Dear sirs,

I have been following this topic closely as my dissertation topic is
about the No Man's Land and I was hoping someone (anyone!) on the list
help me out with some clarification.

I am looking into the status of the No Man's Land (the one in the
Latrun area specifically). As the prospect of a new Palestinian state
draws closer, the issue of the Latrun Salient will become prominent. The
Palestinians consider it part of the West Bank while the Israelis
don't. In fact, three Israeli settlements have been built exactly in
that area. The following map shows part of the area I am talking about
but not all of it (the three settlements are further north; I can
supply a map by attachment if needs be).

http://www.poica.org/photos/latrun/reloc_checkp.jpg

I have two problems:

First, I can't seem to find anything written about the standing of No
Man's Land in international law in general. For example, what sort of
state practice (owing to actual occupation) might bestow legal rights to
such a territory? What are the rights and duties of whoever is there?
Then again, in this case, the UN was patroling the area so where is the
sovereignty?

Second, I couldn't find material written about the No Man's Land in the
Latrun Salient specifically. I know that many books on the 1948 war and
events leading to the 1967 war talk about the importance of the Salient
to Israel (and the various skirmishes in the area) but nothing about
the status of the No Man's land. I find it strange that no one wrote
about this.  The April 3, 1949 General Armistice Agreement
between Israel and Jordan specifically states that the truce lines do
not prejudice their respective territorial claims. however, I couldn't
find any official statements on the matter after that.


I am thinking, I am either looking in the wrong places (or for the
wrong thing) or that it really hasn't been covered.  So if anyone can
answer these questions or lead me to some sources, I would be very
grateful.

Thanking you in advance,

Nizar Farsakh

MA student at KCL
International Boundary Studies



On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 10:02:05 +0100 "John W. Donaldson"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

$ Dear Mike,
$
$ This is an interesting question concerning the very strange Mount
$ Scopus anomoly in the Armistice line. The area on Mount Scopus
$ possessed two hospitals, one that was held in high regard by the
$ Israelis (near the university, although it was largely unused) and a
$ second, located on a spur of the Mount Scopus ridge (on the side
$ towards but not actually on the Mount of Olives) which was being used
$ by the Arab forces. The whole of Mount Scopus was never intended to be
$ an Israeli enclave, as the Israeli force on Mount Scopus was close to
$ being overrun when they negotiated with the UN that Arab shelling of
$ their hospital (which had been funded by a prominent American
$ benfactor) would upset the American administration, and that the
$ university should be protected.
$
$ Instead, because of the presence of the hospitals and the university
$ it was delimited by the UN as a demilitarized zone and administered by
$ the UN in order to preserve the area's "humanitarian and cultural"
$ significance. It was intended that UN forces would monitor the area
$ and only lightly armed Israeli and Arab police could patrol their
$ respective areas. However, both sides reinforced their positions as
$ the UN monitoring force was never strong enough to curb the activity
$ of the two sides. Eventually the few UN monitors withdrew from the
$ area. Technically the area was under UN administration as a
$ demilitarized area, but the situation on the ground was very
$ different. Until 1967 both sides maintained their presence on Mount
$ Scopus divided by the no man's land. The Israeli positions were only
$ sustained by UN monitored supply convoys.
$
$ There is controversy concerning the actual size and outline of the
$ Mount Scopus demilitarized area, as there were two versions put forth
$ on two different maps. The map given by National Geographic shows the
$ Mount Scopus area defined by the map attached to the 7 July 1948
$ cease fire agreement. There was another map of Mount Scopus drawn on
$ 21 July 1948 by both parties and the UN to help define the
$ administration of the area. This second map depicts the demilitarised
$ area on Mount Scopus as being much smaller that the 7 July map and was
$ known (according to statements by both parties) to give a better
$ indication of the actual position of the forces on Mount Scopus. (For
$ example, the no man's land was actually defined as being only the
$ width of a road connecting the Arab hospital with Mount Scopus itself,
$ but the 7 July map shows this area being quite wide.) However, the 21
$ July map was supposedly not initialed by the Israelis, and an
$ "official" version of the 21 July map has never been found. The
$ dispute was never settled prior to 1967. For more information
$ concerning the Mount Scopus issue you can find the Phd dissertation of
$ Norman Gosenfeld (UCLA) entitled "The Spatial Division of Jerusalem
$ 1948-69" from 1973 on the ProQuest website or other dissertation
$ storage sites.
$
$ I hope that this information can be of use and if you have any further
$ questions please let me know.
$ Best wishes,
$
$ John Donaldson
$
$ -------------------
$ > >From 1949-1967, according to certain National Geographic maps, the
$ area
$ > surrounding Mount Scopus was administered by Israel.  An adjacent
$ area near the
$ > Mount of Olives, separated from the Israeli enclave by a narrow
$ strip of No Man's
$ > Land, was adminstered by Jordan during the same period of time.
$ >
$ > My question is this: why would this Jordanian enclave be
$ indentified,
$ > "bordered" (is the proper term "delimited"?), and notated as being
$ under Jordanian
$ > adminstration when it was on the Jordanian (i.e., east) side of the
$ 1949
$ > armistice line in the first place?
$ >
$ > Thanks,
$ >
$ > Mike Beidler
$
$
$ John W. Donaldson, Research Associate
$ International Boundaries Research Unit
$ Department of Geography
$ University of Durham
$ Durham DH1 3LE
$ United Kingdom
$
$ Website: http://www-ibru.dur.ac.uk
$ Tel: +44 (0) 191 334 1963
$ Fax: +44 (0) 191 334 1962

----------------------
Nizar Farsakh
[log in to unmask]