I thought I would clarify the question of whether the UN “created Israel,” since most people – even many of those who are otherwise well-versed on Palestine – are misinformed on this important matter.
The fact is that UN General Assembly Resolution 181, the Partition Plan (read below), was a recommendation that was to go to the Security Council. In the resolution the General Assembly requested that the Security Council take it up. This never happened, and the partition plan has no force of law.
Israeli propagandists, however, perpetrated the myth that the UN created Israel, and this interpretation was then been repeated by numerous others. Please see an article on this, “New States Are Not Created in the UN“. Below is an excerpt:
“…was it true that Israel owed its very existence to the U.N., as it became popularly perceived years later? …This same line of argument was repeated… by an Israeli analyst in the opinion section of the New York Times, who wrote that the vote on Nov. 29 was the “legal basis for the establishment of the State of Israel.”
Leading international legal scholars have vociferously rejected this claim. The noted Australian legal scholar Professor Julius Stone wrote in 1980 that Israel “does not derive its legal existence from the Partition Plan.”
Even Cambridge University’s Professor James Crawford… concluded in his monumental book on the creation of states in international law that Israel was not created on the basis of Resolution 181…”
International jurist Henry Cattan, in his 1988 book The Palestine Question, explained the various reasons that the partition resolution was invalid, writing that the resolution was “vitiated by several gross irregularities.”
(1) First, he points out that the UN General Assembly did not have the authority to partition Palestine.
He writes: “The UN possessed no sovreignty over Palestine, nor the power to deprive the people of Palestie of their right of independence. Hence, the UN resolution for the partition of Palestine possesses no value, in law or in fact, as acknowledged by a number of leading jurists.”
Cattan quotes Pitman B. Potter‘s article in the American Journal of International Law (vol. 42, 1948 p. 860): “The United Nations has no right to dictate a solution in Palestine unless a basis for such authority can be worked out such has not been done this far.” Potter goes on to point out that Arabs denied the binding force of the Mandate and the Balfour Declaration, and says “they are probably quite correct juridically.”
Cattan also quotes Professor Quincy Wright‘s 1968 address to the Association of the Bar of the City of New York: “The legality of the General Assembly’s recommendation for partition of Palestine was doubtful.”
He also cites the statement by Professor I. Brownie in his 1966 book Principles of International Law: “It is doubtful if the United Nations ‘has a capacity to convey title’, inter alia because the Organization cannot assume the role of territorial sovereign… Thus the resolution of 1947 cotaining a Partition plan for Palestine was probably ultra vires [outside the competence of the United Nations], and, if it was not, was no binding on member states in any case.”
Cattan concludes: “It follows, therefore, that the partition resolution was not legally effective or binding on the Palestinian people.”
(2) Denial of justice. A second irregularity was that the General Assembly refused to refer questions of its competence on this matter to the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion.
Cattan writes: “P.B. Potter has observed that the rejection of the Arab requests to refer the question of UN jurisdiction over the Palestine sistuation to the International Court of Justice ‘tends to confirm the avoidance of international law’ ni this regard.”
Cattan concludes: “Such avoidance of international law constituted a denial of justice which deprived the partition resolution of any juridical value.”
(3) Cattan points out that the resolution violated Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, “which previously recognized the independence of the people of Palestine…”
(4) The resolution was also a “violation of the Charter of the UN and the principle of self-determination of the people of Palestine.”
(5) It violated “the most elementary democratic principles by the flagrant disregard of the will of the majority of the original inhabitants who opposed partition of their homeland.”
(6) He points out the “undue influence” of the US president (and others) in passing the resolution.
(7) He discusses the “iniquity of the plan of partition.” pointing out that “the partition plan attributed to the Jews – who constituted less than one-third of the population, who were largely foreigners and who owned less than 6 percent of the land – an area almost ten times greater than what they owned…”
Cattan concludes, “This was not partition, but a spoliation.”
In reality, Israel was created by a war of conquest and ethnic cleansing, which it calls its “War of Independence.”
I hope people will read my article on this subject: “ The Real Story of How Israel Was Created. Among other things, this piece describes how Zionists bribed and threatened varous UN member nations in order to procure sufficient votes to pass the resolution. (For citations on this see my article on how the US-Israel “special relationship” was created.)
Below is an excerpt from General Assembly Resolution 181, also called The Partition Plan [emphases added]. (Read the full resolution at the link below.)
The General Assembly,
Having met in special session at the request of the mandatory Power to constitute and instruct a special committee to prepare for the consideration of the question of the future government of Palestine at the second regular session;
Having constituted a Special Committee and instructed it to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine, and to prepare proposals for the solution of the problem, and
Having received and examined the report of the Special Committee (document A/364) 1/ including a number of unanimous recommendations and a plan of partition with economic union approved by the majority of the Special Committee,
Considers that the present situation in Palestine is one which is likely to impair the general welfare and friendly relations among nations;
Takes note of the declaration by the mandatory Power that it plans to complete its evacuation of Palestine by 1 August 1948;
Recommends to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below;
Requests that
(a) The Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation…
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253