<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-container gmail-content-width3">
<div class="gmail-header gmail-reader-header gmail-reader-show-element">
<font size="1"><a href="https://english.palinfo.com/news/2020/5/5/Annexation-of-Palestine-began-in-San-Remo">https://english.palinfo.com/news/2020/5/5/Annexation-of-Palestine-began-in-San-Remo</a>
</font><h1 class="gmail-reader-title">Annexation of Palestine began in San Remo</h1>
<div class="gmail-credits gmail-reader-credits">By Ramzy Baroud - May 5, 2020<br></div>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="gmail-content">
<div class="gmail-moz-reader-content gmail-line-height4 gmail-reader-show-element"><div id="gmail-readability-page-1" class="gmail-page"><br>
One hundred years ago, representatives from a few powerful countries
convened at San Remo, a sleepy town on the Italian Riviera. Together,
they sealed the fate of the massive territories confiscated from the
Ottoman Empire following its defeat in World War I.<p>
It was on April 25, 1920, that the San Remo Conference Resolution was
passed by the post-World War I Allied Supreme Council. Western Mandates
were established over Palestine, Syria and ‘Mesopotamia’ – Iraq. The
latter two were theoretically designated for provisional independence,
while Palestine was granted to the Zionist movement to establish a
Jewish homeland there.</p><p>
“The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the (Balfour)
declaration originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British
Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favor of the
establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,”
the Resolution read.</p><p>
The Resolution gave greater international recognition to Britain’s
unilateral decision, three years earlier, to grant Palestine to the
Zionist Federation for the purpose of establishing a Jewish homeland, in
exchange for Zionist support of Britain during the Great War.</p><p>
And, like Britain’s Balfour Declaration, a cursory mention was made of
the unfortunate inhabitants of Palestine, whose historic homeland was
being unfairly confiscated and handed over to colonial settlers.</p><p>
The establishment of that Jewish State, according to San Remo, hinged on
some vague ‘understanding’ that “nothing shall be done which may
prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish
communities in Palestine.”</p><p>
The above addition merely served as a poor attempt at appearing
politically balanced, while in reality no enforcement mechanism was ever
put in place to ensure that the ‘understanding’ was ever respected or
implemented.</p><p>
In fact, one could argue that the West’s long engagement in the question
of Israel and Palestine has followed the same San Remo prototype: where
the Zionist movement (and eventually Israel) is granted its political
objectives based on unenforceable conditions that are never respected or
implemented.</p><p>
Notice how the vast majority of United Nations Resolution pertaining to
Palestinian rights are historically passed by the General Assembly, not
by the Security Council, where the US is one of five veto-wielding
powers, always ready to strike down any attempt at enforcing
international law.</p><p>
It is this historical dichotomy that led to the current political deadlock.</p><p>
Palestinian leaderships, one after the other, have miserably failed at
changing the stifling paradigm. Decades before the establishment of the
Palestinian Authority, countless delegations, comprised those claiming
to represent the Palestinian people, traveled to Europe, appealing to
one government or another, pleading the Palestinian case and demanding
fairness.</p><p>
What has changed since then?</p><p>
On February 20, the Donald Trump administration issued its own version
of the Balfour Declaration, termed the ‘Deal of the Century’.</p><p>
The American decision which, again, flouted international law, paves the
way for further Israeli colonial annexations of occupied Palestine. It
brazenly threatens Palestinians that, if they do not cooperate, they
will be punished severely. In fact, they already have been, when
Washington cut all funding to the Palestinian Authority and to
international institutions that provide critical aid to the
Palestinians.</p><p>
Like in the San Remo Conference, the Balfour Declaration, and numerous
other documents, Israel was asked, ever so politely but without any
plans to enforce such demands, to grant Palestinians some symbolic
gestures of freedom and independence.</p><p>
Some may argue, and rightly so, that the ‘Deal of the Century’ and the
San Remo Conference Resolution are not identical in the sense that
Trump’s decision was a unilateral one, while San Remo was the outcome of
political consensus among various countries – Britain, France, Italy,
and others.</p><p>
True, but two important points must be taken into account: firstly, the
Balfour Declaration was also a unilateral decision. It took Britain’s
allies three years to embrace and validate the illegal decision made by
London to grant Palestine to the Zionists. The question now is, how long
will it take for Europe to claim the ‘Deal of the Century’ as its own?</p><p>
Secondly, the spirit of all of these declarations, promises,
resolutions, and ‘deals’ is the same, where superpowers decide by virtue
of their own massive influence to rearrange the historical rights of
nations. In some way, the colonialism of old has never truly died.</p><p>
The Palestinian Authority, like previous Palestinian leaderships, is
presented with the proverbial carrot and stick. Last March, US President
Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, told Palestinians that if
they did not return to the (non-existent) negotiations with Israel, the
US would support Israel’s annexation of the West Bank.</p><p>
For nearly three decades now and, certainly, since the signing of the
Oslo Accords in September 1993, the PA has chosen the carrot. Now that
the US has decided to change the rules of the game altogether, Mahmoud
Abbas’ Authority is facing its most serious existential threat yet:
bowing down to Kushner or insisting on returning to a dead political
paradigm that was constructed, then abandoned, by Washington.</p><p>
The crisis within the Palestinian leadership is met with utter clarity
on the part of Israel. The new Israeli coalition government, consisting
of previous rivals Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and Benny
Gantz, have tentatively agreed that annexing large parts of the West
Bank and the Jordan Valley is just a matter of time. They are merely
waiting for the American nod.</p><p>
They are unlikely to wait for long, as Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo,
said on April 22 that annexing Palestinian territories is “an Israeli
decision.”</p><p>
Frankly, it matters little. The 21st century Balfour Declaration has
already been made; it is only a matter of making it the new uncontested
reality.</p><p>
Perhaps, it is time for the Palestinian leadership to understand that
groveling at the feet of those who have inherited the San Remo
Resolution, constructing and sustaining colonial Israel, is never and
has never been the answer.</p><p>
Perhaps, it is time for some serious rethink.</p><p>
<em>- Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine
Chronicle. He has authored a number of books on the Palestinian struggle
including ‘The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story’. Baroud has a Ph.D. in
Palestine Studies from the University of Exeter and is a Non-Resident
Scholar at Orfalea Center for Global and International Studies,
University of California Santa Barbara.</em></p></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
</div>