-linked United Nations agency to continue its operations.
Yesterday, the General Assembly, led by Norway, passed yet another resolution against Israel, requesting the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to weigh in on "Israel's obligations" to allow UNRWA to continue its operations — operations that include indoctrinating children and providing facilities to Hamas.
This was due to the fact that last month, Israel passed legislation that would prevent UNRWA from operating inside Israel, which essentially only applies to a handful of schools in East Jerusalem. UNRWA has a separate agreement with the Palestinian Authority to operate in the territories under its own administration, Areas A and B of Judea and Samaria, and, in theory, Gaza. Let’s also not forget that UNRWA operates in Israel by invitation. Israel is under no legal obligation to work with this agency, which even has a cancellation clause.
Norway’s role in this disgraceful act of international hypocrisy is particularly galling. How dare Norway, a country that has played a role in facilitating the Oslo Accords, question who should be providing services to Arab Palestinians, especially when the Oslo Accords make it crystal clear: Israel has no such obligation, the accords clearly state such services should be transferred to the Palestinian Authority.
Norway’s continued disregard for the Oslo Accords is also evident in its stance regarding the ICC arrest warrants against Israeli leaders. The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, as stipulated not only by the Rome Statute but also by the Oslo Accords, yet Norway saw it fit to state the Oslo Accords articles of jurisdiction shouldn’t apply.
So, why is the UN so obsessed with keeping a terror-laden agency alive? Why are they more concerned about the survival of UNRWA than the lives of the people it claims to serve? UNRWA’s real agenda is to be to keep Arab Palestinians in a perpetual state of dependency rather than solving their problems. The agency is not interested in helping people, we know that by now. After all, why would they, when they receive billions in funding without the need to solve anything?
Arab Palestinians are in fact abandoned, while the UN continues its circus of diplomatic terrorism against Israel. Since Norway and the international community want the ICJ to provide an “opinion,” and we all know that the obsession with UNRWA is not about providing humanitarian services, it is important to note that the UN already has over 20 agencies operating in Gaza who are able to provide. In fact Sweden already announced it will no longer be funding UNRWA, and will be giving the money to other agencies. Proving if the issue is humanitarian, there are enough agencies available to do the job. These agencies have stated they are willing and able to help.
As the ICJ soon examines Israel's obligations, I want to discuss the “Legal Obligations of the United Nations and the Arab States.”
Today, I want to go back to the beginning—not the start of UNRWA’s creation, but the start of the end of the Israeli War of Independence. I want to talk about the "United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine," which was created in December 1948 to facilitate the implementation of General Assembly Resolution 194, passed on December 11, 1948, as part of the same resolution.
The UNCCP is one of the lesser known UN bodies. The UNCCP's primary function is to assist the governments and authorities concerned to reach a final settlement of all outstanding questions between them (Israel and other countries). This is to be done through negotiations conducted either with the Conciliation Commission or directly between the parties, (Arab Countries and Israel). The commission has not done anything for about 60 years, but their mandate is still valid since it was created as part of Resolution 194, the same resolution that created the right of return.
The General Assembly also gave the UNCCP three specific directives:
1. Holy Places should be protected and access to them assured.
The UN failed and Jordan broke international law and UN resolution 194, Jews were not allowed to enter the holy sites under the control of Jordan and Egypt for nearly 20 years, not mention how Arabs destroyed many Jewish Holy Sites and Synagogues. Not a single resolution was ever drafted.
2. Jerusalem should be placed under effective United Nations control. The assembly instructed the commission to formulate proposals for an international regime in Jerusalem including surrounding villages and towns.
The only case in history where the United Nations wants to be in charge of any region in the world, and also administer its people, why? Even on the Partition Plan, this was their idea. More on that at a later time..
3. Refugees wishing to return to their homes should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and the responsible governments or authorities should compensate the refugees for the loss of or damage to their properties as a result of the war. The assembly instructed the commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement, economic and social rehabilitation, and payment of compensation to the refugees.
Based on this parameters, lets examine who is legally obligated to do what.
The UN Resolution states two things, right of return and compensation for losses, the commission was tasked to facilitate such matters.
The right of return specified in the resolution has two key elements, one “wishing to return”, meaning refugees had a choice not to return and move on with their life. Number two: It was not unique to Arab Palestinians, it spoke of “refugees”, that includes Jews.
”Refugees wishing to return to their homes should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date”
Why is this important, at the time in 1949:
There was zero conversation about establishing a “Palestinian State” in the territories illegally occupied by Jordan and Egypt as we know.
All conversations were between Arab States and Israel.
Of course also they had no intention to return those territories to Israel, the only emerging state after the end of the British Mandate.
Much less allow the thousands of Jews who were displaced to return to their homes in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and Gaza.
Now lets talk about the holy “Right of Return”
UN Resolution did not say “Arab Refugees”, it spoke of “Refugees”, per the UN resolution 194, the right of return applies to Jews as well.
All original documents from 1948 from the UN speak of around 330,000 Arab refugees and 10,000 Jewish Refugees. Not 700,000 or 650,000 or 750,00 or 800,000 as it is now said. They can’t even make up their mind on the number now.
If we want to speak about “Right of Return” as some legal obligation that applies to Israel, it must include the Jews, the nearly 10,000 Jews ethnically cleansed by Jordan and Egypt
Since the conversations was between Israel and Arab Countries, the right of return also applies to the nearly one million Jews displaced from the entire Muslim world, at the very least the involved countries in the 1948 war (Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Yemen)
Expelling and persecuting your own citizens because another country was created, is a direct result of the war. Meaning, included in the “Right of Return”.
But lets ignore the Jews, lets focus on the Arab Palestinians. Jews moved on, not with the help of the UN, in that regards the commission failed the Jews, part of their mandate was assist in resettling people. Lets not forget, by this point UNRWA did not exist.
So who was helping refugees at this point? The UNHCR did not exist at the time.
UNRWA replaced another agency tasked with making sure people did not starve to death. We know UNRWA does not have the mandate to resettle people, the agency it replaced also did not. The UNHCR, excluded those under the mandate of UNRWA, also not having the mandate to resettle them, for as long as UNRWA exists.
1950 UNHCR Statute, Section 7C: “Refugees receiving protection or assistance from other UN organs or agencies are outside UNHCR’s remit".”
1951 Refugee Convention, Article 1D: “If such protection or assistance ceases, those refugees are automatically entitled to the benefits of the Convention.”
If UNRWA were to cease functioning, these clauses would become void, and Palestinians would fall under UNHCR’s mandate. Which means, only the UNCCP has the mandate and is responsible for resettling Arab Palestinians.
Now that we know the UN has someone with the mandate to resettle people. Why is everyone ignoring such commission exists?
The second important aspect of UN Resolution 194 paragraph 11 of right of return was for those affected, it required the RESPONSIBLE party to compensate those affected.
“…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”
The UNCCP mandate is to facilitate such payments, they can go speak to the Arab countries who started the 1948 war, legally they are responsible to compensate for the loss of property and damages caused, not just to Palestinians but legally to Jews too.
Now lets speak about UNRWA, while everyone believes getting rid of UNRWA will affect “The Right of Return”, that right doesn’t come from UNRWA, as we mentioned, it originates from UN General Assembly Resolution 194, a resolution passed before the establishment of UNRWA. The only link between the “Right of Return” and UNRWA people mistakenly make, is the definition given to “Refugees”, something that happened at much later point. The definition was added as part of the documents of UNRWA once it was created, not as part of the resolution that created the agency.
Why is this important, legally, you can’t create laws and try to apply them retroactively against someone or in this case a state. UNRWA was established by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 302 (IV) of 8 December 1949, an entire year after UNGA Resolution 194, which gave the holy “Right of Return”.
In addition, the resolution that created UNRWA also specifies it’s creation is not linked to UNGA Resolution 194’s “Right of Return.” This means, whatever UNRWA’s definition of “Refugee” is, would not legally apply to the right of return anyways.
Paragraph 5 of UNGA 302 (IV) - “Recognizes that, without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 11 of General Assembly resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, continued assistance for the relief of the Palestine refugees is necessary to prevent conditions of starvation and distress among them and to further conditions of peace and stability, and that constructive measures should be undertaken at an early date with a view to the termination of international assistance for relief; - UN General Assembly Resolutions: Resolution 302(IV), December 8, 1949
Paragraph 5 of UNGA 302 (IV) has various key legal elements on the legal obligations of the UN and UNRWA, none related to protecting any “Right of Return”, since clearly stated by the resolution that created UNRWA, those two things are not linked together “without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 11 of General Assembly resolution 194 (III)”. “Without prejudice” are the key words. Bottom line, not linked.
Obligation of UNRWA under the resolution that created it:
“further conditions of peace and stability”
“Constructive measures should be undertaken at an early date with a view to the termination of international assistance for relief”
Both UNRWA and the UN are obligated to take measures to end UNRWA's existence. Creating "refugees" simply because they are born, while also indoctrinating children, does nothing to foster peace and stability or are measures to terminate the need of assistance. Both UNRWA and the UN have failed in fulfilling their legal obligations under Paragraph 5 of the resolution.
The very resolution that created UNRWA, mandates UNRWA to self-destruct. It is time it implements it, in accordance with the UN Resolution.
It is the legal obligation of the United Nations to facilitate UNRWA’s destruction.
UNCCP has the mandate to resettle Arab Palestinians.
UNCCP needs to make sure Arab countries compensate EVERYONE (Arab Palestinians and Jews).
