Submitted by Salomon Benzimra, Mar 17, 2007 03:22

As Mr. Halkin correctly points out, so-called "peace plans" have come and gone since 1969. All these plans were predicated on the hapless notion of "land for peace." And all of them failed.

When the pursuit of an experiment leads to persistant failure, decade after decade, it is only logical to question the premise. I would argue that the notion of "land for peace", while possibly valid in the case of the Sinai Peninsula, is definitely wrong in the case of Judea and Samaria (the "West Bank"). It is wrong for strategic, historical and geographical reasons. And above all, it is wrong for legal reasons.

Palestine has already been partitioned in 1922 with the creation of Transjordan (now Jordan), an exclusively Arab country where Jews were barred from settling. The remaining western part was allocated to the Jewish people by international law, under the provisions of the Mandate for Palestine, as issued by the Council of the League of Nations in July 1922. How many times should Palestine be partitioned?

It behooves the Israeli government to finally avail of its legal rights, enshrined in international law. That they have never done so since 1967 is baffling. Once the title to the land is clearly established and recognized by the world at large, the status of the non-Israeli population would be dealt with in as fair a way as possible.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.