The Struggle in Self-defense and for Self-preservation


Al-Azhar Magazine – January 1974

An impartial study of the principal directions of Quran on which the laws of war are to founded show the wisdom and humanity which animated the Islamic system. It will also be to give us clear idea about the Islamic point of view about war and peace, and violence and tolerance. The spirit of Islam is based on peace and tolerance. By the laws it guaranteed liberty of conscience and freedom of worship to the followers of every other creed under the Muslim dominion. The Holy Quran testifies to the principle of tolerance and liberty inculcated by Islam as follows:

لَآ إِكۡرَاهَ فِى ٱلدِّينِ‌ۖ

(Let there be no compulsion in religion) (2:256)

وَلَوۡ شَآءَ رَبُّكَ لَأَمَنَ مَن فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ ڪُلُّهُمۡ جَمِيعًا‌ۚ أَفَأَنتَ تُكۡرِهُ ٱلنَّاسَ حَتَّىٰ يَكُونُواْ مُؤۡمِنِينَ ( ٩٩ ) وَمَا كَانَ لِنَفۡسٍ أَن

تُؤۡمِنَ إِلَّا بِإِذۡنِ ٱللَّهِ‌ۚ وَيَجۡعَلُ ٱلرِّجۡسَ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ لَا يَعۡقِلُونَ

(And if thy Lord willed, all who are in the earth would have believed together. Wouldst thou (Muhammad) compel men until they are believers? It is not for any soul to believe save by the permission of Allah. He hath set uncleanness upon those who have no sense) (10 : 99-100)

In turning to the legality of war for self defence the Holy Quran says :

وَقَـٰتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقَـٰتِلُونَكُمۡ وَلَا تَعۡتَدُوٓاْ‌ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلۡمُعۡتَدِينَ ( ١٩٠ ) وَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ حَيۡثُ ثَقِفۡتُمُوهُمۡ

وَأَخۡرِجُوهُم مِّنۡ حَيۡثُ أَخۡرَجُوكُمۡ‌ۚ وَٱلۡفِتۡنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ ٱلۡقَتۡلِ‌ۚ وَلَا تُقَـٰتِلُوهُمۡ عِندَ ٱلۡمَسۡجِدِ ٱلۡحَرَامِ حَتَّىٰ يُقَـٰتِلُوكُمۡ فِيهِ‌ۖ فَإِن قَـٰتَلُوكُمۡ

فَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ‌ۗ كَذَٲلِكَ جَزَآءُ ٱلۡكَـٰفِرِينَ

(Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.) (2: 190 -191)

وَقَـٰتِلُوهُمۡ حَتَّىٰ لَا تَكُونَ فِتۡنَةٌ۬ وَيَكُونَ ٱلدِّينُ لِلَّهِ‌ۖ فَإِنِ ٱنتَہَوۡاْ فَلَا عُدۡوَٲنَ إِلَّا عَلَى ٱلظَّـٰلِمِينَ

(And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers) (2: 193)

Islam never interfered with the dogmas of any moral faith, never persecuted and never established an inquisition. But it opposed to isolation and exclusiveness. In a comparative rude age, when the world was immersed in darkness morally and socially the Prophet Muhammad ( peace be upon him ) preached those principles of equality and promulgated the laws of freedom and human rights.

The extraordinary success and marvellous effect of the teachings of the Prophet upon the minds of the People have given rise to the charge, by some people, that Islam was propagated by sword and upheld by the sword. A careful examination of the circumstances and facts connected with the rise of Islam, and the wars of the Prophet will show clearly that the various conflicts were occasioned by the aggressive and unrelenting hostility of the idolaters and were necessary for self defence and self preservation.

When the Prophet migrated to Madina from Mecca, and the two tribes of Aus and Khazraj ended their strife by the Islamic fraternity, the elements of danger became apparent. The surrounding tribes, among whom the influence of the Quraish was supreme, were grouped against Madinah. The Meccan disciples who had braved death, and now faced poverty and exile. While the Madinite followers were not many. The Jew, compact and united jealously and relentlessly, opposed the Prophet in every direction, with poison, with treachery and with conspiracies.

But the heart, which did not fail when the Quraish threatened with death, was not frightened when the existence of others depended on him. He set himself to the task of organising into a social entity the varied elements which had gathered around him as the Messenger of God. He abolished the distinction between the waring tribes; he also comprehended the Jews and Christians in his little state and established basis of cordial relations among all believers.

While the Prophet was engaged in this divine and noble work of humanising his people, raising them from the abyss of degradation, he was attacked by his enemies from all sides, ruthlessly and uniting. They had sworn his death and the extermination of that community who had forsaken home and wealth for the sake of Almighty God and His worship, and so insistent in the common duties of love, charity, fraternity and equality based on purity of thought and deed.

So the destruction of the Prophet mean the destruction of the entire body of people who had gathered round the messenger of God. From the moment of his entry into Madina, the Prophet’s destiny had become intertwined with that of his people and of those who invited and welcomed him to their midst. To the muslimsself defence had become a question of self preservation. They must either submit to be massacred or fight when they were attacked. They had to choose the latter alternative. It was essentially necessary for the safety of the weak and small community.

A single city had to make head against the combined attacks of the multitudionous tribes of Arabia. Under these circumstances, an unsleeping vigilance on the part off the muslims was required, and energetic measures were often necessary to sustain the existence of the Muslim community. The same instinct of self preservation is the criteria of the legality of war in Islam, as the Holy Quran has clearly directed.

Islam forbids all kinds of wars it is not waged for a just cause. Such wars can be referred to only three kinds, namely defensive, punitive or preventive. The prophet proposed, in his well known correspondence with the Byzantium Emperor Heraclius, in connection with the assassination of a Muslim envoy in his territory, three alternatives : embrace Islam, if not, pay the Jizya, if not , do not interfere between your subjects and Islam if they desire to embrace it.

The establishment of liberty of conscience in the world was the aim and object of the struggle of the Prophet. He did not undertake any war for the purpose of conversion, conquer territory or with expansionist intentions. All war is illegal in Islam except to make the justice to prevail and to remove the consequences of suppression and aggression.

When we turn from the concepts of war in Islam to the conduct of war we see the following facts:

According to the expressed instructions of the Prophet and his companions, it is obvious that the objective of fighting should always be upholding of high ideals, not the material gain.

It was strictly forbidden to kill women, weak, children, old people, monks and priests.

These teaching were actually put into practice by the Caliphs. This is a clear and distinctive difference between the aggressive and extirpative wars and the struggles of self defence and self preservation.

The Holy Quran declares:

لَّا يَنۡهَٮٰكُمُ ٱللَّهُ عَنِ ٱلَّذِينَ لَمۡ يُقَـٰتِلُوكُمۡ فِى ٱلدِّينِ وَلَمۡ يُخۡرِجُوكُم مِّن دِيَـٰرِكُمۡ أَن تَبَرُّوهُمۡ وَتُقۡسِطُوٓاْ إِلَيۡہِمۡ‌ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُحِبُّ

ٱلۡمُقۡسِطِينَ ( ٨ ) إِنَّمَا يَنۡہَٮٰكُمُ ٱللَّهُ عَنِ ٱلَّذِينَ قَـٰتَلُوكُمۡ فِى ٱلدِّينِ وَأَخۡرَجُوڪُم مِّن دِيَـٰرِكُمۡ وَظَـٰهَرُواْ عَلَىٰٓ إِخۡرَاجِكُمۡ أَن

تَوَلَّوۡهُمۡ‌ۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُمۡ فَأُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّـٰلِمُونَ

Allah forbiddeth you not those who warred not against you on account of religion and drove you not out from your homes, that ye should show them kindness and deal justly with them. Lo! Allah loveth the just dealers. Allah forbiddeth you only those who warred against you on account of religion and have driven you out from your homes and helped to drive you out, that ye make friends of them. Whosoever maketh friends of them – (All) such are wrong-doers.

(60 : 8-9)

A Study of the Aims and the Plans of the Zionist Movement

“A Study of the Aims and the Plans of the Zionist Movement”

Al-Azhar Magazine – November 1968

The Zionist movement started as an organization from the first Zionist congress, held at Basle in 1897, and preached over by the founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl. He fixed the main ideas, aims and plans of the Zionist movement at this congress. The congress proclaimed that the Jews constituted an ethno-religious unity that they were a single people, and that, in consequence, this people had the right to exist as a nation established on autonomous territory. This territory was to be Palestine. At this first congress were definitely enunciated the main ideas of Zionism, so much so that there emerged a national ideology, with its fixed aims and its strategic plans.

The main aim of Zionism is to establish in Palestine a national Jewish home. This objective to be achieved by the following tactical plans:

  1. To reinforce and maintain the Jewish national conscience and sentiment among the Jews throughout the world.
  2. To adopt necessary measure to the realization of Zionist thought and Jewish nationalism.
  3. To reorganize world Jews with the help of local and international organizations.
  4. To regroup the Jewish people in conformity with the laws in force in each country.
  5. To carry out the plans of the colonization of Palestine with the help of agricultural workers, and Jewish industrials, with adequate and well defined plans.

In this brief study we must examine the Zionist geographical definition of Jewish National Home. Theodore Herzl was the first to give a general definition of the nature and geographical extent of Israel and the neighboring territories. The founder of Zionist movement says in his famous “Memoirs” Part I:

“The slogan we must shout should be the Palestine of David and Soloman! We must have access to the sea because of the future of our external trade. We must also have extensive areas of land where we can introduce our modern agriculture on a large scale”. In another passage of his Memoirs, Herzl defines the general idea about the geographical boundaries of the Israel: “…From the river of Egypt to the Euphrates. A transitory period, during which there will be a British governor is indispensable for the consolidation of our institutions. As soon as the proportion of the Jewish population has reached two-thirds of the total population, the Jewish administration will automatically take over command as political authority.”

The founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, outlined the Zionist plans with regard to the geographical extensions of the so-called Promised Land (Israel) in the following points:

  1. – The Zionist state must be sufficiently extensive in area in order to receive all the children of the Jewish nation, as it is the expression and the incarnation of the Jewish Natinalism, preached by Zionist movement.
  2. – As the Palestine is the promised land of the Jews, it should therefore, include all those territories over which Jews have travelled and all the regions in which, centuries ago, there were settlements of Jewish tribes.
  3. – The state of Israel must possess all the basic foundations of a state capable of attaining an autonomous economy and acquiring military Supremacy.
  4. – The state of Israel must be able to render service to any imperialist state which will protect it and assure its existence, in return for the efforts undertaken to allow the Zionists to create their state.
  5. – The future Zionist state must be strong, of imperial and glorious character in order the better to manifest the superiority of the Chosen people over the other people, especially those of Asia and Africa.

These are the master-ideas dominated the thought of Zionist movement with regard to nature, aims and geographical extent of the Israel and its frontiers. In a letter which the Zionist leader Herzl addressed to the famous Jewish financier Lord Rothscild, dated 12 july, 1902, he outlined the Zionist plan for the settlement of poor Jews at Al-Arish and in the Sinai Peninsula and also in Cyprus. In this letter he termed the Arish and Sinai as Egyptian Palestine.

It is recalled that the first Jewish religious leader to join the Zionist Movement set up by Herzl, Aaron Marcus, had discovered, by a close study of the ‘Talmud’ that Cyprus was part of Palestine. The Zionist writer Oscar gave, in his book ‘The Jewish Project’, the proofs of the Zionist plan to obtain the Island of Cyprus also as part of Promised Land of the Jews in the Holy Books. In his reply, this book added, to Aaron Marcus, Herzl said: “If you say that (Cyprus was part of Palestine) speaking as a man of religion I do oppose it. I also find that it constitutes an important gain.”

The mouth piece Journal of a British Zionist organization ‘Palestine Magazine’ published a series of articles on the Palestinian frontiers, as well as some studies of the relatively little known regions. This magazine published on 15 February, 1917 an article entitled ‘The Frontiers of Palestine’, it says: “Every writer who takes an interest in Palestinian affairs has his own conception as to the frontiers of his country…his own deductions, which are in conformity with the nature of the objective at which he is aiming in the domains of religion, of science, or of politics. Consequently, these deductions vary according to the definition referred to since such definition is based on Biblical or historical, or geographical writings. The frontiers we wish to discuss are those of the future Palestine, the territory must of necessity include the land inherited from Twelve Tribes of Israel mentioned in the Old Testament:

“To this should be added the territories indispensable for safeguarding the unity and integrity of the country. The western frontier is the one formed by the Mediterranean Sea. The eastern frontier is constituted boundaries of the territory which formerly belonged to the tribes of Israel. It runs along a straight line from the Mediterranean coast to north of Saida, and as far as the point at which the river Al-Awaj runs into Lake Al-Haid Jannah to south east of Damascus. This frontier extends eastward to a point at North latitude 32’30’’ from where it runs westward to the River yarmouk, and, still westward, to the Dead Sea.”

“The southern frontier runs from the extremity of the Dead Sea to Wadi Arab from where it runs eastward to Wadi Al-Arish, which it skirts as far as the sea”. This analysis gives a clear picture of the Zionist point of view with regard the frontiers and areas of Israel.

In fact the expansionist acts of Zionists began before the date of the official founding of the Israel. Previous to that Zionist military and Para-military forces had invaded and occupied a certain number of localities such as Jaffa and Akka, which had been allocated to the Arab State in the partition plan recognized by the U.N.O. They also occupied certain parts of the city of Jerusalem. Furthermore the Zionist forces took maximum possible areas of Arab property during cease-fire periods.

During the period between June 1949 and October 1956 Israel took steps to occupy demilitarized zones declaring them as parts of Israeli territory, and assumed sovereign authority over them. The Arab residents were expelled from their homes, and forts and military installations were built in their home lands. During this same period Israel also organized raids into neighboring Arab territories. In fact, the major attack launched by Israel in 1956 with the overt complicity of Britain and France was a total war aimed at occupying the Gaza strip and Sinai to retain them as integral parts of the extended Israel.

An objective study of the dynamic character of Zionism and the expansionist character of the Zionist state of Israel is enough to convince any imperial observer of the threat inherent in the Zionist movement. This threat aimed not only at the neighboring Arab states but the entire Arab world. The danger represented by the existence of Israel in the Middle East is originated fundamentally in the ideological factor, and its military and economic necessaries.

International Laws and Jusitce call for the Liberation of Palestine from Zionist Occupation

“International Laws and Jusitce call for the Liberation of Palestine from Zionist Occupation”

Al-Azhar Magazine – December 1969

Under international law, Palestine was recognized as a state, with territory, with fixed boundaries, and with a population. The British Mandatory organized a Civil Administration which it called the Government of Palestine. That Government consisted of an Executive, a Judiciary and ten Departments, which administered the affairs of the country. The Government of Palestine was headed by a High Commissioner and a Chief Secretary, aided by various Assistant Secretaries. Palestine-Citizenship was created by the Palestine-Citizenship- Order. Palestine passports were issued to citizens. The Government of Palestine took part in many important international conferences and became a member of Several International Agencies.

In 1919 Palestine, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Transjordan were recognized as independent states all the nation assembled in Paris for the Versailles Peace Conferences, and at the same time they were temporarily placed under Mandates of League of Nations. The Mandate for Palestine was entrusted to Britain. The population of Palestine in 1919 was 95% Muslim and Christian Arabs and 5% Jews.

All countries placed under Mandates have become independent and are now members of the United Nations with the exception of Palestine and a few others. In the twenty-nine years following 1919 the British Mandatory failed to carry out its mandate to give the population of Palestine independence and self-determination. Throughout that period Britain continued dumping alien Jews into an Arab country and using the Balfour Declaration as justification.

According to the principles of International Law, “the natural home and field of activity of every human being is his home state. He cannot claim any right to be admitted to or settle in, foreign states. If admitted, he is merely a guest who must put up with conditions offered him. He must obey the general laws of the land being a foreigner, he must put up with the lack of many advantages conferred on the natives. If he is not satisfied, he can leave the country.” In the present case alien Jews illegally in occupation of Palestine claim every right and deny the lawful indigenous population all their rights.

A citizen of a state cannot expel another citizen. A state cannot expel or excite a native citizen. Since the First World War the international community has endeavored to lay down rules for the protection of minorities and safeguarding their rights of to life, liberty, and religious freedom. The maxim adopted was that all citizens were to be equal before the law, enjoy the same civil and political rights without any distinction due to race, language or religion. It also provided that minorities or any state could petition the League of Nations if these rights were violated. The preamble of the United Nations Charter reaffirms faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and the worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women of nations large and small. The declaration of Human Rights guarantees against violation of the rights of the individual. These principles of International Law support our contention that the minority of the naturalized Palestine Jews could not expel the majority of the citizens of Palestine form their ancestral homeland, and deprive them of their citizenship, their political, religious and civil rights, and their right to political independence and self-determination.

The history of Palestine tragedy started from the Balfour Declaration which confirmed the infamous and perfidious conspiracy by which in 1916 Britain betrayed her Arab Allies in World War I by promising world – wide alien Jews “a Jewish national home in Palestine” as the price Zionist Jews demanded for using their influence to railroad the United States into World War I as Britain’s ally. Samuel Lamdman, a London Solicitor and legal adviser to the World Zionist Organization described the Balfour Declaration as follows: “The best and perhaps the only way, which proved so to be, to introduce the American President to come into the War was to secure the cooperation of Zionist Jews by promising them Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilize the hitherto unsusceptible powerful forces of Zionist Jews in America and elsewhere in favor of the Allies on a ’quid pro quo’ contract basis.” As soon as this conspiracy, became known to the Arabs they protested vigorously, demonstrated and demanded their liberty and independence. From 1919 to 1939 many Arab uprisings took place. British military forces, reaching 200,000 British troops in 1936-39, crushed Arab resistance using the most unjustified and ruthless methods. More than 50,000 Palestinian Arabs were killed during the twenty-nine years of British rule in Palestine. More than 100,000 Palestinian Arab nationalists were imprisoned or thrown into concentration camps. Many British Commissions were sent from London to investigate the situation on in Palestine. Each and everyone of them came to the identical conclusion, that the Mandate was “unworkable because there existed two incompatible obligations, one to the indigenous Arab population and the other to Jews”.

In 1939 the British Government issued a white Paper, promising Palestine self-determination and limiting the further immigration of Jews to Palestine. This White Paper enraged the international Jewish Agency and Zionists throughout the world. While Britain was engaged in a life and death struggle in World War II, terrorist gangs of Jews in Palestine- the Hagana, the Irgun and the stern gangs – waged an armed insurrection, committing the most barbaric atrocities and acts of terrorism against British forces, the Government of Palestine and the civilian population. Many thousands of victims were killed, maimed or wounded. According to official British documentary evidence, Mr. David Ben-Gurion and his Jewish Agency colleagues plotted planned and ordered the execution of these crimes and atrocities.

When the General Assembly of the United Nations met in a special session in April 1947, there were in Palestine 1,350,000 Muslim and Christian Arabs who were Palestine citizens by birth, about 200,000 Jews naturalized Palestine citizens and about 450,000 alien Jews, mostly illegal immigrants. A United Nations Special committee on Palestine was appointed to investigate the problem and make recommendations for political settlement. The influence of the Western Powers and Zionist machinations produced a “majority plan” for partitioning Palestine.The “minority plan” proposed a federal State. By pressure undue influence and power politics a resolution proposing reference of the Palestine issue to the International Court of Justice to determine whether the United Nations had authority to partition Palestine or any other country, was rejected in the General Assembly. As the result of pressure and improper manipulation by the Western powers, the General Assembly of the united Nations adopted the resolution of the 29th of November 1947, recommending the Partition of Palestine into an ‘Arab State’, a ‘Jewish State’, and an ‘International Zone’ for the Jerusalem Bethlehem area.

British forces disarmed Arabs in every city, town and village throughout Palestine. The British Military forces took part in Battles between Arabs and Jews ensuring victory for the Jews. This British Zionist conspiracy resulted in the expulsion of Arabs from Tiberias, Haifa, Jaffa, Acre, Safad, Beisan, Modern Jerusalem and all village surrounding these towns. When the disarmed Arab civilian population were threatened with massacre by the terrorist Jews, the British military forces representing the British Mandatory power, and as suh responsible for law and order, were considerate enough to urge Arabs to surrender and generous enough to offer army trucks and lorries to evacuate Arab civilians, to enable them to take refuge in neighboring arab countries! British armed forces aided and abetted Jews enabling them to win the second round against Palestine Arabs after April 1948. Britain used her then powerful influence in the Arab World to prevent Palestine Arabs from taking part in war after May 15, 1948.

In spite of the fact the United Nations General Assembly was still meeting in the Special Session called to search for peaceful solution of the Palestine problem, the international Jewish Agency on May 14, 1948, proclaimed their so-called Declaration of Independence. The Jews in occupation of Palestine called themselves the so-called State of Israel and organized a so called provisional Government. The international Zionism believed they could thus wipe the State of Palestine off the face of the map by a stroke of their pen and by proclaiming their Declaration of Independence. The Jews, a minority in Palestine, by force and violence violated the territorial integrity of Palestine and the Political independence of the Muslim and Christian Arab majority of Palestine. The Jews expelled more than one million Arab citizens from their ancestral homeland in defiance of Article-2 paragraph 4 of United Nations Charter which “forbid the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the United Nations”.

The Second Special Session of the General Assembly convened on April 16, 1948. The United States submitted proposals for placing Palestine under Trusteeship whereby the Trusteeship Council would exercise supervisory powers over Palestine, appointing a Governor- General. While the United Nations was in session Searching for a peaceful solution to this problem, the minority of Jews in Palestine by force and violence, aided and abetted by the British troops, expelled more than one million Muslim and Christian Citizens of Palestine form their homeland occupying their homes and properties, robbing them of all their personal possessions Jews owned less than 1% of Palestine yet they plundered and occupied all private and public property in 80% of Palestine was about 30% of the total population less than one half were neutralized Palestine citizens and he balance illegal alien immigrants.

These are the facts of the Palestine tragedy. But what is the position according to International Law, the United Nations Charter, and the Charter of Human Rights? Can a neutralized Palestine citizen, who is a Jew, expel a native Palestine citizen who is a Muslim or a Christian? If not, can a Jew, who is an alien illegal immigrant in Palestine, do so? If minority of Jews by force and violence occupied 80% of Palestine, what right do these Jews have in Palestine occupants under the international law? If Palestine neutralized Jews cannot deprive Palestine Arabs of their rights, under what principle of International Law and Justice can alien Jews, legal or illegal residents in Palestine, deprive the indigenous Arab Palestine population of sovereignty and birth right in their homeland?

The so called “State of Israel” never was a state. It consisted of a minority of Jews, alien illegal immigrants, transplanted into Palestine, who by an armed insurrection in violation of International law, expelled more than one million citizens from Palestine and stole all their assets. How could they be a peace loving nation? How could they carry out obligations under United Nations Charter when their existence, their occupation of 80% of Palestine, and the crime committed by them against its inhabitants are the greatest mockery of the United Nations Charter?

Yet by an armed insurrection and in defiance of the General Assembly of the United Nations and the Security Council, Jews occupied *80% of Palestine and proclaimed themselves the counterfeit so-called “State of Israel”. The Rule of War in International Law deal with the occupation by one state of the territory of another state. At the same time it considers the occupation by armed insurrection as a military occupation to which the principles of International Law apply. The consensus of opinion of international lawyers confirms the following:

    1. – The occupants does not in any way acquire sovereign rights in the occupied territory but exercises a temporary right of administration on a trustee basis…the legitimate government of the territory retains its sovereignty but the latter is suspended during the period of belligerent occupation. Military occupation does not confer title or extinguish a nation. As long as the people of the occupied nation do not accept military conquest, so long as they can manifest, in one way or another, their inalterable will to regain freedom, their sovereignty even though flouted, restricted and sent in exile still persist.
    2. – Mere seizure of territory does not extinguish the legal existence of a government. The occupant is not entitled to altar the existing form of government, to upset the constitution and domestic laws of the territory occupied or set aside the rights of the inhabitants.
    3. The most important principle of law is that occupation does not displace or transfer sovereignty. The rights of the inhabitants of an occupied territory are also safeguarded against abuse and violation. They owe no allegiance of any sort to the occupying power. Their family honor and rights, and private property must be protected. Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of the inhabitants from occupied territory of the occupying power or that of any other country are prohibited regardless of their motive.

These principles of International Law establish beyond any shadow of doubt that the occupation of 80% of Palestine by a minority of Jews was illegal. Under International Law Jews could not establish a state of Palestine. They could not change the internal administration in the country. They could not change the internal administration in the country. They could not substitute a new governmental structure. They could not change the nationality of the inhabitants. They could not replace the Arabic language. They could not expel exile or forcibly transfer the population of Palestine. They could not occupy the public property of the Government of Palestine or occupy, appropriate, dispose of or use the private property of the inhabitants of the country. They could not commit outrageous against the inhabitants.

Some people ask what about the admission of the so-called “State of Israel” to the United Nations? The admission of so called Israel to the United Nations was contrary to the International Law and to the letter and spirit of the United Nations Charter. Also called ‘state of Israel’ never existed in fact or in law. It was nothing but an illegal ‘proclamation’ and illegal occupation by a minority of Jews. Furthermore, such admission was obtained by undue pressure and deceit and therefore it is void. This so called “Provisional Government of Israel”, which consisted of International Zionist representatives, aliens from many foreign lands, representing Zionists throughout the world, submitted an application for membership in the United Nations. On the 17th of December 1948 he Security Council rejected that application.

When the western powers submitted the application to the General Assembly in April 1949 and this was referred to the Political Committee for further discussion. Many delegates questioned Zionist representatives whether they intended to abide by resolutions of the General Assembly regarding Palestine. The committee was given affirmative assurance by Mr. Aba Eban a citizen of the Union of South Africa who had no connection with Palestine. His answers were misleading. He gave the impression that the Jews intended to abide by United Nations Resolutions on Palestine. The Western Powers exerted strong pressure upon delegates in the political committee for the adoption of the resolution for the admission of the so called “State of Israel”. Strong pressure by the Western powers was again exerted in the General Assembly for adopting the resolution of May 11, 1949 for admitting ‘Israel’ to the United Nations.

Such admission cannot give the minority of Jews in Palestine, the occupants by force of 80% of Palestine, any right or sovereignty, because the United Nations has no authority to do so. One of the purposes of the United Nations in Article 1 of the Charter is ‘to bring about by peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of justice and International Law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to breach of the peace’. The words ‘by peaceful means’ and ‘in conformity with justice and international law’ are imperative. The United Nations cannot contravene, violate or ignore the principles of international law and justice. The occupation of Palestine by force and violence, by alien Jews and the expulsion of more than one million inhabitants can hardly be said to have been accomplished by ‘peaceful means’ or to be consistent with principles of justice and International Law.

Therefore the resolution of the General Assembly of the United Nations had no effect under International Law and did not legalize the unlawful occupation of Palestine by Jews. Furthermore Article 4 of the United Nations Charter provides that United Nations can only admit as a member a peace loving state which accepts the obligations of the Charter and able and willing to carry out these obligations. These facts are proof that Palestine had all qualifications of a state under International Law and Justice.