The Ignored Reason There is no Palestinian State Already

Ask any European leader or politician and the odds are you will hear that the reason there is no Palestinian State is due to Israeli refusals to make peace and the Israeli settlements. They will speak of how the Palestinians are thirsting for peace and crave their own State and have made generous offers if only Israel would compromise. They will never mention the refusals over the decades by the Arab League, Yasser Arafat, and Mahmoud Abbas to every offer beginning with the initial offer from the United Nations to found the Palestinian State on the more select and prime farming lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea leaving only a thin strip of land along the Mediterranean Sea, another along the northwest at the bottom of the Golan Heights and over half of the land being the southern lands of the Negev Dessert. The Zionists accepted this hardly equal or fair division while the Arab League refused to allow this partition as it still allowed the Jews to rule themselves and demanded that all the land be relegated to Arab rule and they would allow the Jews to remain as long as they behaved like good Dhimmis. The United Nations and the world simply left the offer to stand in hopes that the Arab League would accept the plan, but come the middle of May, 1948, Israel declared their nationhood and seven Arab nations’ armies declared a war of annihilation against the Nascent Jewish State of Israel. Miraculously, the small newly found State of Israel managed to survive and even gain lands by pushing the combined Arab armies back taking the western half of Jerusalem within hours of the declared ceasefire taking hold. At this point there was no Israeli presence in the lands of Gaza, Judea, or Samaria with Egypt retaining control of Gaza and Jordan retaining control over Judea and Samaria which they refused to call by their historic names substituting the less descriptive and un-Jewish name of West Bank. Jordan even attempted to annex the lands they called the West Bank and made the Arabs living within Jordanian citizens. This seemed natural as the Arabs living in the area mostly had relatives either in Jordan or in either Syria or Iraq as most had arrived over the past two generations as the economy offered better employment. Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank was not recognized not even by the other Arab nations or the Arab League and was recognized solely by Great Britain and Pakistan in the entire world. Jordan also forced the Jewish residents within their areas of control to leave their property behind and expelled them into Israel. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion offered for the Arabs living within Israel to remain and join in building a future. Despite this invitation many Arabs fled into neighboring Jordan, Egypt or Syria where they eventually ended up placed in camps, denied citizenship largely due to their not joining in the war against Israel; causing them to be seen as less loyal.

During the next decade over three-quarters of a million Jews were stripped of their wealth, lands, businesses and were deported from the majority of the countries of the Arab League with the majority finding a new home and a place to restart their lives in Israel while some went to Europe, the United States and other destinations. The Jews who were ejected from their homes often with only the clothes on their backs or a suitcase or two were welcomed in Israel and were granted citizenship and full rights and today they and their descendants make up approximately half of the Israeli population. This makes the claim by many Palestinian and Arab spokespersons that Israelis should be returned to the lands from whence they came in Europe and the United States ignores that half of the Israelis lived originally in the Arab world. One must wonder if these countries would open their arms and accept the descendants of the Jews they ejected. Somehow I just cannot see that ever happening.

Since 1948 Israel has been attacked by her Arab neighbors a number of times. Resulting from the first conflict where France, Great Britain and Israel declared war of Egypt after Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal and refused to allow European shipping to pass through the canal, Israel took possession of the entire Sinai Peninsula during this conflict but returned every inch of the lands to Egypt as part of the peace treaty that also saw the reopening of the Suez Canal to international shipping. United Nations peacekeepers were also stationed in the Sinai Peninsula to prevent another conflict from erupting. In late May, 1967, Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser ordered the peacekeepers removed from the Sinai Peninsula, massed troops on the Israeli southern border, closed the Straights of Tiran and massed Syrian troops on the Israeli northern border threatening to annihilate the Jewish State. The closing of the Straights of Tiran was an internationally recognized casus belli of war. Israel responded to this declaration and defeated both armies driving almost to the outskirts of Damascus and taking the entire Sinai Peninsula once again. Close to the beginning of the war upon hearing of great Arab victories that Egyptian and Syrian radio and television broadcast they were executing against the Israelis, Jordan declared war in the hopes on taking their part in the glorious victory. The Israelis pleaded for Jordan not to enter the conflict warning them that the broadcasts were untrue and were simply propaganda. Jordan did not trust the Israelis believing they were simply frightened of another Arab army entering the war which would definitely contribute to the end of the Jewish state. The results of the Six Day War are well known and by the end of the conflict, in response to the United Nations and World pressures, Israel halted their advances also now having driven the Jordanians back east of the Jordan River liberating occupied Judea and Samaria (one must recall that Jordan illegally occupied the so-called West Bank which was originally believed to be part of Israel). During Yom Kippur of October, 1973 Egypt and Syria once again attacked Israel hoping to reclaim the lands lost in 1967 and destroy the Jewish State. After initial gains the war ended with Israel retaining all of the Sinai Peninsula and having crossed the Suez Canal and approaching Cairo as well as approaching Damascus in Syria. When hostilities ended, Israel agreed to return to the borders which had existed since the 1967 conflict returning lands to both Egypt and Syria lands gained during the closing days of the conflict. Eventually Israel and Egypt made peace (for those who claim Israel must return some of the lands they gained in the 1967 war remember the following) with Israel returning all of the Sinai Peninsula once again, an expanse of land greatly larger than all of Israel. Egypt refused any claim to Gaza which was relented to Israeli sovereignty. Further on in time Jordan and Israel also reached a peace accord in which Jordan surrendered the previously Jordanian occupied lands to Israel liberating the lands and allowing many Jewish families to reclaim their lands and homes they had left when Jordan forcibly removed them in 1948.

Somewhere the world acquiesced to the invention of peoples whom had never existed in all of history and was admitted by even Yasser Arafat they were necessarily invented in order to have a political wedge with which to remove the Jews from Arab sovereign lands, namely Israel. This twist of history beyond recognition of any historic accounts dated previous to 1920 has gained great recognition and a life all its own in Europe as well as throughout the Arab and Muslim lands. Historically, before 1948 the use of the title Palestinian had several different forms, Palestinian Arab was used to define Arabs living within the British Mandate, Palestinian Jews or simple using Palestinian alone was used to refer to the Jews living within the British Mandate. In 1922 the nation of Transjordan, later renamed simply Jordan, was founded with the issue of the Churchill White Paper where Transjordan was granted for rule by the Hashemite family repaying them for their assistance against the Ottomans in World War I and they were to rule over a Palestinian State. This was the British reaction in response to Arab insistence for a country of their own within the British Mandate. The Arab demands implied they should have their country formed over all of the British Mandate but the British still had their obligation stemming from the Balfour Declaration, the Peel Commission, Article 80 of the United Nations Charter and numerous other treaties and agreements to found a Jewish homeland. The White Paper which established the Palestinian Arab State of Transjordan also guaranteed that the lands west of the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea would remain never to be divided and remain as whole and in its entirety as the Jewish Homeland. This accord was also ratified by motions and legislations in the League of Nations, the United States and several European nations. That is the history; the future is far less resolute and will likely be a thorn as intended by Yasser Arafat and those who initiated the demand for another Arab nation in place of the only Jewish nation on Earth. This desire to replace Israel with one or two new Palestinian Arab states, whichever becomes necessary by events to come, is understood as the inevitable aim of the Arab world but is never spoken of as to admit to knowing this would reveal all the duplicities, animosities, hatreds, and lies which are the realities of the negotiations the world calls the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process, originally the Arab-Israeli Peace Process but renamed in order to mask the ultimate aim of the destruction of Israel.

Beyond the Cusp

Benghazi and Gaza Reveal Government Spin Over Action

In the United States the public is being slowly traumatized by the horrors slowly coming to light as the putrefied onion that is Benghazi, Libya is slowly peeled one rotting later after another while in Israel there is the escalation by the terror governance in Gaza of rockets being hurled across the border at civilians and often timed to strike while children are transiting to or from school thus traumatizing the millions within the ever increasing range of these explosive projectiles. In both countries the government in general and the leadership in particular; President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, United Nations Ambassador Rice and others in the Administration in America and Prime Minister Netanyahu and the military and coalition leadership in Israel; are dodging responsibility and avoiding directly addressing the truth in a futile hope that neither problem will have any defining affect upon the upcoming elections. The similarities in both of these horrid and tragic instances go further than simply the attempt to wish them away by each nation’s leaders, they also have similar solutions which are based on honestly admitting some painful truths, taking responsibility for protecting the people and interests of the nation, giving an honest and complete assessment of the realities each nation faces, admission of mistakes and shortcomings committed by those in the positions of leadership and decision making, and finally refusal to take bold steps that would protect those in harm’s way and use necessary military steps that would prevent any further damages and show an understanding and consideration for protecting those who stand vulnerable from these threats.

The United States leadership needs to admit that it is very possible and even likely that the changes brought on by the so-called Arab Spring are more likely to result in situations less favorable to the West, freedom, liberties and even the economies of the nations where the Muslim Brotherhood or other Islamist entities have taken over the governance and are going to resemble an Arab Winter and relations are going to turn colder, not warmer. This places our personnel in the embassies, consulates, and other assets in greater threats of danger either directly from the new governance or from other terror-like threats acting with the permission of the governments if not directly being organized by these governments. It will not only be unwise to allow for security to be provided by the governments of the countries in which there are personnel and must insist on having United States Marines on duty guarding these people or should let it be known that American personnel will be pulled if forced to do so as well as financial and other consequences. Niceties cannot be extended if they will result in the death or threats of violence to American personnel. There are times when niceties must be put aside and putting forth a steel gloved hand becomes necessary instead of a white silk glove that President Obama appears to believe will solve everything. Reality is often not as pretty and in this case is extremely unseemly and ugly, but the truth is the truth.

Meanwhile, in southern Israel there have been close to one hundred rockets, mortars, bombs and other attacks originating from the Gaza Strip in less than one week. While the Iron Dome system protecting the city of Ashkelon has been of adequate success by intercepting at least eight rockets fired in its theater, there are simply not sufficient Iron Dome systems to protect all of the communities. There have been mounting casualties and an even larger number of people suffering stress and other nervous attacks and disorders as a result of this seeming declaration of war. If this many explosive rockets and mortars had been fired across a border into any country in the world other than Israel, the United Nations would be holding emergency sessions and there would be world-wide concern and denunciations against the senseless violence and provocations. Of course, since these attacks are against Israel there will be no fury of concern, hand-wringing and denouncements unless and until Israel should retaliate with any appropriate force which will be labeled as disproportionate as is the custom of the world in its current state of affairs. But just because the rest of the world will likely get their panties in a wad should Israel launch a ground attack that is carefully planned and executed sweeping through the entire length and breadth of the Gaza Strip searching every single building, shed, hospital, and mosque for rockets, mortars, rocket launchers, mortar launch tubes and any other such equipment of war and confiscate and destroy every single piece found does not preclude the possible necessity for just such an action. There should also be arrests of every leading terrorist and the rocket, mortar, bomb and explosive expert should be arrested or taken as prisoners of war to be released once all violence originating from the Gaza Strip has ceased for twelve straight months and a treaty negotiated. It may even have reached the point in time where returning IDF forces into the Gaza Strip to patrol the area and keep the peace has become a desirable and necessary option. Simply promising to reinforce the homes, businesses, hospitals, schools, malls, and other buildings to make them better able to withstand the rocket attacks is insufficient, irresponsible and completely inadequate. Election or no election in the offing, protecting the people of Israel is job one Mr. Netanyahu, not the strengthening of your coalition in the Knesset. What may not be obvious to you is that by assuring the safety and security of the people you also assure the size and loyalty of your coalition in the Knesset.

In both the United States and Israel there will be elections within a few months. The United States will have their election within fourteen days and may very well end up a referendum not only on President Obama’s performance in his first term, Obama Care, the economy, or any of the other items the American people have been fed for the whole election year thus far, it may well be a referendum on Benghazi and who will most likely keep the American people safe and the United States strong and respected with a sufficient dose of feared that nobody would ever consider attacking Americans anywhere in the world. In Israel the election might be a referendum on the authenticity of a return as an innocent man into politics by Ehud Olmert, or the return of Tzipi Livni. What should be the issues are a leader who will put the final nails to seal the coffin where the Oslo accords have been laid for some time by Mahmoud Abbas and his refusal to compromise or even discuss compromise, protection of the citizens living under constant threat in southern Israel from the rockets, mortars and other attacks originating from the Gaza Strip under the direction of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and related terror groups, the acceptance and application of the Levy Report along with all it implies, and stand firm before the hatreds and bigotries of too much of this world and establish that Israel is entitled to every millimeter of lands guaranteed under the numerous agreements including but not limited to the Peel Commission, San Remo Conference, Churchill White Papers, and Article 80 of the United Nations. The other way in which the United States and Israel are facing a similar situation is the possibility that the upcoming election in each country could have an effect on the entirety of each country’s future beyond what anyone can anticipate. Act One in two weeks and Act Two scheduled for late January of next year. The time between these two important dates should prove interesting, especially on how the results of the first could have influences on the second. These surely are interesting times but as such, are these a good thing or a curse as the Chinese believe.

Beyond the Cusp

The Levy Report, if Only it Would Matter

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called for a thorough investigation to be carried out regarding the legal status of the Jewish residents’ rights to live in Judea and Samaria, the West Bank, under International Law and a variety of treaties and other appropriate legalities in January 2012. The committee produced a report named after the presiding jurist, retired Israeli Supreme Court Judge, Edmond Levy. The other members of the Committee were retired Tel Aviv District Court Judge Tchiya Shapira and a former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker. They began their investigation with the documents and treaty produced by the San Remo Conference of April 1920 and followed the paper trail which included the League of Nations treaties which set up the Mandate Lands under British control which were dedicated for the expressed purpose of establishing the Jewish State, and on through the establishment of the United Nations in 1945 with the recognition of existing rights of states acquired under the various mandates from under the League of Nations, including of course the rights of Jews to settle in the Land of Israel by virtue of the those documents, which was affirmed in article 80 of the United Nations Charter. After fully reviewing all pertinent documents, conferences, treaties and commentaries, the Levy Committee released their findings which state explicitly the legal status of all Jewish settlement within all of Judea and Samaria.

There have been those who have opposed the findings of the Levy Committee. Many of those in opposition claim that the Levy Committee was unnecessary as the International Court of Justice had already addressed the issue of the legality or lack thereof of Israeli use of lands considered as part of the West Bank when they ruled against the separation fence which Israel was erecting for security purposes with some of it running through these areas. This finding was made without the benefit of access to all the pertinent documents as the office of then Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan was remiss in providing some of the vital documents in the dossier of eighty-eight documents he was required to submit to the Court that were “likely to throw light upon the question” which he was legally required to do under Article 65 of the International Court of Justice’s statute. The most glaringly obvious documents which were omitted were the original League of Nations Mandates and the United Nations Charter Article 80. Ironically, the one justice on the International Court of Justice who expressed warning, sounding the alarm that these documents were absent and deserved to be considered before reaching any judgment, was Judge El-Araby, an Egyptian appointee on the court. Obviously, he was ignored as the majority of the justices sitting on the International Court of Justice had reached their decision likely before the first document or witness had been examined. This had been the exact reasoning behind the Israeli decision not to even have representation to argue before the International Court of Justice as they expressly stated the futility of such an exercise.

What will be the unfortunate result of the introduction of the Levy Committee Report to the litany of decisions, arguments, and related posturing on this subject is that it will not even add any appreciable sound to the fury of the present arguments. The Levy Report will simply be ignored by virtually every NGO, government, world body, international discussions, national leaders or any activity which will address the right of Israel to the lands of Judea and Samaria and all lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea as was promised in treaties, conferences, mandates and charters; let alone the fact that Jordan was already carved from lands which had been promised for the Jewish State. But what are promises and 78% of the Mandate lands to be considered when the current question is how to steal even more of the promise from Israel and the Jewish people. The one thing history has noted is that no promise is any stronger or lasting than the force of arms ready and willing to protect and enforce it, and Judea and Samaria will prove to be no different.

What makes this entire episode all the more frustrating has been the reaction of those one might suspect would beck Israel in applying the Levy Report on the international stage. The United States Department of State has already condemned the Levy Committee Report when spokesman Patrick Ventrell, declared: “We do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity and we oppose any effort to legalize settlement outposts.” Even that could be understood despite the fact that after the League of Nations established the British Mandate Lands to fulfill the Balfour Declaration, United States endorsed the idea of a Jewish national home through a joint resolution of the United States Congress. What is almost impossible to swallow is the letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu by some of the American Jewish Leadership expressing concern over the Levy Committee Report stating, “As strong advocates for Israel’s security and well-being as a Jewish and democratic state, we are deeply concerned about the recent findings of the government commission led by [retired Supreme Court Justice] Edmund Levy. We fear that if approved, this report will place the two-state solution, and the prestige of Israel as a democratic member of the international community, in peril.” Among those who signed this revolting expression of politically correct surrender of Jewish rights to claim the lands which were promised by treaty under the declarations of the League of Nations, a world body, and reaffirmed by the United Nations in its founding Charter, include philanthropists Charles Bronfman and Lester Crown; Marvin Lender the Former National Chairman of United Jewish Appeal; Deborah Lipstadt the Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish History and Holocaust Studies at Emory University; Bernard Nussbaum who is the former White House Counsel; Richard Pearlstone the former chairman of the Jewish Agency; and Rabbi David Saperstein who is the director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. The signatories of this declaration of treachery and betrayal should be forever held in contempt by every Zionist and sympathizer and supporter of the State of Israel or the Jewish People. May G0d be merciful in their judgment.

Beyond the Cusp