Pompeo flounders on why annexation is good for the Golan but not for Crimea

[Eugene]

Source: The Guardian

Pompeo flounders on why annexation is good for the Golan but not for Crimea

Trump’s decision to recognise Israeli sovereignty over territory it seized from Syria sets a troubling precedent, experts fear

Julian Borger in Washington
Thu 11 Apr 2019 09.00 BST Last modified on Thu 11 Apr 2019 09.01 BST

Under intense questioning about why the Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights was good but the Russian seizure of Crimea was bad, the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, told senators that there was an “international law doctrine” which would be explained to them later.

It turned out there was no doctrine. The state department’s clarification of Pompeo’s remarks contained no reference to one, and experts on international law said that none exists.

Donald Trump’s decision last month to recognise Israeli sovereignty over the Golan, captured from Syria in 1967, took the state department by surprise, and it has been struggling to catch up since.

Pompeo has provided several justifications for the move, from ancient Jewish roots on the plateau, to the justness of the Israeli cause in the “six-day war”, and the blunt force of “facts on the ground”.

On Tuesday, bombarded by senators’ questions on the distinction between the Golan and the Crimean cases, he suggested there was a body of international law underpinning Trump’s move, that would soon be revealed.

-snip-

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/11/golan-heights-crimea-pompeo-us-state-department

[SWBTATTReg]

1. How condescending. And proves what an idiot he is. ...

There is no international law doctrine covering the seizure and annexation of this land, other than brute force. The excuse of this area having an ancient Jewish history background associated with it or the 'justness of the Israel cause' is no excuse what-so-ever. The whole area was carved out by the powers that be in the end of or just immediately after WWII.

The sad fact of reality on the ground is that you have thousands of tanks, troops, etc. all within literally a stone's throw from Israel. There is no 'legal' concept involved here other than simple brute force. I do understand the concept of self defense (among highest spots around), and Israel is concerned about bombardment from these heights into populated areas, but isn't that where trust needs to begin?, so the peace process can begin?

rump and poppeo are going backwards in trying to resolve this long simmering issue (Golan heights) being seized during the six day war in the 60s.

[Mosby]

2. Trust assad?

You can't be serious.

[SWBTATTReg]

3. And where did I say this? Where? Don't put words into my postings that I didn't write. NT

[Mosby]

4. Right here

I do understand the concept of self defense (among highest spots around), and Israel is concerned about bombardment from these heights into populated areas, but isn't that where trust needs to begin?, so the peace process can begin?

Who is Israel supposed to be trusting?

[SWBTATTReg]

5. I most certainly did not. QUIT putting or making up words into my post. I realize ...

that the Golan Heights are a high point in that area, which can be attacked by drones, aircraft, kites, cannon, whatever, and somehow you think that the vaunted Israeli defense forces can't defend themselves from incursions into the G. Heights, especially with all of the new technology now available?

I doubt that this is what you are saying but I certainly am not saying anything positive or supportive of the scumbag who only rules a portion of Syria today (and barely, only w/ the support of the Russians). I don't know who Israel is supposed to be trusting, why don't you tell us all here on DU since you seem to know all about it.

[Mosby]

6. well for the record I don't support annexation

Nor do I think they should hand over the area to the Syrians. Israel and Syria are still technically at war, so if that ever changes and the Syrians experience democracy then the Golan can be discussed.

[SWBTATTReg]

7. I agree w/ you. Until assad is gone I wouldn't trust them/him one bit especially with how ...

assad murdered 10s of thousands, if not more of his own citizens. And using gas and worse on his own citizens. Scumbag is one of the worst since Stalin, Mao, and others like them. How can anyone trust someone like this? You can't. I was hoping when things were in a 'talking stage' earlier, that assad would have left and someone else would have taken over, but unfortunately the Russians stepped in.

I do have the highest respect for the Israel defense forces, who are probably (IMHO) better than the next 10 military forces combined in that whole area. Easily. That's why I say having territory isn't the key to defense...you can win it back pretty easily if your military forces can stomp the crap of you if need be, which I think they can do rather easily. Take care.