Netanyahu is encouraged by the fact that some of his critics are starting to cast doubt on the deal, and even to echo his arguments against it.17:39 30.07.15 | 0 comments
Prior to 1948 the Brits had sovereignty over the Palestinian Mandate, which they conquered from the Ottoman Empire during WWII. This mandate, issued by the League of nations called for creating a Jewish homeland and an Arab one. (The Brits fullfilled the Arab part by removing 80% of the territory, giving it to TransJordan, and prohibiting entry to Jews in order to preserve its Arab character, while allowing Arabs to migrate from Transjordan to what is now Israel and the West bank. So the Brits had it (and they got it at a time when acquisition of territory by force was still legal, and further had a Mandate from the League of Nations for setting up a homeland for the Jews in it) Prior to the Brits the Turks had it. At no time was there ever a state controlled by Palestinians which had sovereignty over the land. In case you're thinking of basing this claim on the 'rights of indigenous peoples' I'll also remind you that in the US, the Indian wars were still being fought as late as 1898-1924, and nobody in the international community is demanding that the US give the southwest back to the Indians, so if you're basing this on the claim that the Palestinians had rights to sovereignty because that was international custom regarding indigenous people at the time you're skating on thin ice.