Making the case

Sir, – Michael Freund’s “Making the case for Judea and Samaria” (Fundamentally Freund, February 19) shows that making such a case for our presence in Judea and Samaria is clear and just. But it is hard to understand his accusations as to why our diplomats abroad have failed. My gut feeling is that our foreign service is made up of people who are simply not doing their jobs and should be replaced by those who believe in what they are doing.

Freund reports on our historical and cultural rights but neglects one important item – the Levi Report, which clearly lays out our legal claims to Judea and Samaria. My perusal of Israeli newspapers, including

The Jerusalem Post, shows a lack of attention to this report. Should it not be displayed around the world to those who are confused about our legal history in the Land of Israel? MICHAEL TAL Jerusalem

Sir, – It is a disgrace that The Jerusalem Post continues to publish columns by writers who refer to Israel’s “occupation” of the “West Bank,” specifically Jonathan Rosen, who in “Netanyahu’s Palestinian predicament” (Inside Out, February 14) mentioned Israel’s “occupation” of Judea and Samaria no fewer than four times.

Does Rosen have any legal expertise or qualifications to say with certainty that these areas are under “occupation?”

Occupation is a legal term under international law, defined in Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations, which occurs in wartime when the army of one country assumes effective authority that it exercises over the territory of another country. Furthermore, Article 43 of the regulations requires that the country whose territory is being occupied to be “the legitimate power” or, in the original French, pouvoir légal.

It is a well-established fact that under international law Jordan was never the “legitimate or lawful power” over Judea and Samaria. These areas were part of the Jewish national home; thus, no “occupation” by Israel ever occurred in the 1967 Six Day War, in which Judea and Samaria were legally restored to the Jewish people, as originally intended in various documents of international law approved and ratified between 1919 and 1925.

Has Rosen never heard of the Levy Report, compiled by three distinguished jurists who determined that no such occupation exists under international law? Is he not aware of the 1920 Franco-British Boundary Convention, which assigned the so-called “West Bank” to be part of the future independent Jewish state? Is he not aware of the San Remo Resolution, which assigned all of Mandated Palestine to the Jewish people, including the so-called “West Bank?” HOWARD GRIEF Jerusalem The writer is the author of The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law