Who has Legal Sovereignty Over Jerusalem and which Peace Proposal has the Best Chance of Resolving the Dispute over this Symbolic Land?

• Main Author: Moore, Daxton H.
• Other Authors: Hafez, Mohammed
• Published: Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School 2012
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10945/7389

There are four schools of thought as to who has legal sovereignty over Jerusalem, and this is one of the primary reasons why there has been no resolution to the problem. The first is that there was a vacuum of sovereignty in the wake of British withdrawal, which was filled by Israel after the first Arab-Israeli War and again as a need for self-defense after the 1967 War, the second is the idea that the Palestinians have always held legal sovereignty over Jerusalem and continue to do so today, the third thought is that Jordan still has a legal right to the eastern section of Jerusalem due to the outcome of the first Arab-Israeli War, and the fourth is that the United Nations has legal sovereignty due to the mandate that was created by the League of Nations at the conclusion of the First World War. These four claims form the basis behind the legal argument over Jerusalem and are discussed in this thesis in order to determine legal sovereignty over the city and provide the background information necessary to proceed toward a peaceful resolution. In the conclusion of this thesis, I point out that both Israel and the Palestinians have legal sovereignty of Jerusalem and therefore, joint control of the city should be pursued in the form of a type of condominium.