Restitution as a Remedy for Refugee Property Claims in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. FLORIDA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 19(2), Article 2: 422-490
by Michael Kagan. 2007
Reviewed by Jan Peczkis
The accusations of the Holocaust Industry are regularly in the news. Property restitution is almost always framed in terms that benefit the Jews, and complete with a Poles-owe-Jews message. Poles are regularly blamed for German crimes and for the lasting consequences of German crimes. This article inadvertently provides a bit of a comeuppance. It is permanently located at:
https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/fjil/vol19/iss2/2
Nowadays, the Holocaust Industry toots its horn about Poles being beneficiaries of “plundered” Jewish property. This is totally bogus, and worse than the pot calling the kettle black. If Poles are guilty at all, then Jews are 100 times more guilty in any case.
The Jews began plundering Palestinians from the very beginning and were not the least bit subtle about it. See:
ALL PROPERTY TRANSFERS ARE NOT EQUAL
The Poles got Jewish property through a chain of events, none of which were of their making. The Nazi Germans conquered Poland, killed the Jewish owners, and then stole the Jewish property for themselves. They were pushed out of Poland by the Soviet military forces. The Soviet-imposed Communist puppet government then inherited the once-Jewish properties, and unilaterally decided their fate. Only eventually did Poles have a say about these properties.
Everything that the Poles did was legal throughout all this time. At no time did the Poles “steal” Jewish property. The claims of the Holocaust Industry rest upon falsehoods, and moral blackmail over long-settled issues.
The rather-unobjective media keeps repeating the self-serving lie that “Poland is the only nation without a Holocaust property restitution law.” In actuality, Poland always had property-succession laws, including those that dealt specifically with war-related transfers of property, and Poles dutifully followed these laws.
The situation with Jewish-confiscated Palestinian property was and is completely different. It was clear-cut and blatantly illegal. There was no extraneous chain of events, and the confiscation was ALL of the Jews’ making, from beginning to end. The Jews flagrantly stole Palestinian lands, individually and collectively, from Palestinians that were still alive, and as elaborated in this article.
JEWISH THEFT OF PALESTINIAN PROPERTY WAS PREMEDITATED, SHAMELESS, AND ONGOING
Kagan is unsparing in his criticism of Jewish crimes:
“Israel’s confiscation of Palestinian refugee property formed part of a composite violation of illegal forced population transfer in which non-Jews were forced from their homes and their land transferred to Jewish control. This composite violation began, at least, with the first forced expulsions of refugees in the 1947-1948 war and included the Israeli decisions in 1948 to prohibit non-Jewish refugee return and to confiscate refugee property. The violation continues today both because refugees remain displaced and dispossessed, because the custodian of absentee property continues to confiscate property, and because the property has been administered by the Israel Lands Administration primarily for the benefit of Jews.” (p. 460).
“Despite these disparate estimations, it is clear that much of Israel was Arab land until 1948.” (p. 430).
“POLES GOT RICH OFF DEAD JEWS?” NO. JEWS GOT RICH OFF LIVE PALESTINIANS
Jews are prone to sit on a moral throne and moralize about Polish conduct during WWII. Look who’s talking! Kagan does not beat around the bush as he writes:
“Israel began seizing Arab property by force in an arbitrary fashion during the 1948 war, and quickly followed these seizures by creating a legal regime that transferred Arab land to institutions controlled by Jews. Israel’s nascent government attempted to retroactively legitimize its actions and facilitate further seizures and transfers through legislation enacted during the first five years of Israel’s existence. These actions, at first ad hoc and later organized, had a pronounced discriminatory aspect. Land that had been held by Arabs came to be owned and controlled by Jews and mainly for the benefit of Jews.” (p. 427).
“Even if the 1948 war was an internal civil war, insurgents and armed factions taking part in hostilities are not exempt from international humanitarian law.” (p. 447).
“During the fighting and even before the official founding of the State of Israel, decisions to seize refugee property were taken by a range of actors, including the Jewish Agency, the Agricultural Center, the Israeli army and its precursor militia-the Hagana, and individual Jews.” (p. 433).
“I conclude that the refugees have a strong legal claim to restitution.” (p. 425).
BOTH JEWISH INDIVIDUALS AND THE JEWISH STATE ARE GUILTY
The Holocaust Industry waxes eloquent about how Poles “stole” Jewish property, how “immoral” the Poles are for hanging on to it, and especially about how clever the successive Polish governments have been in papering-over these practices and in avoiding the restitution that Jews think that they are owed. Ironically, and once again, Jews are guilty of the very thing that they accuse Poles of. And how! In regards to the unambiguously stolen Palestinian property and the Israeli state’s “burying” of this egregious theft and denying responsibility, Kagan writes:
“Both the seizures and the transfers were legitimized, at least for Israeli domestic law, via legislation passed by the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) in 1950. However, as a factual matter, seizures and transfers occurred before the enactment of regulations or legislation. Israeli authorities were often attempting to legitimize transactions after the fact. The legal regime they enacted enabled the State of Israel to transform previously Arab property into ‘Israel Lands’ that were managed mainly for the benefit of Jews.” (p. 433).
THE JEWISH SEIZURE OF PALESTINIAN LANDS HAD A RACIST BASIS
Ironic to the recurring bogus Jewish claims that Poles “stole” Jewish property out of greed and (what else?) anti-Semitism, the shoe is on the other foot. Jewish prejudices played a major role in the unilateral confiscations of Palestinian property. As Kagan tells us:
“As I have already argued, discrimination for Jews and against Palestinians was the primary substantive feature of Israel’s confiscation of refugee property. As such, they violated preemptory norms of international law.” (p. 456).
TALMUDIC-STYLE DUAL MORALITY ON SQUATTER’S RIGHTS. JEWS CLAIM TITLE TO PALESTINIAN PROPERTY WHILE DENYING POLES TITLE TO POST-JEWISH PROPERTY
Kagan makes the issue clear:
“Also, Israeli courts have legitimized unauthorized or ad hoc Jewish settlements on refugee land using the concept of an ‘implied license.’ In this doctrine, which is very similar to the common law concept of adverse possession, a Jewish settler can claim the right to remain on a piece of land by virtue of long-term occupancy. For instance, in 1962 the Israeli High Court refused to evict Jews from a pre-1948 Arab village because the evictions would dispossess them ‘from their homes in which they have dwelled by permission and not fraudulently for approximately fourteen years.’” (p. 436).
Note, again, the cynical irony. Good-faith possession of Palestinian property counts for Jews, but good-faith possession of post-Jewish property does not count for Poles. Moreover, Jews claim title to Palestinian property based on only 14 years of squatting but deny to Poles the title to post-Jewish property despite over 75 years of squatting! How farcical can this get?
YES, EVICTION OF CURRENT LONG-TERM OWNERS IS A VIABLE CONCERN
Many in the media and in the standard Judeocentric publications characterize Poles as “paranoid” and (what else?) anti-Semitic for believing that visiting Jews are out to “take back” the properties that Poles have now owned for several decades. Think again.
Fears concerning the eviction of secondary occupants are not so paranoid after all, as this still is a legally viable option in property-restitution claims. Today’s Jews, having squatted on obviously-stolen Palestinian property for many decades, are no less “paranoid” than the Poles. Kagan alludes to this:
“These authorities and recent precedents support the strongest possible argument for restitution of Palestinian refugee property even if it requires evicting secondary Israeli occupants. If it was illegitimate for Israel to have confiscated the property in the first place, then this violation must be remedied.” (p. 472).
“The Pinheiro Principles and ILC draft articles should be seen as an indication of a legal trend, but it is premature to conclude that clear rules of law always prohibit allowing some secondary occupants to resist eviction and hence block refugee restitution if they acquired the property in good faith.” (p. 478).
CONCLUSION
In view of the fact that Jews have stolen Palestinian land, in such a direct and unambiguous way, they have no right to complain about Poland acquiring post-Jewish property through indirect ways. When Jews point fingers at Poland, three fingers point back at them.
Jews have no right to stake out a moral high ground, regarding Jewish properties lost in the German-made Holocaust, until they have fully compensated the Palestinians. They have no right to even accuse Poles until they have come to terms with THEIR past. The Polish government should categorically refuse to even entertain any form of Jewish demands until the Jews have fully paid restitution to the Palestinians.
Let us make this more universal. Why be concerned about the wrongs faced by Palestinians? An injustice to one is an injustice to all. There should be an international agreement that automatically rejects any and all Holocaust-related Jewish claims against others, until such time as the Jews have fully compensated the Palestinians.
