By David Singer ——Bio and Archives--July 14, 2016
World News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
"China will never accept any claim or action based on those awards"His rejection was as peremptory as that of the PLO--which declared in Article 18 of its original 1964 Charter:
"The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate system and all that has been based upon them are considered fraud."This position was revised when the Charter was redrafted in 1968--article 20 declaring:
"The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void."These provisions have been a major contributing factor in preventing a resolution of the Jewish-Arab conflict for the last 52 years.
Support Canada Free Press
"Vietnam strongly supports the resolution of the disputes ... by peaceful means, including diplomatic and legal processes and refraining from the use or threats to use force, in accordance with international law,"That response is what one would normally expect--but when you have not demanded the same of the PLO for the last 48 years then such statement amounts to an indefensible double standard. Other countries vitally affected by the South China Sea ruling include the Philippines--the plaintiff in The Hague proceedings - Japan, Malaysia and Indonesia. They may find their long-standing ties with the PLO similarly embarrassing as they confront an angry China. China on the other hand can argue that rejecting the South China Sea judgement is consistent with China's recognition of the law-trashing PLO in 1988--since International law means nothing to China and the PLO. The Hague ruling is regarded as legally binding--but there is apparently no mechanism to enforce it. Boycott Divestment and Sanctions programs against China will have little effect. Rejecting China's claim to any historic rights in the South China Sea stands in stark contrast to the acceptance of Jewish historic rights to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank)--recognised by the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the UN Charter--but erroneously claimed by the UN Security Council to be in violation of international law. Double standards in the international community have a horrible way of coming back to bite those indulging in such dangerous games.
View Comments
David Singer is an Australian Lawyer, a Foundation Member of the International Analyst Network and Convenor of Jordan is Palestine International—an organization calling for sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza to be allocated between Israel and Jordan as the two successor States to the Mandate for Palestine. Previous articles written by him can be found at: jordanispalestine.blogspot.com