Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 22 - Was the Declaration of a Jewish State Valid?

  • from Part VI - Jewish Statehood on the Ground
  • John Quigley, Ohio State University
  • Book:
    The Legality of a Jewish State
    Published online:
    09 December 2021
    Print publication:
    16 December 2021, pp 181-193

  • Summary

    The declaration of a Jewish state in May 1948 was said not to violate existing rights because a sovereignty vacuum obtained. That view was opposed by an argument that Palestine was a state, and that its territory could not be divided against the will of its population. The declaration recited that it was based on historical rights of the Jewish people in Palestine, and on the General Assembly’s resolution recommending partition of Palestine. The historical rights basis was opposed on an argument that no such rights could prevail over the rights of the existing population. The General Assembly resolution argument was opposed on the grounds that the resolution was outside the powers of the General Assembly, that the resolution was in any event only a recommendation, that the resolution had been superseded by the General Assembly’s effort toward a United Nations trusteeship, and that the declaration violated the terms of the General Assembly’s resolution by failing to ensure nationality to the population and by failing to commit to respecting Palestine’s existing treaties.