Jerusalem Material Claims Conference Against the Arab League
“Justice, Justice shall you pursue….” Deut. 16:18-20
“Zion shall be redeemed with justice, And they that return of her with righteousness.” Isaiah 1.27
“And Judah also shall fight for Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the nations round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.” Zechariah 14.14
“The children of thy bereavement [Yom HaShoah] shall yet say in thine ears: ‘The place is too strait for me; Give place to me that I may dwell.’ ” Y’shiyahu (Isaiah) 49.20
It is advised by Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham that on or about 13 October 2021 through 19 October 2021, Jews, Christians and Muslims hold a “material claims conference” in Jerusalem patterned after the 1952 Luxembourg Reparations Agreement, the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine and Reintegration Fund, the UN Compensation Commission and Fund, together with the Canadian Treaty Land Entitlement Agreements to effect a just and lasting peace for the Indigenous Peoples of the Middle East that land reserves for “close Jewish and Arab settlement” in historical “Eretz Yisrael” (Palestine – “East & West” of the Jordan River) be “set aside” under a Trusteeship Agreement to secure reparations and restitution against the Arab League for the 1947 Draft Law of the Political Committee of the Arab League and expulsion of the Jews from Arab Countries, North Africa and the Persian Gulf as documented by Justice for Jews from Arab Countries; and for the refusal of the Arab League states to patriate by collective naturalization “Arabs of Palestinian extraction” and the recent denaturalization of Arabs of Jordanian Nationality who were collectively naturalized by King Abdullah on December 13, 1949.
Israel Set to Seek $250,000,000,000.00 In Compensation:
Israel is expected to demand compensation for Jewish property left in Arab and Muslim countries as a condition to a regional peace deal, based on 2010 Israeli law, which states that any peace deal with Arab countries or Iran is contingent on individual Jews and/or Jewish communities receiving compensation for what they lost in 1948.
The Times of Israel reports (5 January 2019) that “Israel said set to seek $250b compensation for Jews forced out of Arab countries”
“Israel is preparing to demand compensation totaling a reported $250 billion from seven Arab countries and Iran for property and assets left behind by Jews who were forced to flee those countries following the establishment of the State of Israel.
“The time has come to correct the historic injustice of the pogroms (against Jews) in seven Arab countries and Iran, and to restore, to hundreds of thousands of Jews who lost their property, what is rightfully theirs,” Israel’s Minister for Social Equality, Gila Gamliel, who is coordinating the Israeli government’s handling of the issue, said Saturday.”
It is further advised by Yochanan Ezra ben Avraham that, because of the rise in anti-Semitism, the State of Israel amend the Law of Return and “Collectively Naturalize” all Jews of the Diaspora, and symbolically re-patriate (viz, naturalize) the Arabs of Palestinian Extraction from the 1948 Israeli War of Independence (as contemplated by (1) UNGA Resolution 194 (11) and as purview-ed by (2) the historical attempts via the UN CONCILIATION COMMISSION for PALESTINE [UNCCP] Reintegration Fund to reintegrate the Arabs of Palestinian extraction into the body polity of Eretz Yisrael; and as contemplated by (3) Camp David II) for “close settlement” in historical Eretz Yisrael, East and West of the Jordan River.
The subject of collective naturalization is discussed at length in Boyd v. Thayer, 143 U. S. 135, (1892) and many cases cited and illustrations given.
Collective Naturalization can occur by legislation or by treaty of cession or through acquiescence, concession or assent (failure to remove, relocate or traverse international boundaries).
Citizenship by Conquest or Treaty of Cession & Election of Citizenship:
“Manifestly the nationality of the inhabitants of territory acquired by conquest or cession becomes that of the government under whose dominion they pass, subject to the right of election on their part to retain their former nationality by removal, or otherwise, as may be provided.” Boyd v. Thayer.
Although “self-determinism” was exercised by Arabs of Palestinian extraction who voted by delegates as a “free expression of the will of the people” for King Abdullah I as their sovereign at the December 1948 Jericho Conference and were “collectively naturalized” by King Abdullah, (I); all Arabs of Palestinian extraction retain an inalienable and unalienable right of suffrage in the Jordanian Parliament, and possess Jordanian Citizenship by virtue of force majeure, acquiescence, concession or assent.
See: Bishop, International Law, Cases and Materials, Second Edition, 1962 (Little, Brown and Company, Boston, Toronto); Chapter 5, Nationality: (pp. 394, – 409, – 438)
“These commentators maintain that when territory is transferred to a new
sovereign by conquest or cession the inhabitants of the territory
become nationals of the new government only by their own consent,
express or implicit. [….] If the inhabitants remain within the territory
their allegiance is transferred to the new sovereign. [….] American Insurance Company v. 356 Bales of Cotton, 1 Peter 511, 542, 7 L. Ed. 242
In this case, the New Sovereign is the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to which the Arabs of Palestinian extraction affirmed their allegiance to the Hashemite Crown at the December 1948 Jericho Conference!
Jerusalem Declaration 10 Sep 2012 :
“We, the participants of the conference “Justice for Jewish Refugees from Arab Countries”, hereby declare that we fully support the rights of Jews displaced, expelled or who fled Arab countries, to justice, rights and redress. [….] As the organizing body in the Arab world and the organization which drafted legislation against the Jewish communities in 1947, we hold the Arab League responsible for the exodus of Jews from Arab countries.”
Read the full Jerusalem Declaration on Justice for Jews from Arab Countries
Watch The Forgotten Refugees –
Register Your JIMENA Refugee Claim
Read the Fact Sheet Jewish Refugees From Arab Lands
1952 Luxembourg Reparations Agreement:
The Reparations Agreement between Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany –
According to wikipedia,
“The Reparations Agreement between Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany was signed on September 10, 1952, and entered in force on March 27, 1953.
According to the Agreement, West Germany was to pay Israel for the costs of
“resettling so great a number of uprooted and destitute Jewish refugees” after the war, and to compensate individual Jews, via the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, for losses in Jewish livelihood and property resulting from Nazi persecution and genocide.”
More information on The Reparations Agreement of 1952 can be read here National Library of Israel
Canadian Treaty Lands Entitlement Agreements –
Treaty Land Entitlement process
First Nations who did not receive all the land they were entitled to under treaties signed by the Crown and First Nations, can file a Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) claim with the Government of Canada. TLE settlement agreements are negotiated between First Nations and the Government of Canada, typically with the participation of provincial/territorial governments. The federal government must adhere to treaty obligations to provide the promised amount of reserve land to treaty First Nations.
Generally, a TLE settlement agreement specifies an amount of land that a First Nation may either purchase on a willing buyer-willing seller basis, or select from unoccupied Crown land, or both in some cases, within an agreed to acquisition or selection area.
Once purchased or selected, the First Nation may submit a proposal to the Government of Canada for the land to be added to the First Nation’s reserve under the Additions to Reserve process.
As of August 2016, some 90 percent of TLE transactions take place in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The fulfillment of TLE agreements assists in building partnerships and encourages economic development on reserves and in surrounding communities.
More information can be read here Canadian Treaty Land Entitlement Agreements
And here Crown Indigenous Relations Northern Affairs
“The Supreme Court of Canada has decided that, where a First Nation maintains demographic and cultural connections with the land, aboriginal title (including self-government rights) can survive both sovereignty changes and the influx of a new majority population, resulting from foreign conquest.” Delgamuukw v. British Columbia
 3 SCR 1010 (Case Number 23799)
This jurisprudence is an important decision because only Jews indigenous to Palestine have maintained an “indigenous demographic and cultural connection” to the Land of Eretz Yisrael, have survived foreign (Roman, Arab and Crusader) conquests and were guaranteed POLITICAL rights to self-government within Mandate for Palestine “Treaty Territories” pursuant to the San Remo Resolution!
The Canadian Treaty Land Entitlements Agreements, and the Jurisprudence decided in behalf of Indigenous First Peoples provides a useful model that could be negotiated as part of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli settlement under a trusteeship agreement as contemplated by Chapter XII (Articles 75 through 85) of the UN Charter, to “set aside” Land Reserves for “close Jewish and Arab settlement” in historical “Eretz Yisrael” (Palestine) both East and West of the Jordan River.
Reparations Against the Arab League
As for reparations against the Arab League, in 2013 Israeli MK Shimon Ohayon Called on the Arab League to Accept Responsibility for the Jewish Refugees from Arab Lands:
“It is time for the Arab League, not just to make diktats for a resolution to the conflict, but also accept their great responsibility for driving out almost a million Jews from lands which they had lived in for millennia,” MK Ohayon continued. “I call on the Arab League not just to take responsibility but also to provide redress to the Jewish refugees.
“This is a matter of justice and rights and has been ignored by the Arab League and the international community for too long. It is time to place the rights of the Jewish refugees from Arab lands at the forefront of the push for peace and reconciliation in our region.”
The Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran is a Memorial Day that is marked in Israel every year (starting in 2014,) on November 30 with the purpose of marking the departure and expulsion of Jews from Arab countries and Iran. It is based on a law sponsored by MK Shimon Ohayon (Yisrael Beiteinu) and passed in the summer of 2014 by the Knesset.
The 1947 Draft Law and more information about the expulsions, pogroms and internment of Jews in Arab Lands, North Africa and the Persian Gulf can be read here 1947 Arab League Draft Law – Jewish Refugees
Conference on Material Claims Against the Arab League States –
Claims Commission and Fund
As part of any future Middle Eastern “regional” peace agreement, there needs to be a claims commission set up and a claims fund established following the establishment of a (Jerusalem/Al Quds) Reparations Agreement for distribution to those populations affected, as contemplated by UNSC Resolution 242 and US House Resolution 185 (1 April 2008); said Claims Commission which was supposed to have been part of the Camp David Peace Accords with Egypt (Article 8) and was supposed to have been part of the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty (Article 24).
Camp David Peace Accords – Article VIII The Parties agree to establish a claims commission for the mutual settlement of all financial claims.
Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty – ARTICLE XXIV CLAIMS
The Parties agree to establish a claims commission for the mutual settlement of all financial claims.
— Justice Requires a Conference on Material Claims Against the Arab League States –
“In the aftermath of World War II and the establishment of the State of Israel, the World Jewish Congress was actively involved in assisting Jews in Arab and other Muslim countries, who had come under increasing pressure. In January 1948, WJC President Stephen Wise, appealed to US Secretary of State George Marshall: “Between 800,000 and a million Jews in the Middle East and North Africa, exclusive of Palestine, are in ‘the greatest danger of destruction’ at the hands of Muslims being incited to holy war over the Partition of Palestine … Acts of violence already perpetrated, together with those contemplated, being clearly aimed at the total destruction of the Jews, constitute genocide, which under the resolutions of the General Assembly is a crime against humanity.” The United States, however, did not take any follow-up action to investigate these pleadings.” (Source: Wikipedia World Jewish Congress)
Former U.S. President Bill Clinton made the following assertion after the rights of Jews displaced from Arab countries were discussed at “Camp David II” in July 28, 2000 (from White House Transcript of Israeli television interview): “There will have to be some sort of international fund set up for the refugees. There is, I think, some interest, interestingly enough, on both sides, in also having a fund which compensates the Israelis who were made refugees by the war, which occurred after the birth of the State of Israel. Israel is full of people, Jewish people, who lived in predominantly Arab countries who came to Israel because they were made refugees in their own land.”
Sign the Petition Jerusalem Material Claims Conference to the World Jewish Congress: “For any peace process to be credible and enduring, it must address the rights of all Middle East refugees, including Jewish and other minority populations that were displaced from Arab countries.”
The UN CONCILIATION COMMISSION for PALESTINE [UNCCP] Reintegration Fund
As the [UNCCP] Commission was aware, it [the State of Israel] had already “declared its willingness to support the Reintegration Fund to be established by the United Nations by paying into it funds accruing from compensation for abandoned Arab lands”.
On December 2, 1950, the United Nations General Assembly passed resolution 393 by a vote of 46 in favor, 0 against, 6 abstaining. This resolution allocated, for the period 1 July 1951 to 30 June 1952, “not less than the equivalent of $30,000,000” for the economic reintegration of Palestinian refugees in the Near East “either by repatriation or resettlement”, their permanent re-establishment and removal from relief, “without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 11 of General Assembly Resolution 194”.
Toward this goal, Israel donated the equivalent of $2.8 million, and Arab states pledged almost $600,000. The United States accounted for the greatest pledge with $25 million.
UNGA Resolution 194 (11) and the “Right of Return” –
Although UNGA Resolution 194 (11) is a non-binding resolution and is premised upon a return “at the earliest convenience” of those “willing to live at peace with their neighbor(s);” the right of return to Eretz Yisrael treaty territories must now be construed and exercised on an individual basis with a qualified offer of collective rehabilitation (repatriation to Jordan) in light of the December 1948 Jericho Conference wherein the 1,000 Arab delegates led by Sheik Muhammad Ali Ja’abari elected Abdullah I as their sovereign within the meaning of UNGA Resolution 181 (III Election of an Independent Sovereign).
As such, a “limited right of return” is still offered to the 1948 Arab (“Palestinian”) refugees, conditioned on a REGIONAL peace treaty with the Arab League States that will allow Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to retain a TRUST, (as contemplated by Chapter XII (Articles 75 through 85) of the UN Charter) over the Jewish Treaty Territories East and West of the Jordan River (e.g. Judea, Shomron, Gad, Reuven, and Manasseh) for “close Jewish and Arab refugee resettlement” within the spirit of US Congress’ House Resolution 185, 1 April 2008 as these [trust] treaty territories were ceded to the Jewish Community via the Mandate for Palestine (Treaty of Sevres, Article 95) as contemplated by the 1919 Faisal-Weizmann Agreement.
Israel’s first offer of any limited right of return came at the 1949 Lausanne Conference, when it offered to allow 100,000 refugees to return, though not necessarily to their homes, including 25,000 who had returned surreptitiously and 10,000 family-reunion cases. The proposal was conditioned on a peace treaty that would allow Israel to retain territory it had captured which had been allocated to a proposed Palestinian state, and the Arab states absorbing the remaining 550,000–650,000 refugees. The Arabs rejected the proposal on both moral and political grounds, and Israel quickly withdrew its limited offer. At the 2000 Camp David summit 52 years following Israeli independence, Israel offered to set up an international fund for the compensation for the property which had been lost by 1948 Palestinian refugees, to which Israel would contribute. Israel offered to allow 100,000 refugees to return on the basis of humanitarian considerations or family reunification. All other refugees would be resettled in their present places of residents, the Palestinian state, or in third-party countries, with Israel contributing $30 billion to fund their resettlement. During this time, most of the original refugees had already died without any compensation. Israel demanded that in exchange, Arafat forever abandon the right of return, and Arafat’s refusal has been cited as one of the leading causes of the summit’s failure.
Megillat HaNechoshet (the Copper Scroll) – A proposed peace and reconciliation conference
This material claims conference would lead to compensation for all populations affected, Jewish, Christian and Arab/Muslim (within the spirit of US House Resolution 185) and I suggest a peace and reconciliation conference for the populations effected by the Arab Israeli Conflict “with a gesture of peace for reconciliation by the Hashemite Kingdom” of a return of the Copper Scroll to the Jewish People from the Jordan Museum Amman!
UN Compensation Commission and Fund
The UN Compensation Commission and Fund provides a useful model that could be negotiated as part of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli settlement. In the aftermath of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the UNCC adopted a policy of paying individuals first, with the remaining sums owed entirely to government entities. The UNCC also created six categories for resolving claims from the Iraq-Kuwait war. These categories include claims for families killed or injured during the war, business losses, individual anguish, cost of resettling citizens, and damage to the environment. These categories could be adapted to fit the needs of an international peace fund for the Middle East.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission –
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was a court-like restorative justice body assembled in South Africa after the end of apartheid.
Witnesses who were identified as victims of gross human rights violations were invited to give statements about their experiences, and some were selected for public hearings. Perpetrators of violence could also give testimony and request amnesty from both civil and criminal prosecution.
The TRC, the first of the 1003 held internationally to stage public hearings, was seen by many as a crucial component of the transition to full and free democracy in South Africa. Despite some flaws, it is generally (although not universally) thought to have been successful.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) provides a useful model for a comprehensive Arab-Israeli settlement.
1970–Thames Television–Golda Meir discusses the Palestinian identity, and asks why the Arabs in the West Bank became more Palestinian than the Arabs in the East Bank, after June 5 1967.
Golda Meir – “I’m a Palestinian! From 1921 to 1948 I carried a Palestinian Passport.”
1970–Thames Television–Golda Meir discusses the Palestinian identity
Palestinian-Origin Jordanians Deprived of their Nationality(* See Disclaimer Below) –
Summary: More than half of the 6.3 million population of Jordan is of Palestinian origin-that is, from areas west of the River Jordan, including the West Bank, today’s Israel, and Gaza. With the exception of persons from Gaza, the vast majority of those persons of Palestinian origin have Jordanian citizenship. However, since 1988, and especially over the past few years, the Jordanian government has been arbitrarily and without notice withdrawing Jordanian nationality from its citizens of Palestinian [Israeli] origin, making them stateless. For many of them this means they are again stateless Palestinians as they were before 1950.
So far, Jordan has withdrawn its nationality from thousands of its citizens of Palestinian origin-over 2,700 between 2004 and 2008 alone. It has done so, in the individual cases Human Rights Watch identified, in an arbitrary manner and in violation of Jordan’s nationality law of 1954. Under that law Palestinian residents of the West Bank in 1949 or thereafter received full Jordanian nationality following Jordan’s incorporation of the West Bank in April 1950.
*Disclaimer: In order for there to be TRUTH and RECONCILIATION between Arabs and Jews, one must admit that the Arabs of Palestinian Extraction are simply Arabs who have migrated to Eretz Yisrael. That is, the author of this proposal does not espouse a distinct Palestinian Identity for Arabs of “Palestinian Extraction” as there is no difference between an Arab from Arabia and an Arab from Judea and Samaria (the West Bank of the Jordan River) or from the territories allocated (by Moses and Joshua) to Gad, Reuven and Menasheh (the East Bank of the Jordan River) as agreed to by the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement.
In their own words: In 1977, Zuheir Mohsen, PLO Executive Council member, articulated the goals of the new “peoplehood” strategy saying, “The Palestinian people does not exist…. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel…. It is only for political and tactical reasons that we speak today about…the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.”
While Jews are Indigenous to Eretz Yisrael (Palestine); Arabs are Indigenous to [Saudi] Arabia, not Eretz Yisrael and many only recently settled within Mandate for Palestine [TREATY] territories! The Hashemites should be held to and bound by the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement as the Arabs have been given “independence” through the Mandates for Mesopotamia (Iraq), Syria and Lebanon and by and through the Kingdom of the Hejaz exercised, by their free will, “national self-determinism” at the December 1948 Jericho Conference wherein they elected King Abdullah I as their sovereign (within the meaning of Chapter III [Election of Sovereignty] of UNGA Resolution 181).
The 1950 State Department Country Report on Jordan said that King Abdullah had taken successive steps [to wit: Annexation and Occupation] to incorporate the area of Central Palestine into Jordan and described the Jordanian Parliament resolution concerning the union of Central Palestine with Jordan. The report said the US had privately advised the British and French Foreign Ministers that it had approved the action, and that “it represented a logical development of the situation which took place as a result of a free expression of the will of the people.” The major problems of concern to the United States were the establishment of peaceful and friendly relations between Israel and Jordan and the successful absorption into the polity and economy of Jordan of Arab Palestine, its inhabitants, and the bulk of the refugees now located there.
Since the Arabs were collectively naturalized by Abdullah I of trans-Jordan April 1950, effectively nullifying and voiding UNGA Resolution 194(11); any Reparations Agreement must include a provision that those hostile belligerent nationals of Jordan (viz: unprivileged/unlawful enemy combatants) who were collectively naturalized by the Hashemite Regime unwilling to “live at peace with their neighbor” be classified as hosti humani generis and the parties to such Reparations Agreement should pursue the establishment of a Regional UN Human Rights / Terrorism Court in East Jerusalem for the prosecution of any terrorist or act of terrorism.