Skip to content

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

Israeli Security, Regional Diplomacy, and International Law

Menu

“Why Is a Meeting in San Remo 101 Years Ago So Important?”

 
Filed under: Israel

“Why Is a Meeting in San Remo 101 Years Ago So Important?”
San Remo, Italy, April 25, 1920, A resolution on a Jewish homeland in Palestine was declared by prime ministers of Britain (David Lloyd George), France (Alexandre Millerand), Italy (Francesco Nitti), and Japan’s Ambassador K. Matsui. (Wikimedia)

On April 29, 2021, Dr. Dore Gold, President of the Jerusalem Center, was interviewed by Professor Ugo Volli of Turin University in Shalom Magazine, published in Italy. Below is the translation of excerpts from “Siamo Ancora un Popolo Che Dimora Da Solo” – Intervista a Dore Gold

What is the 101-year-old San Remo Conference, and why is it important today?

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, states were born through great international conferences. For example, the Congress of Berlin took former Ottoman territories in 1878 and granted them independence, creating Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro. Bulgaria also emerged from this division of Ottoman territories. After the First World War, international conferences of the victorious allied powers led to a division of formerly Ottoman territories as well. It was in San Remo, Italy, that the powers decided on the emergence of a national home for the Jewish People that established the State of Israel. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was a statement of British policy; the San Remo Resolution of 1920 was a formal international treaty that was legally binding.

In the years between 1919 and 1922, many states were established. Why, after one century, is the right of the State of Israel to exist still disputed?

Israel is the only state whose legal foundation was rooted in acts of the League of Nations and the United Nations. Its legitimacy was backed by both bodies. But Israel is a state that is not protected by coalitions of countries. If a group of states wants to challenge the existence of Belgium, they will confront the collective power of the European Union. If Singapore’s existence is called into question, then the ASEAN states will “circle the wagons.” The American veto in the UN Security Council has provided Israel with protection from one-sided attacks on Israel. But that is not applicable in the General Assembly with its 193 members. Israel is still what the Bible (Numbers 23:9) describes as “a people that shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.”  

Yet, after the Balfour Declaration, San Remo and the League of Nations, a large non-government organization, Human Rights Watch, can criticize the existence of the state of the Jewish People as “racist.” Is it a political issue, or is it anti-Semitism?

This is pure anti-Semitism. Why do French people have a right to France, but the Jewish people have no right to a state of their own? Double standards are one of the indicators that anti-Semitism is present. And the apartheid charge is yet another form of anti-Semitism that ignores the reality of modern Israel.

In apartheid South Africa, there were separate hospitals for blacks and whites. Anyone who visits an Israeli hospital, like Hadassah in Jerusalem, will see in the Emergency Room and all wards Arab and Jewish doctors working together taking care of Arab and Jewish patients. In the 1980s, Israel sent its air force into Africa to bring out Ethiopian Jews. Is that an apartheid state?