Abbas Should Draw a Map Just Like Netanyahu

One of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s now world infamous preconditions is the insistence that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu deliver a map showing what the Israeli leaders foresees as the borders between Israel and Palestine. Abbas claims that until he is able to actually visualize the borders which Netanyahu is suggesting he will be unable to determine whether or not it would be worthwhile for him to meet and restart negotiations. Abbas is using this ploy so he can continue to reject one map after another claiming that Netanyahu is not serious about making peace as the map does not come anywhere near the minimal area which Abbas feels is required for the Palestinian State. By having Prime Minister Netanyahu draw such a map Abbas excuses him from having to make any demands or claims as to what he would accept leaving him to simply reject any map proposed without stating what would be acceptable. So, perhaps in all fairness Prime Minister Netanyahu should offer to exchange maps with Abbas thus having both men draw up their idea of what would make a fair border from which to begin the final border negotiations. Of course Mahmoud Abbas will refuse to exchange maps while continuing to demand that Netanyahu must submit a map to Abbas.

 

There is no doubts as to why Palestinian President Abbas will refuse to present a map of the final borders he envisions as acceptable to the Palestinians for the establishing of a final solution to the question of borders. His reason is simply as such a map already exists and is available for anybody to see. All one need do is look at the maps of Palestine in the Palestinian schoolbooks or the map behind Abbas’s desk in his office and the map of Palestine that they consider their minimal requirements are there for anybody to see. These maps all depict all of Gaza, Judea, Samaria (West Bank) and Israel as the borders for their state of Palestine. That is correct; everything from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea is their envisioned state with no Israel whatsoever. That is the reason that Abbas would reject any request for him to also present a map of his vision for final borders and also why no matter what map Netanyahu might present, as long as it depicted any of the land as belonging to Israel as a Jewish State would be unacceptable to Abbas. Along with offering to present Abbas with a map if and only if Abbas returns the favor and presents his ideal map in a mutual exchange, why not also do similar offers on some of the other preconditions which Mahmoud Abbas is currently hiding behind using them as a means to avoid negotiations.

 

Where Mahmoud Abbas demands that Israel accept the Right of Return for as many as five to six million refugees, Israel could demand that Abbas admit to how many Jews who own lands in Judea and Samaria will be allowed to remain on their lands after a settlement has been reached. It is unlikely that Abbas would surprise the world and admit that the Palestinians intend to dispossess the Jews who are living or own land beyond the Green Line and refuse to allow even a single Jew to remain and become a citizen of the Palestinian State. Once Abbas has made the situation clear that there will be no Jews allowed to remain within Palestine then the Israelis can hardly be condemned for not accepting the refugees, especially all five to six million, within Israel and demanding that they only be allowed to settle in Palestine. In all truth, Israel actually holds the moral high ground on this issue as there are already sizeable Arab sectors within the Israeli population who have full rights and are found throughout Israeli society. There are Arab doctors and nurses working right next to Jewish doctors and nurses in every Israeli hospital, Arab members in the Knesset even to include some who act more for the Palestinians than they do the Israeli Arabs who elected them. There are Arab judges, Police, and soldiers in the IDF, though the Arab Israelis are not required to serve in the IDF as Israeli Jews and Druze are required to serve. You cannot find a single Jews even allowed to reside in Area A of the West Bank or within any of the Arab villages under Palestinian Authority rule.

 

While President Abbas has demanded that Israel issue a building freeze once again in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, perhaps in exchange Abbas will freeze all Palestinian building within East Jerusalem, the Jordan Valley, and Areas B and C of the West Bank in a gesture of equality and fairness. Just as the Israelis would still be entitled to build within the Green line and only cease building in the contested lands, the Palestinian would continue to build in Area C and they would also not build within the contested lands. As for the Abbas demand that Israel agree to utilize the 1967 Lines as a reference for final borders, these are actually the Armistice Lines from 1949 which the Arabs demanded could never be used to denote a border, that the Israelis could demand that Abbas recognize that the original British Mandate was presumably for the establishment of a Jewish State and that all the lands east of the Jordan River were already ceded by the Jews to the Palestinian Arabs when they forfeited those lands for the establishment of Jordan. Should that be too difficult a pill for Abbas to swallow then there is always the compromise position that at the establishment of United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 Israel possessed the Golan Heights, the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza, Judea and Samaria and as required by Resolution 242 Israel had surrendered territories by returning the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt and the disengagement from Gaza thus Israel is not technically or legally required to surrender any further lands except by mutual agreement and should Israel wish to fully exhaust their rights they could annex all of Judea and Samaria and still have satisfied all legal international requirements. There has to be a point where the truth is stated and a requirement that the actual International legal requirements are made obvious and that Israel has technically met every International requirement proposed by the United Nations and accepted by International bodies.

 

Proposing that for every precondition which Israel is requested to meet to jumpstart the peace process the Palestinians also meet a like precondition would be simply an equalizing and fairness measure. The examples above are simply that, samples, suggestions. It would be up to Israeli leadership to present proposals which they would deem as evenhanded. There are other preconditions such as the releasing of large numbers of Palestinian terrorists from Israeli prisons, including some of those who have committed the most grievous crimes, is one demand for which I am unable to find anything which would balance such out to pose in return. The other problem with this idea is that I have little doubt that Mahmoud Abbas would not simply keep adding more preconditions to the list while ignoring the Israeli answer of preconditions of their own. Still, by proposing such return preconditions they would add into the discussion a review of what are the demands and positions on each subject the Palestinians hold. Any turning of the tables that potentially reveals the truth of the Palestinians refusal to negotiate works in Israel’s favor. Trying to tell the world that these preconditions are merely excuses not to negotiate is not accepted and will not be accepted unless Israel actually gave in on them and the Palestinians still refused to negotiate. The problem is once Israel surrenders on any point there will be no backtracking away from the conceded point. For example, if Israel commits to a building freeze for a period, say six months, in order to allow for negotiations we all know exactly what would be the response as we already danced this dance. Abbas would simply ask about another set of preconditions such as agreement on the 1967 lines for borders and the acceptance of the Right of Return for all five to six million Palestinian refugees and the prisoner release. Israel would have allowed the building freeze to be established as something that Israel is obliged to commit to in order for negotiations just as it has been pushed ever since it was introduced and forced down Israel’s throat by United States President Obama. We also need to remember that the concept of the building freeze and using the 1967 lines as the starting point for borders were both brilliant ideas introduced and proposed by President Obama, not Mahmoud Abbas. Ever since their introduction they have stuck and Abbas realizes that these two gifts from the American President are in his pocket ad infinitum. As these preconditions will never depart the scene on their own, Israel has to find some tactic to turn them back on the Palestinians and use them to reveal the duplicity behind these demands being used deceptively by the Palestinians. Turnabout is only fair as all’s fair in love and war, and if this is not one it must be the other.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

A Vital Question for Netanyahu

At a recent Knesset Finance Committee hearing addressing the housing crisis in Israel and possible solutions a prescient question was posed by Committee Chairman Nissan Slomiansky. He inquired of Housing Minister Uri Ariel why there appeared to be no construction in Jerusalem. Ariel replied that Slomiansky needed to direct his question to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. To quote him directly, Housing Minister Ariel had responded, “Why is there no building in Jerusalem? I suggest you ask the Prime Minister.” What a novel and, may I add, brilliant idea. Truth be told, the questions addressing the very obvious lack of building in Jerusalem as well as Judea and Samaria have been popping up ever since President Obama visited Israel introducing Secretary of State Kerry and his peace process revival. Perhaps the Prime Minister should take on the denial of the existence of a silent, unannounced, stealth building freeze by having a groundbreaking for new housing and may we suggest this event take place deep into Samaria, say somewhere like Itamar. Such a serious and in your face dedication to Israel’s righteous right to build on lands guaranteed as indivisible in countless agreements through modern history would set the argument going forward that Israel will declare and implement their proper and legal sovereignty over all the lands.

 

The reasons why many might suspect that there is a building freeze being applied but just not announced are obvious. Secretary of State Kerry has been quoted expressing how such actions would be a helpful contribution by Israel to his efforts to jumpstart the lifeless peace negotiations. If it should eventually come out that Prime Minister Netanyahu has imposed a building freeze to please Secretary Kerry and President Obama, such news would not bode well for other possibilities in the near future. Secretary Kerry and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas have been heard also agreeing that it would be preferable for Israel to release some of the Palestinians they are holding in prisons on various charges. From the apparent attitude shown by Secretary Kerry, both past and presently, it would not be too much of a reach to believe that he intends to convince Abbas to drop his preconditions for returning to the peace negotiations due to Kerry guaranteeing compliance by Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu to many of these demands voluntarily. Such an eventuality is something that the members of the ruling coalition and the entire Knesset should force from the shadows and into the light of public review. This would allow for public input and hopefully push the Prime Minister to truly represent the Israeli people and not the machinations of President Obama and Secretary Kerry who are more receptive to Mahmoud Abbas than they are to the rights and safety of the Israeli people.

 

Should it prove out that there are such backroom dealings being carried out by the Prime Minister’s office, it should be revealed to the public as Israel is supposed to be a representative government and not the private playground for any political group or government cabal. The people are the real makers of policy and the government is not empowered to make backroom deals which counter the will of the majority. One would hope that Prime Minister Netanyahu has not decided that he alone should be the arbiter of Israeli policy free from the input or even informing of the Knesset or even his Cabinet. The idea of democratic governance is that no one person is an island and that the government represents the will of the people. So, the time has come for the media, the people, and the Knesset as the representatives of the people to call out the Prime Minister and demand the truth be revealed. Prime Minister Netanyahu must be made to actually permit actual building of new homes and apartments in Judea, Samaria and most importantly in Jerusalem or reveal the deceptive freeze that is feared. Should the freeze be validated by the Prime Minister it will be up to his coalition partners to take the correct measures and be faithful to those who placed them in power even if it becomes necessary to force new elections. The government must represent the people and not the designs of a powerful few who have their own policies.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

A Beheading on the Streets of London

There is an old theory which some news hounds swear by that states that the United States future can be told by looking to Europe. It goes on to explain reasons why mainland Europe is about a decade ahead while England, London in particular, is merely five years or even a slim three years ahead; so whatever one sees on that side of the pond will be coming to the other side of the pond after a slight delay. The importance of this dusty old theory is very important after what was witnessed in broad daylight on the streets of London this past week, the beheading of an English subject, a British soldier named Drummer Lee Rigby, in broad daylight in front of witnesses who watched apparently helpless or too scared to do anything about what they were observing. This event takes on an even more eerie and foreboding spirit when combined with the date of November 2, 2004, when in the streets of Amsterdam Theo van Gogh was stabbed to death and a note was impaled in his chest by the murder weapon placed there by Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim. If one applies the Europe to the United States via London theory to these two incidents you reach the implication that the Americans can expect a similar type event to occur sometime in the not too distant future and no later than the year 2018. Part of the problem is that Jihadist violence has already come to the streets of America in multiple different forms where most of the attacks have been of a general nature not targeting specific individuals. The murder of Theo van Gogh was an execution as was the beheading of this British soldier who was murdered because of having been a British soldier. Once individuals are being selected for execution in the name of Jihad which will make politicians a targeted group we can expect more definitive action to be taken to interdict such attacks.

 

British Prime Minister David Cameron stated that the attack was “truly shocking” while cutting short his visit to Paris in order to return to London in order to convene the security cabinet, aptly named Cobra. As has become expected standard procedure for Western politicians Prime Minister Cameron simply claimed that terrorism was suspected but that further investigation would be required in order to verify that finding. This has become the PC mantra no matter how definitive the evidence that any attack is terror related. The attackers can bellow out Allahu Akbar until they are blue in the face passing out and still the media and the majority of politicians will still take the default initial position of denial until overwhelming evidence leaves them no other choice but to acknowledge reality. Until the leaders and those who make the national policies awaken to the realities that are right before their eyes and whose mantra is echoing in their ears the problem will continue to fester only passively opposed when active resistance is required. Our societies are under attack in a genocidal religious life and death struggle and the leaders of Western society and the default defenders of the faith, so to speak, are going to great lengths to avoid any confrontation. They are not solely to blame as they are merely a reflection of the society which they represent which is more concerned with who will be voted off of some show or who will be crowned the next singing sensation than they are the protection of their way of life. Those who realize and are concerned with the coming violence over whose society will be preeminent and whose society will be extinct can pound the story and loudly announce the coming threat and pray that they are able to awaken sufficient numbers before the battle is lost. One of the obstacles is that our way of life no longer revolves around religious principles but relies more on the creature comforts of our secular humanist progressive liberal morality over the stricter regimen of religious scriptural morality and thus leaves us possessing too little sensitivities to the challenges based on a religious front to discern the growing threats. Eventually there will occur sufficient events or some sufficient singular catastrophic event that will awaken the sleeping masses to the reality and challenge we face. We need pray that whatever event or series of events it takes to awaken within us the necessary indignations and self-preservation instinct to cause us to rise in defense of our societies does not come at so steep a price it makes resistance virtually, if not actually, impossible. Trust that if the necessary wakeup call turns out to be an EMP device or numerous such that lay waste to our electronic infrastructure, then we will have awakened too late for it to matter.

 

Beyond the Cusp