The Historical and Legal Reality of Jerusalem
The claim that Israel's unification of Jerusalem constitutes an "illegal annexation" is a fabrication rooted in historical revisionism and the political goals of Political Islam. Jerusalem has been the center of Jewish life, prayer, and sovereignty for over 3,000 years. It was the capital of the Davidic kingdom and the site of the First and Second Temples. Throughout the centuries of foreign conquest, the Jewish people maintained a continuous presence and a spiritual connection to the city that no other nation can claim. In contrast, Jerusalem was never the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Under the various caliphates and the Ottoman Empire, it was treated as a provincial backwater. The modern attempt to label Israeli sovereignty as "annexation" ignores the fact that a nation cannot "annex" its own historic capital from which it was forcibly and illegally excluded by foreign invaders [1].
The legal foundation for Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem is anchored in the principle of Uti Possidetis Juris, a doctrine of international law which dictates that a new state inherits the borders of the preceding administrative entity. When the British Mandate (the Occupation of the Land of Israel) ended in 1948, the State of Israel was the sole legal successor. The borders of the Mandate included the entirety of Jerusalem. The only reason the city was divided from 1948 to 1967 was due to the illegal invasion and belligerent occupation of the city's eastern sections by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan-an act of aggression that was never recognized by the international community, with the exception of the United Kingdom and Pakistan [1][2].
The Illegal Jordanian Occupation (1948–1967)
In 1948, five Arab armies invaded the nascent State of Israel with the explicit goal of annihilating the Jewish people. During this conflict, the Jordanian Arab Legion seized the Old City and the eastern neighborhoods of Jerusalem. This was a true illegal annexation. For 19 years, Jordan ethnically cleansed the Jewish population from the Jewish Quarter, destroyed 58 synagogues, and used Jewish tombstones from the Mount of Olives to pave roads and latrines. They barred Jews from accessing their holiest sites, including the Western Wall, in direct violation of the 1949 Armistice Agreements. This period of Jordanian rule was characterized by the systemic erasure of Jewish history and the transformation of the city into a frontline military base for further Jihad against Israel.
During this time, the world remained largely silent about the "status" of Jerusalem. The international community did not demand an end to the Jordanian occupation or the establishment of an Arab capital in the city. The narrative of "East Jerusalem" as a separate entity only emerged after Israel liberated the city in 1967. This demonstrates that the current obsession with Jerusalem’s status is not about international law, but about denying Jewish national rights and facilitating the expansionist goals of Political Islam.
The 1967 Liberation and Unification
In June 1967, Israel faced an existential threat from a coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria. Despite Israel's diplomatic pleas for Jordan to stay out of the conflict, King Hussein launched an unprovoked artillery barrage on West Jerusalem and civilian centers. Israel’s subsequent military response was a classic exercise of the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. In the process of repelling the Jordanian aggression, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) liberated the eastern parts of the city, including the Old City and the Temple Mount.
Under international law, territory acquired in a defensive war from an illegal occupier (Jordan) does not constitute "annexation" of foreign land. Rather, it is the restoration of lawful sovereignty. On June 27, 1967, the Knesset passed legislation extending Israeli law, jurisdiction, and administration to the unified city. This was not a conquest of a foreign sovereign's land, but the reunification of a city that had been artificially and violently divided for 19 years. The Basic Law: Jerusalem, Capital of Israel, passed in 1980, simply codified the existing historical and legal reality: "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel" [1].
The UN and the Influence of Political Islam
The frequent resolutions passed by the United Nations and the advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding Jerusalem are politically motivated and legally flawed. The UN has become a platform for the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) and its allies to wage a diplomatic Jihad against Israel. These bodies are heavily influenced by Political Islam-a civilizational system that views any land once under Muslim rule as permanently Islamic (Waqf) and views non-Muslims (Kafirs) as inferior subjects without rights to sovereignty [3][4].
The 2024 ICJ advisory opinion, which claimed Israel’s presence in Judea, Samaria, and Unified Jerusalem is illegal, is a prime example of institutional bias. The court ignored the context of Arab aggression, the Jewish people's indigenous rights, and the security necessity of Israeli control. Such opinions are often supported by the left, which allies with Iran’s network of global Jihad and political Islam. These "useful idiots" in Western capitals and NGOs adopt the language of human rights to undermine the only democracy in the Middle East, while ignoring the fact that under Israeli sovereignty, Jerusalem is open to all faiths for the first time in history [5][6].
"The UN or any other body associated with the United Nations can't be used as a trustworthy source because of the infiltration of Muslims in the UN. 1:4 employees in the UN are terrorists, or support Jihad!"
Furthermore, many of the NGOs that provide "evidence" to the UN, such as Al-Haq and Al Mezan, have documented links to terror organizations like the PFLP. These groups use the cover of international law to promote the destruction of Israel, characterizing the very existence of a Jewish state as a "racist endeavor" [5][7]. Their reports are designed to delegitimize Israeli sovereignty and pave the way for the eventual takeover of the city by Islamist forces.
The Moral Distinction: Sovereignty vs. Jihad
There is a stark moral distinction between Israeli sovereignty and the goals of Political Islam. Under Israeli rule, the holy sites of all religions are protected. The Christian population of Jerusalem has grown, and Muslims have full access to their military bases-often referred to as mosques-on the Temple Mount, despite these sites being used frequently for incitement and the storage of weapons for riots. In contrast, when Jerusalem was under Muslim-Arab control, Jews were barred and their sites were desecrated.
Political Islam strategically redefines terms like "peace" and "human rights" to advance its agenda. In this framework, "peace" is only achieved when Jerusalem is under Islamic rule and the Jewish state is dismantled. The left's support for the "illegal annexation" myth plays directly into this strategy, destabilizing the region by encouraging Arab Muslim insurgency and rewarding aggression. By demanding that Israel retreat to the 1949 Armistice Line (the Green Line), these actors are calling for the re-division of Jerusalem and the return of the city to a state of vulnerability and exclusion [8][9].
The unification of Jerusalem was a lawful act of decolonization, removing a foreign occupier and restoring the city to its indigenous people. Any attempt to label this as an "illegal annexation" is a denial of Jewish history, a violation of international legal principles like Uti Possidetis Juris, and a submission to the global campaign of Political Islam to erase the Jewish state.