1949 Armistice Agreement Line

Actor Agreement
8 aprila, 2021

5. This agreement replaces the agreement reached on 24 January 1949 by the contracting parties with the general Israeli-Egyptian ceasefire. (7) Rosenthal, Yemima, ed. Documents on the Foreign Policy of Israel., Vol. 3: Armistice Negotiations with the Arab States, December 1948-July 1949. Jerusalem: Israel State Archives, 1983. On 28 and 29 January 1953, Israeli forces estimated between 120 and 150 men using 2-inch mortars, 3-inch mortars, PIAT weapons, Bangalore torpedoes, machine guns, grenades and small arms, crossing the demarcation line and attacking the Arab villages of Falameh and Rantis. In Falameh, the Mukhtar was killed, seven other villagers were injured and three houses were demolished. The attack lasted four and a half hours. Israel was condemned for this act by the Joint Ceasefire Committee. [18] In the Knesset, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs and future Prime Minister, Mr.

Sharett, called the ceasefire lines “temporary borders” and the former international borders on which the ceasefire lines, with the exception of Jordan, were based, “natural borders”. [13] Israel did not claim territories beyond these territories and proposed them, with minor modifications except in Gaza, as the basis for permanent political boundaries at the Lausanne Conference in 1949. [14] The agreement with Lebanon was signed on 23 March 1949. [2] The main points were: 19 February: The Egyptian delegation complained that armed Israelis opened automatic fire on the demarcation line on 19 February on an Arab working on his land at M.R. 0952-0931. The Arab was seriously injured. 19 February: The Egyptian delegation complains that, on 18 February, a patrol of two Egyptian soldiers on Egyptian territory was attacked by armed Israelis who were hiding in an ambush. One of the Egyptian soldiers was abducted and killed in Israeli-controlled territory near the demarcation line (see point c), above, which summarizes an Israeli complaint filed on 18 February. The ceasefire agreements were clear (on Arab pressure) that they did not create lasting borders.

The Israeli-Egyptian agreement states that “the ceasefire border must not be regarded as a political or territorial border and is demarcated, without prejudice to the rights, claims and positions of one of the parties to the ceasefire, with regard to the final resolution of the Palestinian question.” [1] Bar-Yaacov, Nisan. The Israeli-Syrian Armistice: Problems of Implementation 1949-1966. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1968. February 17, 1954: The Israeli delegation complains that two Arabs crossed the demarcation line to Israel on February 16 under M.R. 1018-0992. According to the complaint, they began to flee when they were challenged by Israeli guards, and the fire that had been opened on them was hit and fired by the second on the demarcation line. The last agreement, the GAA between Syria and Israel, was reached after long quarrels and many delays. On July 7, 1949, signed by Lieutenant-Colonel Makleff on behalf of Israel and Colonel Fawzi Silo for the Syrians near the Banat-Yaqub Bridge in the Jordan River. Two major problems continued to hamper the full implementation of these GAAs: the status of demilitarized zones and the use of the waters of the Jordan River and its tributaries. These problems ultimately contributed to the main causes of the Arab-Israeli war of June 1967 and the conquest of the Golan Heights by Israeli troops. The Syrian-Israeli GAA predicted that a number of areas previously held by the Syrian army were declared demilitarized zones. Sharp differences of opinion, often at the root of violent measures, have erupted from the outset on the status and disposition of these areas.

Israel has carried out several civilian projects in these areas without respecting the rights of Arab landowners, while Syrian gunmen have fired on operators of such projects as a violation of the GAA.

Comments are closed.