A few rocks

China and Japan are practically prepared to go to war over a few rocks in the East China Sea.  China claims the islands of Diaoyutais and Japan claims the same islands, but calls them Senkaku.  It all depends on one's interpretation of post-WWII treaties.  Meanwhile students are rioting in Beijing and Tokyo.  Russia controls the Kuril Islands that it captured during WWII, but Japan claims them back, they are still in dispute.  Then there are the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea that are claimed by Vietnam, China, Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines.  Britain went to war over the Falkland Islands that are 8,000 miles from its homeland, even though Agentina claims them as the Malvinas.  Of course, there are many other territorial disputes around the world, but all these nations think they have the moral right to advise Israel what it should do about the territories of Judea and Samaria, that are an integral part of the Holy Land.   

At the very least these are disputed territories, often called the West Bank, and considered to be the potential basis of a Palestinian State simply because Arabs live there.  Should Washington DC become the capital of a Black State just because a majority of Blacks (85%) live there?  Should Fiji become a part of India just because the Fijians are outnumbered by a majority of Hindus?  Should Assam become a Muslim State just because a majority of Muslims live there, that has caused the indigenous Bodo tribe to riot.  Here we are in an area of ambiguity, the presence of a majority does not necessarily signify sovereignty.  This is a false assumption that often otherwise well-meaning liberals mistakenly make.  The presence of a majority of Arabs in Judea and Samaria, which they conquered centuries ago, does not necessarily give them the right to establish a Palestinian State on that territory.  If such an outcome is to occur it must be as a result of negotiations, as required by all relevant UN resolutions.  However, the Palestinian leadership are not abe to negotiate, since they are split between Fatah and Hamas and cannot overcome their fundamental differences.  The longer they wait the more will Israel occupy and take-over that territory, that it has a legal claim to.

Many States have territorial claims against them.  Should Wales and Scotland become independent of the UK because they have majorities of Welsh and Scots respectively?  Territorial disputes have led to wars within Europe many times, such as between Hungary and Romania over Transylvania, France and Germany over Alsace-Lorraine, Denmark and Germany over Schleswig-Holstein, etc, etc.  These disputes are usually resolved by war (as in the case of the Falklands) or treaty (as in the case of Scotland).  It would probably have been preferable if Israel had annexed the WB when it occupied it in 1967, just as most countries do after they win a war. But, they didn't, so now we are left with the consequences, an endless dispute.