U.S. rejects Netanyahu's claims: "Golan Heights are not part of Israel"

[dadori]

One day after the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, vowed that the occupied Golan Heights would "forever remain under Israeli sovereignty," the U.S. State Department issued a statement of their own that rebuffed this claim.

When asked about Netanyahu's comments regarding the illegally occupied Golan Heights, the U.S. State Department's Spokesperson, John Kirby, asserted that the U.S.' position has not changed, despite the ongoing turmoil inside Syria.

"This position was maintained by both Democratic and Republican administrations. Those territories are not part of Israel and the status of those territories should be determined through negotiations. The current situation in Syria does not allow this."

According to the Haaretz, one of the few U.S. politicians to back Netanyahu's comments was U.S. Presidential candidate, Ted Cruz.

Cruz stated that "the government of Israel reiterated the reality that the Golan Heights are part of Israel’s sovereign territory."

He would add that it is "dangerous for the international community to try to pressure Israel to abandon the Golan to the chaos engulfing Syria."

The U.S. was not alone in rejecting Netanyahu's claims: the German government also expressed their discontent with the Israeli Prime Minister's comments.

"It's a basic principle of international law and the UN charter that no state can claim the right to annex another state's territory just like that," Martin Schaefer, spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry, said Monday.

In 1981, the U.N. unanimously adopted Resolution 497, which called on Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights.

Israel rejected Resolution 497 and has refused to withdraw from the Golan Heights.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article...t-part-israel/ | Al-Masdar News

[Damajin]

Ah Ted Cruz, loving that AIPAC money.

It certainly isn't theirs but can't expect a greedy kid to not be greedy.

[Dextroden]

"Those territories are not part of Israel and the status of those territories should be determined through negotiations."

This sounds an awful like we're going to wag our finger at them while they continue to occupy it.

[Kalis]

"Those territories are not part of Israel and the status of those territories should be determined through negotiations."

This sounds an awful like we're going to wag our finger at them while they continue to occupy it.

That is what has been going on since they occupied the Golan Heights, so it is not really much of a surprise. No force capable of ousting them is willing to oust them, so it just comes down to telling them they should not be there, such is international politics.

[oxymoronic]

One day after the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, vowed that the occupied Golan Heights would "forever remain under Israeli sovereignty," the U.S. State Department issued a statement of their own that rebuffed this claim.

When asked about Netanyahu's comments regarding the illegally occupied Golan Heights, the U.S. State Department's Spokesperson, John Kirby, asserted that the U.S.' position has not changed, despite the ongoing turmoil inside Syria.

"This position was maintained by both Democratic and Republican administrations. Those territories are not part of Israel and the status of those territories should be determined through negotiations. The current situation in Syria does not allow this."

According to the Haaretz, one of the few U.S. politicians to back Netanyahu's comments was U.S. Presidential candidate, Ted Cruz.

Cruz stated that "the government of Israel reiterated the reality that the Golan Heights are part of Israel’s sovereign territory."

He would add that it is "dangerous for the international community to try to pressure Israel to abandon the Golan to the chaos engulfing Syria."

The U.S. was not alone in rejecting Netanyahu's claims: the German government also expressed their discontent with the Israeli Prime Minister's comments.

"It's a basic principle of international law and the UN charter that no state can claim the right to annex another state's territory just like that," Martin Schaefer, spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry, said Monday.

In 1981, the U.N. unanimously adopted Resolution 497, which called on Israel to withdraw from the Golan Heights.

Israel rejected Resolution 497 and has refused to withdraw from the Golan Heights.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article...t-part-israel/ | Al-Masdar News

all i read is, its ok when russia when does it, not okay when israel does.

[Guy4123]

Meh, Golan Heights is a strategic military location for a country who went to war with Israel, and considering the current state of Syria it would be the height of foolishness to give it back.

[Kalis]

all i read is, its ok when russia when does it, not okay when israel does.

The US and EU enacted sanctions on Russia when they did it, not really sure how that is saying it is okay.

[Dextroden]

The US and EU enacted sanctions on Russia when they did it, not really sure how that is saying it is okay.

Could you imagine it, though? Sanctions on Israel. That would be fascinating.

[Auxora]

all i read is, its ok when russia when does it, not okay when israel does.

Those are pretty dissimilar situations though. In the case of Crimea, the people there considered themselves Russian and overwhelmingly wanted to be annexed by Russia. That's why there was no fight or resistance at all, they were welcomed with open arms. That's not even counting the deep Russian history in Sevastopol.

The Golan Heights however are very different, where Israel annexed it during war with Syria by force, and then went on to forcibly inhabit the land there through settlements. It would be like if the US had annexed Germany after WW2 as a US state and built American cities with US citizens there.

All that said, this was just a policy statement and doesn't really have any effect or teeth. It's just reaffirming that Obama and Netanyahu really dislike each other.

[Hooked]

Israel should keep the Golan heights, its theirs. Israel just needs to outlast the Obama administration then its game on pallys.

[Sunseeker]

If it is illegally occupied why should its status be determined through negotiation? It sounds to me as if it has already been determined: It does not belong the Israel. So what negotiating is there to do? Legally speaking the only conclusion to be drawn from saying "It's not yours." is to return it to whose it is.

In any case, it always nice to see Israeli claims to more land getting rebuffed.

[Kasierith]

If it is illegally occupied why should its status be determined through negotiation? It sounds to me as if it has already been determined: It does not belong the Israel. So what negotiating is there to do? Legally speaking the only conclusion to be drawn from saying "It's not yours." is to return it to whose it is.

In any case, it always nice to see Israeli claims to more land getting rebuffed.

The issue is that the US has spent the past few decades sheltering activities just like this, and the situation is where it is purely because the US has repeatedly ignored Israel's actions and prevented any significant repercussions. In other words, the US has through vetoes on the Security Council essentially endorsed Israel to be in that exact situation, and so cannot just say "you shouldn't be there to begin with."

[Kalis]

If it is illegally occupied why should its status be determined through negotiation? It sounds to me as if it has already been determined: It does not belong the Israel. So what negotiating is there to do? Legally speaking the only conclusion to be drawn from saying "It's not yours." is to return it to whose it is.

In any case, it always nice to see Israeli claims to more land getting rebuffed.

One of the issues is that Israel is arguably justified in occupying it militarily, but claiming it as Israeli territory is not justified.

If they said that they acknowledge it belongs to Syria, but were unwilling to compromise their security by withdrawl at this time (which could go on indefinitely), then many people would not give a toss. However Israel, or at least certain Israelis, do not want that, they want the territory permanently.

Ted Cruz is an idiot, his comments justify land grabs and that is never a good thing to justify, that will fuck over US allies and weaken the US position, far better is to say it does not belong to Israel but make no comment on them returning it.

[Sunseeker]

One of the issues is that Israel is arguably justified in occupying it militarily, but claiming it as Israeli territory is not justified.

Sure, I'm not arguing Israel's reasoning for occupying the land. But that doesn't make it theirs.

If they said that they acknowledge it belongs to Syria, but were unwilling to compromise their security by withdrawl at this time (which could go on indefinitely), then many people would not give a toss. However Israel, or at least certain Israelis, do not want that, they want the territory permanently.

And more.

Ted Cruz is an idiot, his comments justify land grabs and that is never a good thing to justify, that will fuck over US allies and weaken the US position, far better is to say it does not belong to Israel but make no comment on them returning it.

Ted Cruz is a religious lunatic who makes Michelle Bachmann look positively sane.

The issue is that the US has spent the past few decades sheltering activities just like this, and the situation is where it is purely because the US has repeatedly ignored Israel's actions and prevented any significant repercussions. In other words, the US has through vetoes on the Security Council essentially endorsed Israel to be in that exact situation, and so cannot just say "you shouldn't be there to begin with."

Sure it can. That's how politics works. Say one thing, do another. Just like how Russia claimed it didn't annex 1/4th of the Ukraine, and yet there it is, part of Russia. Funny that.

[Kasierith]

Sure it can. That's how politics works. Say one thing, do another. Just like how Russia claimed it didn't annex 1/4th of the Ukraine, and yet there it is, part of Russia. Funny that.

In this case, they've done a lot. If you look at the history of this particular issue, Israel holds it uncontested in an international sense because of vetoes on the Security Council preventing any actual repercussions beyond finger wagging from the GA.

[Sunseeker]

In this case, they've done a lot. If you look at the history of this particular issue, Israel holds it uncontested in an international sense because of vetoes on the Security Council preventing any actual repercussions beyond finger wagging from the GA.

Again: so what? A lot of problems around the world would be solved if *insert Security Council county here* stopped cockblocking the process. But such is the price we pay for getting Russia, China and Western Powers to sit at the same table.

[Kasierith]

Again: so what? A lot of problems around the world would be solved if *insert Security Council county here* stopped cockblocking the process. But such is the price we pay for getting Russia, China and Western Powers to sit at the same table.

And again, it means that the US has deliberately permitted Israel to be in its current occupying capacity, not simply stated but actively defending them, and thus cannot easily say that it is not their property because it undermines them. The US state office is already suffering significantly in its credibility around the world since the Iraq war, and adding on such a major flop in the most important area of international relations would do nothing to help it.

But I see that you went to bed too late last night and your self control on items even remotely and tangentially related to Russia is essentially nonexistent, so I'll leave you to your pathetic whining.

[AeneasBK]

God, I wish Israel didn't exist.

[Valexie]

God, I wish Israel didn't exist.

I hope you find the irony of this quote. Unless of course that was your goal. In which case good job sir, good job.

As far as Israel is concerned I believe they have the right to exist, the matter over land is never going to solved due to different ideologies.

[Easo]

Meh, Golan Heights is a strategic military location for a country who went to war with Israel, and considering the current state of Syria it would be the height of foolishness to give it back.

This.
They will never give it back, unless the, emm, neighbours non-belligerent.
So... never in foreseeable future?