The Palestinian in Old Free Palestine, the Hebrew and Aramaic speaking people declared by the Roman Empire in the Biblical Holy Land, having Jewish character, escapes the fate of the Arabic-speaking post-1948 Palestinian who may end up like the Philistinian in history!
Commentary And Analysis . . . The writing, based purely on the rule of law and Philistinian, has long been on the wall for the post-1948 Palestinian in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
Briefly, the Arabic speaking communities in the two territories, being mostly Muslim, may only grudgingly accept the rule of law and multiparty elections, but reject human rights of the individual and international law.
Settling disputes based on law was about the rule of law. Disputes can be settled out of court, without prejudice, but rights would be reserved i.e. whether turn up in the court of law or start war.
Opinion isn’t law. Only the court can declare law.
The court of law isn’t about ethics, moral values, civilisational values, theology, sin, God, righteousness, justice or truth.
The court of law was only about law.
There’s law, no law, no law but there can be law but not retrospectively, and where there can be no law.
No law, no crime.
There must be law before there can be crime.
Nullum crimen sine lege (no crime without law) and nullum crimen poena sine lege (there must be law before punishment).
The court of law was about bringing closure on issues in conflict between parties in dispute. There must be finality in litigation for closure.
The nature of human relationships, if it needs regulating, can be done by the rule of law, out of court settlements, or by other approaches including war i.e. the continuation of politics by other means.
Eventually, all wars would be settled at the negotiation table. No war can go on forever.
Islam only accepts human rights of the collective. After 1948, only the Arabic speaking communities in the Biblical Holy Land call themselves Palestinian.
There’s no Palestinian language.
There has never been Palestine nation-state in history.
Jew in Israel speak Hebrew which is the language of the Jewish Bible, or Torah, on Judaism. There’s Jewish character based on religion and culture.
Jew, before 1948, were also known as Palestinian, an administrative term in misnomer codified by the Roman Empire by misinterpreting old Greek usage for the Philistinian who have since vanished in history. The Romans wanted to avoid using terms like Israel, Judah and others linked with the 12 Jewish tribes, after exiling them from the Biblical Holy Land.
At that time, there were no Arabic speakers in the Biblical Holy Land, but there were Bedouin nomadic people who spoke their own dialect until Islam came with the Quran in Arabic. Originally, Arabic had no written form. So, the Quran first appeared in Aramaic which was widely spoken in the Biblical Holy Land along with Hebrew. Jesus, for example, spoke mostly in Aramaic which was his mother tongue.
Human rights, i.e. of the individual, remains the basis of international law. There’s no human rights of the collective, in international law, although the court of law may accept class action suit. There must be locus standi and special circumstances.
The Palestinian leaders, last elected in 2005 (presidential) and 2006 (legislative) may have even rejected the idea of renewing the mandate every five years. We stand corrected.
Israel, being about Jewish character, has publicly taken position in international law, on Palestinian leaders remaining unelected for decades. The Arabic speaking leaders, the Tel Aviv government has stressed, have no legitimacy since there’s no consent of the governed. Hence, in Israel’s view and in law, the Palestinian leaders can’t be partners for peace and may be headed in the same direction as the Philistinian.
Even so, there have been numerous peace talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders, hosted by the international community. All failed as Palestinian see no reason for trading land for peace. The West Bank, under the peace plan, would lose 30 per cent of the territory, based on the law of conquest following unprovoked war. Also, borders under international law must be defensible. Otherwise, as the war in Ukraine shows, the international community would be helpless.
Palestinian leaders were also against accepting the Jewish character of Israel, but probably cannot go against Jewish culture per se as it isn’t about religion.
In law, the court cannot get into theology.
In jurisprudence, God isn’t source in law. Law must have source for jurisdiction, authority and power.
Israel has no Constitution and there can be no case law on Israel as “God’s Promised Land” and Jew as “God’s Chosen People”.
It’s Jewish culture, not religion, that may give Jew advantage over others.
Jew remains about the generations, about the future and survival instints, and empowering and placing siblings, family, local community, the people and nation, above self. Jewish culture, eschewing living on debts, generates slight surplus of income, revenue and resources over expenditure, and thereby buys time for core stability.
Science in ancient India discovered that the only predictable property of the universe — Maya or illusions — was chaos.
If Palestinian accept Jewish culture, they would no longer exist. They would suffer the same fate as the Philistinian from Phoenicia (Lebanon) in the Gaza Strip. If Palestinian don’t accept the rule of law and multiparty elections, human rights and international law, they risk the same fate as the Native Indian Nations in America.
The Native Indian Nations in America are confined in tiny reservations created by the rule of law. If not for the reservations, Native Indian Nations in America would have gone extint like the Philistinian and so many other other people including ten of the 12 Jewish tribes in the Biblical Holy Land.
Arabic speakers, known as Israeli Arab, make up 20 per cent of the population. They hold a similar percentage of seats in the 120-seat Knesset, the Israeli Parliament. Israeli Arab are deported, headed for the West Bank on a one-way bus ticket, if they publicly declare themselves Palestinian.
The West Bank has been under Israeli military administration since the 1967 war with Jordan. The Gaza Strip currently remains under siege by the IDF (Israeli Defence Force) which went on the offensive since the Hamas attack on Saturday 7 October 2023 on music festival in the desert in southern Israel.
Again, the Palestinian risks suffering the same fate as the Native Indian Nations in America which accepted the rule of law, too little, too late.
It’s occupation of territory that’s violation of international law but, ironically, not laying siege and/or military administration. Military administration under international law, with or without the UN, stands defined on national security grounds. If the violence entails laying siege, it may be about the right of self-defence following unprovoked war.
The story of Old Free Palestine must be kept in perspective since Israel now holds 80 per cent of the Biblical Holy Land. In 1948, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) recognised Israel but only on 20 per cent of the land. The rump state of Palestine, stillborn in 1948 after it rejected the UNSC giving Israel 20 per cent of the land, has been left with just greatly shrunken area for the proposed 2nd rump state. Therein lies the possible creation of permanent conflict mechanism in the Biblical Holy Land as in the Indian subcontinent. Palestinian would never recognise Israel as Jewish state or otherwise.
Israel, the whole world knows, claims the right of self-defence as rule of law nation-state. It may be kamikaze argument in law if there’s proof of disproportionate measures, “ethnic” cleansing, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, all allegations which may or may not be proven.
Israel, like its late in the day patron America, didn’t accede on the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague in the Netherlands. The ICC can summon the International War Crimes Tribunal (IWCT) but only if Israel can be defeated in war. The IWCT can only be about winners going after losers. Losers cannot summon the IWCT.
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) can also seek Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Israel allegedly running amok, if proven, in the “occupied territories” which — i.e. occupation — hasn’t been proven either under international law.
There was no Public Inquiry on the Saturday 7 October 2023 attack by Hamas on music festival in the desert in southern Israel.
It remains rule of law issue although Hamas, Fatah and the post-1948 Palestinian may not accept the rule of law except perhaps grudgingly.
Islam isn’t law but based on the concept of sin. Syariah was about a person’s willingness to accept it. It’s unconstitutional to impose syariah on anyone. There’s case law on Islam and syariah by the Supreme Court of India. It can be used as Advisory Opinion if there’s lacuna (gap) in local law on Islam and syariah. — NMH
Longtime Borneo watcher Joe Fernandez has been writing for many years on both sides of the Southeast Asia Sea. He should not be mistaken for a namesake formerly with the Daily Express in Kota Kinabalu. JF keeps a Blog under FernzTheGreat on the nature of human relationships.