Page 30 - SAN REMO 100 - BOOKLET-08-04-20-Inner Pages-MB.indd

B. San Remo and “Settlements”

oday well over half a million Convention 1949 (“FGC”), which – the establishment of a Jewish
TIsraeli Jews live “outside the prohibits the deportation or transfer homeland – the Mandate required
Green Line”: about 460,000 in by an “Occupying Power” of parts Britain to allow Jews to immigrate
Judea and Samaria (the so-called of its own civilian population into and settle the land. Article 6
“West Bank”), and more than the “occupied territory”. The “West provides:
200,000 in East Jerusalem. They Bank” and “East Jerusalem” are
have gone to live there since 1967. considered to have been “occupied” “The Administration of Palestine […]
All Israelis living in these territories by Israel since it took control of shall facilitate Jewish immigration
are referred to today as “settlers”, them from Jordan in the Six-Day under suitable conditions and shall
and their homes, communities War in June 1967. Since then, it is encourage […] close settlement by
and related infrastructure as alleged, Israel has adopted policies Jews on the land, including State
“settlements”. There are about 2.8 and practices that have encouraged lands and waste lands not required
million Palestinians in this same and facilitated Israelis to move into for public purposes.”
area.

The International Court of Justice
concluded in July 2004 that Israeli
settlements “have been established
in breach of international
law”. The UN Security Council
(Resolution 2334) considers that
the establishment of settlements
“constitutes a flagrant violation
under international law and a major
obstacle to the achievement of the those territories – which, in turn, is Such settlement was evidently
two-State solution and a just, lasting said to infringe Article 49 FGC. not considered an infringement of
and comprehensive peace”. But this view overlooks the Palestinian civil and religious rights,
possibility that San Remo could still protected by the Mandate. And the
Illegal Settlements? be relevant today. drafters of the San Remo Resolution
Why are Israeli settlements and the Mandate clearly intended
considered illegal? It is said that Legal Jewish Settlement Jews to “settle” in all of Palestine
their establishment infringes In order to implement the San – including Jerusalem, Judea and
article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Remo Resolution’s core objective Samaria.

28 SAN REMO 100