top of page

Israeli Sovereignty and Canadian Morality - CAEF Bulletin, June 24, 2020

An Open Letter to Prime Minister Trudeau and Cabinet

Canadians take note --The Government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has voted against Israel at the United Nations, and is publicly choosing to pressure the Government of Israel not to “annex” the Jordan Valley and 30% of the Disputed Territories of Judea and Samaria. International legal experts point out that what is proposed cannot be characterized as “annexation,” but is the extension of Israeli sovereignty to an area that was originally part of the lands designated for the Jewish people in 1917, then 1920, then approved by the League of Nations in 1922, and again in the formation of the UN in 1945 and has never been abrogated.

Additionally, after Israel liberated Judea and Samaria in 1967 from Jordan, an illegal occupier, it could have brought all the land under Israeli sovereignty as it did east Jerusalem. Then in the Oslo Accords of the 90s, the Arabs agreed that Area C would become part of Israel. The current proposal only includes 30% of the Disputed Territories, an area deemed in the Oslo Accords to ultimately be part of Israel.

Canadians must have historical and legal facts in considering the position taken by our Government. Below we provide multiple expert views on Israel’s sovereignty and rights to the land.

CAEF asks: What is the Moral Authority by which the Canadian Government chooses to express opposition to the duly elected government of Israel and its right to make its own decisions? Israel is an Ally.

The Canadian Government has held itself out as operating from a high moral standard with other countries, so where is its morality now?

CAEF will send the letter below to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Cabinet and welcomes your signature.

Over 80 Canadians from across the country have signed this letter. If you wish to be added, send an email to Andria Spindel, with your name, profession or trade, and city of residence:


June 2020

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Cabinet of the Government of Canada

Re: Israel’s Legal Rights

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau and Members of Cabinet,

We write to you today to ask that you acknowledge Israel’s independence and legal rights to act as a sovereign nation in resolving its own conflicts with its neighbors, settling land issues within its borders, and establishing and ensuring civil and human rights to those who live within its borders.

Today, many countries are attempting to dictate to Israel as to how and when it should resolve the 100-year-old conflict perpetuated by its Arab neighbors and residents. While the reconstituted Jewish state is only 72 years old, the Jewish people have been working to re-establish their historical home in Israel for almost 2000 years. Their legal rights were acknowledged by the world community in April 1920 at the San Remo Conference of the victorious Allied Powers, when the last colonizers, the Ottoman Turks were finally removed from the area. The San Remo Resolution was then adopted by all members of the League of Nations, including Canada, and was a foundational principle in the founding of the United Nations. Arab resistance and intransigence commenced even before the state was proclaimed.

The original land granted to the Jewish people under the Mandate system was significantly larger than all of Israel today and included not only Judea and Samaria, (generally referred to by the media as the West Bank) but also land east of the Jordan that was included in the Kingdom of Jordan. Some call this, not unreasonably, the first Two-State solution. Over many decades, Israel has offered additional land to settle the hostilities to which its neighbors appear devoted. Every offer made since the 1948 Declaration of Independence has been rejected by the Arab states and the Palestinian Arabs without any counter offer, making it rather obvious to any astute observer that the only acceptable outcome for the Arab world is that Israel should cease to exist.

Today, there are many countries in the world which continue for reasons, sometimes of ignorance and sometimes of prejudice, to betray Israel and expect and even demand that this very tiny country give up more. Suffice it to say, this is not a matter for other countries to dictate, and that includes Canada.

And so we call upon the Government of Canada to support Israel’s decision, whatever it will be, regarding the extension of sovereignty in an area already legally its own, granted by the San Remo Resolution and the “Mandate for Palestine” -- rights that have never been abrogated according to Article 80 of the UN Charter.

Israel’s sovereignty is the only guarantee that can protect its citizens and non-citizen residents, and anything less risks more lives from belligerent antisemitic enemies who have never given up their one goal—the demise of Israel.

Israel is not the problem! The initiative to find a peaceful solution has always come from Israel and not the Palestinian Arab Authority (PA) and its terrorist partners, the PLO, Fatah and Hamas. Today it is common knowledge that the PA is paying terrorists to kill Jews, teaching Jew-hatred in its schools, denying Israel’s existence, denying the Holocaust that killed 6,000,000 Jews, and fabricating stories daily about Israel, while Israel provides the Arabs with medical and technical assistance, security, funding for services, and access to jobs. More than that—the Israeli Arabs enjoy all the benefits of a democratic society, which is denied to the Arabs who live under PA or Hamas rule. Many Arabs are in favour of Israel applying sovereignty.

Do not make the mistake of preferring the false PA narrative and discounting Israel’s rights, its historic and legal claims and its democracy. Do not choose a terrorist regime over an ally. Recognize that the PA does not grant equal rights to women, bans or punishes LGBTQ people, jails political dissidents, does not allow freedom of religion or freedom of expression, raises children to venerate suicide bombers deny historical facts and commit other atrocities. Do not succumb to the antisemitic campaigns now being waged against Israel within Canada and globally. Canada should at minimum be consistent with its values.

We call on the Government of Canada to recognize Israel’s legal rights and support its democratically elected government, (a coalition government representing over 75% of the population), and NOT oppose its decisions in regards to Judea and Samaria, decisions that affect its security and even its existence.

This letter is supported by Canadians across the country, whose signatures you will find below. Respectfully,

Andria Spindel, Executive Director &

Anita Bromberg, PresidenT



In this Bulletin, we are providing several outstanding articles about the issue of “annexation”/sovereignty. There is significant media bias in Canada, which is ignoring facts and expressing negative views towards Israel. Repeating myths and inaccuracies reinforces them. Sadly, one national radio newscast reported that Canada lost its bid for a Security Council seat because of its “bias towards Israel.”

Please consider the arguments expressed by Israel supporters, legal experts and government of Israel representatives in the articles presented below.

International Christian Embassy Jerusalem’s statement on Annexation Extending Israeli Sovereignty in Judea & Samaria

June 5, 2020

"With a new Israeli government finally in place, the debate is now fully engaged – at home and abroad –as to whether Israel should “annex” portions of Judea/Samaria under the terms of the Trump peace plan.

As this debate unfolds, the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem will remain respectful of Israeli democracy and the right of its citizens to decide these matters of great national concern. Yet we also realise not everyone will afford Israel the same respect, and thus we will stand with Israel’s historic claim to the lands under consideration and its right to make these decisions free of undue interference, pressure and threats.

The term “annexation” is actually a misnomer in this instance, as it commonly denotes the forcible taking of the territory of another. But here, Israel already held a legitimate historic right and claim to Judea/Samaria even before it came into possession of these areas in an act of self-defense in 1967. The question now facing Israel is whether to fully assert its sovereign title to certain of these territories by simply extending its laws there."


Media Ignore Canada’s Throwing Israel to the Wolves in bid to get a United Nations Security Council Seat

June 17, 2020

"It went completely below the media’s radar – how Canada signalled that it was prepared to make Israel a sacrificial lamb and was willing to enter into a Faustian bargain with dictators, to secure a coveted seat on the United Nations Security Council.

In the final days of its campaign against Norway and Ireland for two available seats, Canada pushed back at critics of its bid by promoting its pro-Palestinian credentials and hiding its pro-Israel legacy.

On June 10, Marc-André Blanchard, Canada’s ambassador to the UN, penned a letter addressed to all member and observer states of the UN Security Council in which he censured Israel for its plans to apply sovereignty to Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) as being “contrary to international law” and for posing a “threat” to the two-state solution."


"On June 10-11, 2020, a number of our colleagues published an open letter to Israel’s Prime Minister and other senior Israeli officials warning of international violence and criminal prosecutions should the democratically elected government of Israel, in coordination with the United States, implement its proposal to apply the law, jurisdiction and administration of Israel to parts of the West Bank that are expected to stay under Israel’s permanent sovereignty in the event of an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.

We signatories hold various opinions on the wisdom of the proposal, but we all agree that whatever decision Israel’s unity left-right government ultimately makes will come after months of vigorous public debate, and elections in which the proposed policy was very much an issue. The misleading or inaccurate nature of many of the statements in the open letter does not help that debate. Unfortunately, the open letter misrepresents both the doctrines of international law that bear on the Israeli-American proposal, and the factual and historical background that must guide any attempt to apply that law. The open letter presents a variety of legal claims said to be incontrovertible—even bedrock rules of international law—though in reality, they are highly controversial. For instance, the open letter presents one view of the concept of self-determination and its relationship to statehood and territorial sovereignty, but the open letter fails to acknowledge that the subjects remain highly contested. Certainly, there is no universal agreement that a claim of self-determination entails a right to future statehood and territorial sovereignty, let alone that self-determination is legally equivalent to statehood and attendant territorial sovereignty."


The West Bank's Status Quo is More Dangerous than Applying Sovereignty

June 19, 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Contrary to the alarming charge that the application of sovereignty over parts of the West Bank would transform Israel into a binational state, doing so would not affect 95% of the West Bankers who have been living under the rule of the Palestinian Authority since January 1996. They will continue to do so. The move does entail political risks, but they are smaller than the security hazards that would accompany Israel’s inability to maintain a permanent security presence in the Jordan Valley.


Ron Dermer, Israeli Ambassador to the United States, quoted in the Times of Israel, from an oped in the Washington Post

"The world has helped foster false Palestinian hopes of ending the Israeli state, asserts Jerusalem’s plan will help them accept reality."



June 15, 2020

Here is an excerpt: “As others have pointed out, the term ‘annexation’ is not at the heart of the problem. Annexation implies the seizure of land that belongs to another country, like Russia did in Crimea. But the land in question was ceded to the Jewish nation in the San Remo Conference of 1920, then ratified by the League of Nations and affirmed by the United Nations.

Since the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, no nation has held legal claim to the land of Judea and Samaria except Israel. Although Jordan occupied this territory between 1948 and 1967, it has since abandoned its claim to it. It is false, then, to suggest that Israel has no legal rights to this land.”


Jewish Telegraph Agency Reports on Letter from Top Republicans Backing Israel’s Rights; Recognizing Israel is a Sovereign State

WASHINGTON (JTA) Ron Kampeas reported on June 22, 2020 that Top Republicans spearheaded a letter backing Israel’s right to determine its borders at a time that Democrats are pressing Israel not to annex parts of the West Bank.

“We write to reaffirm the unshakeable alliance between the United States and Israel, to emphasize that Israel has the right to make sovereign decisions independent of outside pressure, and to express our support for you as you make such decisions in your capacity as Israel’s democratically-elected prime minister,” said the letter sent Monday to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “As dedicated friends of the Jewish state, we reaffirm our steadfast commitment to the relationship between our two nations and Israel’s right to sovereignty and defensible borders.”


Algemeiner article by Daniel Pomerantz, CEO, Honest Reporting, June 22, 2020

This article challenges the letter writers and media who have claimed Israel has no right to “annex” lands in Judea and Samaria. Honest Reporting exists to challenge media lies, and Pomerantz does an excellent job. Here is an excerpt from his article:

“Indeed, the question of whether annexation is right or wrong is hotly contested even among Israelis. Yet whether annexation is right and whether it is legal are two different questions. The law is not some kind of popularity contest, like American Idol or Eurovision, and journalists should not imply otherwise to the public by touting a vague and misleading letter. A journalist should instead present credible legal opinions on both sides of the issue and educate the public as to what legal analysis truly requires: a rigorous examination of the original source materials.

The relevant legal question is actually not whether there is use of force, but whether there is violation of state sovereignty (forceful or otherwise). This is apparent in the Cook Islands (1900), Island of Palmas Arbitration (1928), and Eastern Greenland (1933) cases, all three of which were annexed under circumstances that did not involve sovereignty violations. Other cases did involve sovereignty issues but were completed via mutual consent, such as America’s annexation of Texas and Hawaii, while still others do involve violations of sovereignty and of international law, such as Russia’s 2014 “annexation” of the Crimea.”


Newsweek--Palestinians and Israelis Will Both Gain From Israeli Sovereignty Over West Bank

June 22, 2020, by Avi Bell, Kohelet Policy Forum

“Palestinians and Israelis will both gain from what is wrongly being labeled West Bank "annexation." Soon after July 1, Israel is expected to apply its civilian law to roughly half of "Area C" of Judea and Samaria (i.e., the West Bank)…. residents will no longer be subject to the antiquated mix of Ottoman, Mandatory British, Jordanian and military rules that confound even the simplest transactions. Area C's law is full of anomalies, from the absence of environmental law to a ban on the purchase of land by non-Jordanians. Non-Israeli residents of Area C have no access to Israel's unemployment insurance, subsidized national health care and other welfare programs. Israel's Supreme Court has essentially blocked piece-by-piece legislation to clean up the mess. Applying Israeli law as a whole will grant citizens the benefits of a modern liberal democratic legal codex.”


bottom of page