"Occupied Palestinian Territories"

Submitted by Salomon (Canada), Jan 7, 2005 at 03:08

You are absolutely right: "Occupied" is the wrong word.
But I even dispute the word "Disputed" for the following reasons:

These territories were acquired in a defensive war in 1967:
a) a war that had the same Arab obejctives as the 1948 war (the destruction of Israel),
b) a war in which the Arabs violated international law (closing of Tiran straits) and
c) a war which ultimately had the same results, for the Arabs, as the 1948 war (loss of territory).

Even Nasser recognized the 1967 war as an extension of the 1948 war. These two wars, being started for the same reasons, using the same means and ending up in the same territorial losses for the Arabs, should logically be treated the same way, notwithstanding Resolution 242.

So, calling Gaza and the "West Bank" "disputed territories" would logically lead to calling Western Galilee and Beersheba equally "disputed". The whole problem arose with the wording of resolution 242 which, unfortunately, "emphasizes the inadmissibility of acquiring territory by force".

How can we solve this Gordian knot?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".