The Legal Foundations of Israel’s Sovereignty: From the League of Nations Mandate to the United Nations Charter

The modern State of Israel, declared in 1948, is not merely a political creation born from war or diplomacy; it is the culmination of a long legal, moral, and historical process recognized by the international community. The Jewish people's return to their ancestral homeland was grounded in a series of international legal instruments—most notably the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (1922) and the United Nations Charter (1945)—which collectively affirmed the right of the Jewish people to reconstitute their national home in the Land of Israel.

This article explores how these legal frameworks, alongside other international agreements, laid the foundation for the modern State of Israel and legitimized its existence under international law.

1. The League of Nations and the Mandate for Palestine (1922)

After World War I, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire left many of its former territories without clear political futures. The League of Nations, established in 1919, took upon itself the responsibility of supervising these regions through the Mandate System, which aimed to guide territories toward self-determination and independence.

Among these territories was Palestine, historically recognized as the land of ancient Israel and Judah. The Mandate for Palestine, approved by the League of Nations on July 24, 1922, was a binding international legal instrument that recognized the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine” and endorsed their right to “reconstitute their national home” there.

Key Provisions of the Mandate:

1. Recognition of Jewish Historical Rights:
   The preamble explicitly stated:
   “Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country…”

   This acknowledgment was not of a new claim but of an ancient one, affirming continuity between the Jewish past and the modern right of return.

2. Encouragement of Jewish Immigration and Settlement:
   Article 6 directed the Mandatory Power (Britain) to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and “encourage close settlement by Jews on the land,” establishing legal support for the ingathering of exiles.

3. Protection of Civil and Religious Rights of Non-Jewish Communities:
   The Mandate emphasized that nothing should prejudice the civil or religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities. This ensured coexistence within a framework of fairness.

4. International Oversight:
   The Mandate was not a unilateral British policy; it was ratified and supervised by the League of Nations, giving it full status as an international legal obligation.

Thus, the Mandate for Palestine stands as the first internationally ratified legal document recognizing Jewish nationhood and its territorial expression in the Land of Israel.

2. The San Remo Conference (1920) – The Legal Birth of Jewish National Rights

Before the Mandate took legal effect, the San Remo Conference (April 1920)—attended by the Allied Powers (Britain, France, Italy, and Japan)—had already assigned the Mandate for Palestine to Great Britain, incorporating the principles of the Balfour Declaration (1917).

This decision transformed the Balfour Declaration from a policy statement into a binding international commitment under international law.

The San Remo Resolution specifically affirmed:

“The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty… in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”

This resolution had the same legal force as a treaty, marking the formal international recognition of the Jewish right to national self-determination. It was later incorporated into the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) and subsequently into the League of Nations Mandate.

Hence, from a legal standpoint, the right of the Jewish people to reconstitute their homeland in Palestine became part of international law—predating both the United Nations and Israel’s declaration of independence.

3. Article 80 of the United Nations Charter (1945): The Continuity Clause

When the League of Nations dissolved in 1946, its rights and responsibilities were transferred to the newly created United Nations (UN). To ensure that the legal rights granted under previous mandates were not nullified, the framers of the UN Charter included Article 80, often called the “Palestine Clause.”

Text of Article 80 (excerpt):

“Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed… to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.”

In effect, Article 80 preserved the rights recognized under the Mandate for Palestine, including the Jewish people’s right to a national home. Therefore, the legal validity of the Jewish claim to the land—acknowledged by the League of Nations—was carried over into the framework of the United Nations.

This continuity is critical: the UN did not create Israel’s right to exist; it recognized and reaffirmed an already existing right derived from international law and historical legitimacy.

4. The United Nations Partition Plan (Resolution 181, 1947)

As tensions grew between Jewish and Arab populations under the British Mandate, Britain referred the issue of Palestine to the United Nations. In 1947, the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) proposed a partition plan to create two states—one Jewish and one Arab—with Jerusalem under international administration.

On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 181, which:

• Recognized the Jewish right to statehood.

• Allocated specific territories for a Jewish State and an Arab State.

• Called for economic cooperation and protection of minorities.

Although the Jewish leadership accepted the plan, the Arab League rejected it and launched a war to destroy the nascent state. Despite the rejection, the resolution itself represented international endorsement of Jewish sovereignty in at least part of the historic homeland.

5. The Declaration of the State of Israel (May 14, 1948)

When David Ben-Gurion proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the declaration referenced both historical and legal legitimacy:

“This right is the natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their own sovereign State… by virtue of our natural and historic right and on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly.”

Thus, the UN Partition Plan and the Mandate system were explicitly acknowledged as the legal foundations for Israel’s establishment. Within hours, major powers such as the United States and the Soviet Union recognized the new state, confirming its sovereign status under international law.

6. The UN Charter and the Principle of Self-Determination

The UN Charter (Articles 1 and 55) enshrines the principle of self-determination of peoples as a fundamental right. This principle, recognized as part of customary international law, guarantees nations the right to freely determine their political status and pursue their development.

The Jewish people, having maintained a continuous national identity, language (Hebrew), and religious connection to the Land of Israel for millennia—even in exile—clearly meet the criteria for a “people” entitled to self-determination.

Hence, Israel’s establishment fulfills—not violates—the Charter’s principles.

7. Post-1948 Recognition and Admission to the United Nations

Following its declaration, Israel applied for UN membership. On May 11, 1949, the UN General Assembly Resolution 273 admitted Israel as a full member, affirming its sovereignty and acceptance of the UN Charter’s obligations.

This recognition cemented Israel’s legal status within the international community as a sovereign state equal to all others.

8. Summary of Legal Continuity

Each step represents a legal and moral continuum—not the creation of a new right, but the restoration and recognition of an ancient one.

9. The Broader Legal and Moral Context

Beyond the legal texts, Israel’s recognition embodies the principle of historical justice: the restoration of an indigenous people to their ancestral land. While political disputes continue over borders and security, the legitimacy of Israel’s existence as a sovereign Jewish state rests firmly on international law, moral precedent, and historical continuity.

The Mandate system, the UN Charter, and subsequent resolutions affirm that the Jewish people’s presence in their homeland is not a colonial imposition but a right embedded in the very fabric of international legality.

Conclusion

The establishment and recognition of Israel as a sovereign state are rooted in a sequence of binding international legal instruments—from the San Remo Resolution and League of Nations Mandate for Palestine to the UN Charter and Resolution 181.

These documents collectively affirm that the Jewish people possess both the historical legitimacy and legal right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland.

Israel’s sovereignty, therefore, is not a gift of history but a fulfillment of international law—an enduring testament to justice long deferred, and finally restored.