The Palestinian charter (All Palestinians; Boycott; Yishai Kohen) - Comment - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper
  • p.TextOutput { R static java.lang.String p.mt = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; R static java.lang.String p.publicInterfaces = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValued'; R static java.lang.String p.beanClass = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; RW java.lang.String value = '0'; R transient java.lang.Object _data = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.NumberInputPolicy'; },ModelStore=com.polopoly.model.ModelStoreInMap p.TextOutput { R static java.lang.String p.mt = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; R static java.lang.String p.publicInterfaces = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValued'; R static java.lang.String p.beanClass = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; RW java.lang.String value = '0'; R transient java.lang.Object _data = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.NumberInputPolicy'; },ModelStore=com.polopoly.model.ModelStoreInMap
    • Tosefta
    • 07.01.07 | 21:16 (IST)

    Some rightwing websites quote Article 24 of the original (1964) PLO Charter to claim that the PLO at the time "gave up" on its claim to the West Bank, etc. This of course is a stupid claim on the face of it. I will explain the basis for it and then ask you a question. First, quotes from the Charter: Art. 2. Palestine with its boundaries at the time of the British Mandate is a regional indivisible unit. Art. 17. The Partitioning of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of Israel are illegal and false regardless of the loss of time, because they were contrary to the wish of the Palestine people and its natural right to its homeland, Art. 24. This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area. Since in Article 2 the entire area of the Mandate is considered "indivisible", the Charter of course would make no legal distinction between Israel within the Green Line and the areas under Arab control in 1964. The meaning of Art. 24 is that at thapresent time (1964), the PLO does not exercise control over those area, and will start its liberation work by fighting Israel, not the other Arab countries. I take it that since the Arab League was the one creating the PLO at the time, the Charter wanted to explicitly assure the other Arab countries that they will not suffer an insurrection. But the unsaid word was that once Israel was eliminated, the Palestinians will claim the other territories as well. My guess is that the English translator mistranslated the original term, which may have meant "rulership", into "sovereignty", which gave an opening to stupid claims by stupid ideologues. I suspect the Arabic language has a problem with distinguishing between the the two meanings, since the notion of a nation state is modern and European. Can you please check out the original language of the document and let me know? Thanks.

    from the article: While Livni is polishing her wording
    First published 00:00 07.01.07 | Last updated 00:00 07.01.07
Haaretz Headlines
Obama and Netanyahu.
U.S. to Netanyahu: Sign military aid package, no better deal with next president

After Netanyahu says he would wait for a new U.S. president to reach a better military deal for Israel, American officials fire back.

00:09 08.02.16 | 0 comments
Syrians walk towards the Turkish border at the Bab al-Salam border gate, Syria, Friday, Feb. 5, 2016

For Syrian refugees, West is now worse than Assad

It was Bashar Assad and Islamic militants who butchered their families and took their homes, but the U.S., Britain and Germany left them to face their fate.

 A woman wearing tefillin prays at the Western Wall.
At Western Wall, one woman's victory is another's defeat

At annual Super Bowl Sunday prayer event, held in Israel for the first time, women at the Western Wall rejoiced in the recent egalitarian win there. But some women consider it a loss.

20:11 07.02.16 | 0 comments
Dov Yirmiya.
Israel’s oldest silence breaker, Dov Yirmiya, dies at 101

After publishing a scathing account of what he saw in the first Lebanon war, Dov Yirmiya was dismissed from the army at the age of 68.

03:57 08.02.16 | 0 comments