Beyond the Cusp

April 10, 2014

Israel Fault and Lack of Flexibility End Negotiations

The evidence keeps rolling in with one presumably credible source after another pointing the finger of blame on Israel over the latest failed peace initiatives. United States Secretary of State Kerry was probably one of the closest people to this last round of talks which he negotiated into place with promises from both the Israelis and the Palestinians that the negotiations would proceed for nine months and would likely end with a resultant peace by or before April 29, 2014. The initial agreement appeared to be one-sided though there were demands made of both sides. From Israel, Secretary Kerry gained the concession demanded by the Palestinians as their demand required for them to even consider entering negotiations with the Israelis. This concession consisted of the Israelis eventually releasing one-hundred-four terrorist prisoners who had been incarcerated since before the September 1993 signing of the Oslo Accords. These prisoners had been convicted of carrying out or planning terror attacks responsible for multiple fatalities and near countless injuries of which many caused permanent physical impairment as well as a wider amount of mental difficulties. Many of the terrorists to be released were serving at least one life sentence and a fair number more than one such sentence. These terrorists were to be released in four groups of twenty-six and each subsequent release was predicated on advancements achieved through the negotiations.

 

On the Palestinian side, Secretary Kerry managed to arrange for them to agree to meet the Israelis providing the terrorist prisoner releases could be arranged. It was at the outset of the negotiations that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu made the demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the home of and for the Jewish People. From the start Palestinian Chairman Abbas refused to grant this demand exclaiming repeatedly that neither he, nor the Palestinian leadership nor the Arab World would ever recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish People. Chairman Abbas went further stating that it was impossible for a nation to be based upon a religious idea thusly the Jewish People could not be the basis for a nation anywhere on Earth. Despite his stating such, Abbas also held to the idea that any lands which would result in being under Palestinian control as a result of the negotiations would necessarily be cleansed of any Jewish population residing there. Another demand made by Chairman Abbas was that Israel would necessarily be forced to accept resettlement of as many as six-million Palestinian refugees and their descendants, in some cases four generations of family would have gained that right under the rules which are applied by UNRWA and are reserved only for the definition of refugee status for the Palestinians. Also from the outset of the negotiations, despite the Palestinians choosing to demand the terrorist prisoner releases and forgo a building freeze, Abbas and the other Palestinian leadership constantly demanded that Secretary Kerry pressure and force the Israelis into also enacting a building freeze. This request was even spoken of disapprovingly by Secretary Kerry though he eventually sided with the Palestinians on this issue making it an additional demand on the Israelis if the negotiations were to continue beyond the initial nine months. Secretary Kerry also sided with the Palestinians when he posited that it was unnecessary and foolish that the Israelis were demanding that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the home of the Jewish People. His reasoning was that it should be sufficient that the United States recognized Israel as being the state for the Jewish People and after all the Palestinians and even Arafat had recognized this fact though no actual quote was ever produced, let alone confirmed.

 

Despite there being imposed at the insistence of Secretary Kerry a gag order making the progress and machinations of the peace negotiations secret and not released to the press or public, there were almost constant little bits of information leaked by the Palestinian side. Often accompanying these leaked pieces of information were demands of the Israelis which either had not been discussed due to their improbability of being agreed upon or had been refused by the Israelis and the Palestinians believed they would gain the Israeli surrender by appealing to the world in general. When these tactics appeared to have been generally failing and with about ten weeks left before the April 29 deadline for the talks to have reached at the very least a framework agreement, the Palestinian negotiators staged a walkout of the talks declaring they were done with the intransigence of the Israelis. This denunciation was despite the fact that the Palestinian side has also refused to compromise on even a single item during the talks. After a big fuss was made publically, the Palestinians returned to the negotiations even more stridently defending against any need for them to offer any compromise on any subject. Meanwhile there were constant comments to the press and in general decrying the unfairness of the talks and how Secretary Kerry and his main staff were being used by Jewish forces within the United States government. Abbas was constantly noting that he and the Palestinian negotiators were remaining at the negotiating table solely to gain the release of the final twenty-six terrorist prisoners and were planning on “blowing-up” the negotiations immediately after receiving these final prisoner releases.

 

Also a little earlier than the start of the Palestinian threats to depart the talks Secretary Kerry lowered his expectations from reaching an actual peace agreement to establishing a framework and then extending the negotiations and using the framework as the guide in these additional negotiations. It was towards this end that the American team began negotiating with the Israelis in order to find some manner or path that would permit Israel to release hundreds, if not thousands, of additional terrorist prisoners including Marwan Barghouti, one of the worst of the worst terror planners who was responsible for some of the most horrific terror attacks in Israeli history. It was for these crimes that Mr. Barghouti was serving five life sentences. In addition to gaining the release of the additional terror prisoners the Palestinians were also demanding a complete and comprehensive Israeli building freeze by Israel. All the time that these demands were being issued, the Palestinians continued to threaten to walk away from the table and then recant and restate their remaining solely to attain the last twenty-six terrorists release before bolting. With there having been a complete lack of advancement resulting from the negotiations and the Palestinians continuously taking stands in complete opposition to every demand made by the Israelis while claiming that Israel was causing the talks to fail by making unreasonable demands and refusing to meet any of their obligations as were presented during the talks by the Palestinians. After weeks of threats and bluster from the Palestinians the final release date approached and the Palestinians added to their demand four additional prisoners released as well as the inclusion of Israeli Arabs who were incarcerated for terrorist crimes that caused an Israeli response to delay the final release and demand some return concession from the Palestinians due to the change in the Palestinian demands on the final releasing of terror prisoners. The Palestinians refused but the Israelis remained firm in their demand that the final release be totally renegotiated in order to accommodate the additional demands placed on this final Israeli concession warranting such a reexamination of the terms. This is what led the Palestinians to apply to fifteen United Nations and international treaties, conferences and agencies by the Palestinians as their first step to legitimacy through alternate means and without having to negotiate a settlement with the Israelis.

 

When Secretary of State Kerry appeared before the United States Senate committee he aimed the lion’s share of the blame for the talks failing on the Israelis though mentioning almost in passing that some of the actions by the Palestinians being unhelpful. But it was definitely the Israeli withholding the final release and their refusal to enact a building freeze as well as granting the terrorist prisoner releases and even announcing the request for tenders to build several hundred apartments within southern Jerusalem, building which the Palestinians had been informed were to be built before the negotiations commenced when they chose the terrorist releases over a building freeze. Of course the Palestinians felt that they should have been gifted a building freeze and did not understand why they should have to choose only one concession when there were so many concessions they desired to force from Israel. Obviously it was the fault of the Israelis by their demand that the Palestinians make at the least some compromise in return for the numerous compromises, concessions and allowances made by Israel, and not only during this session of talks but overall the negotiations for the past twenty-plus years. The Europeans also offered to assist getting the talks back on track and were implying that it was Israel’s responsibility to make concessions and agree to demands of the Palestinians in order to allow for their return to negotiations without losing face or standing. Of course the Arab League has completely backed the Palestinians and condemned Israel. What can be expected going forward will be the agencies, treaties and commissions which the Palestinians have applied will all agree to receive them and grant them full recognition of statehood. After they have pocketed these recognitions we can expect them to apply to another hundred or so followed by demanding recognition from the United Nations General Assembly and possibly seek membership by applying to the Security Council, especially if they can assure themselves that the United States will restrain from using their veto power. Whatever Israel does from now going forward is of little consequence as the initial stone had been skipped across the still waters and the ripples will only sell and become tsunamis with possibly horrendous consequences. Eventually the world will need to decide exactly how far they are willing to take Palestinian statehood. Will they be willing to intervene with troops and starting a war against Israel in order to retain the narrow strip of land coating the shores of the eastern Mediterranean? It is something we all should fear as such a war would not end well for anyone, least of all Israel.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 18, 2014

Two Diametrically Contrasted Meetings

In the past half a month President Obama has held meetings in the Oval Office with the leaders of both parties to the Middle East peace talks. These two meetings probably could not have had different agendas or more opposite styles and content. The proof of this fact will be made evident in the coming weeks as Secretary of State Kerry continues to attempt to bring the two sides together reaching a framework towards a final peace agreement. Secretary Kerry’s task was not well served by his boss as President Obama’s treatment and demeanor was likely anything but fair, impartial or equal regarding the two men he met with in these two meetings. What we need to investigate in the coming weeks and will try to predict here are the aftereffects of President Obama’s actions done in the vacuum of his mind which is quite separated from the truths of the real world. Secretary Kerry should be, if he is not already, extremely displeased with the disservice done to him and all of his efforts to mold an agreement between two opposing and unyielding sides.

 

The first of the two Obama hosted meetings was with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. The demeanor for this meeting was conveyed even before Prime Minister Netanyahu had left Israel in an article written by Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg News where President Obama laid out his views on the ongoing peace talks and what was necessary for them to bear fruit. Reading the article was distressing enough, I can only imagine how excruciating doing the interview would have been had I been replaced for Jeffrey Goldberg. Fortunately for Mr. Goldberg, he is one of the President’s last remaining stalwarts in whose eyes the President can do no wrong, especially if it is compromising the Jewish state. For those concerned for my stability after reading the article spawned from this interview, rest assured I settled for numerous commentaries which quoted the interview article and spared myself the direct aggravation. The gist of President Obama’s meanderings in fantasyland, which is where he stores his reality of the Middle East, he had claimed to have gleaned and discerned that all that was necessary for peace was Israel to finally see reality as clearly as he has and make the sacrifices necessary to meet the reasonable, polite requests of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Why Netanyahu was so unreasonable after Abbas had agreed to recognize Israel as the home for the Jewish People and made all the other concessions appeared to mystify the President. Oh, but if it was only so.

 

What was interesting was that after the article hit print and before President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu initially met and hopefully at least shook hands, Mahmoud Abbas had convened an appropriate venue with some Palestinian youths and the ever ready and willing press and once again announced his firm commitment to never ever under any circumstances, pressures or other efforts would he recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish People nor would he ever compromise on the universal “Right of Return” for the five-million plus Palestinian refugees into Israel proper and to their receipt of full compensation for their hardships. Chairman Abbas also had other equally accepting and accommodating statements all of which likely do not echo or even exist in President Obama’s little world he inhabits with elves and woodland creatures that speak with him and praise his glory. The meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu went according to the now familiar route initially but then came an unexpected change. After President Obama had berated Prime Minister Netanyahu, very politely but still condescending, and where the Prime Minister had previously attempted to explain reality to the always delusional President, there came no real retorts, contradiction or other protestations. Reportedly, the Prime Minister simply smiled knowingly, thanked the President, requested he be equally as receptive when meeting Chairman Abbas when they were to meet a week hence and left politely and on easy, if not good, terms. The feeling I got from the descriptions was it was similar to the Principle of a school leaving a meeting with the rowdiest and most troublesome student who always had a raft of excuses for his behavior and simply patted the undisciplined child’s head and walked away knowing that school would let out in the very near future and this child would graduate and no longer be his problem. It was as if Prime Minister Netanyahu has simply resigned to the fact that President Obama is beyond hope when it comes to Israel and that all that is left is to wait for this evil nightmare to end.

 

President Obama, for reasons that bode poorly for Israel according to those of us with suspicious minds and memories of past actions, saw no reason to give any interviews casting doubts and aspersions of the soon to visit Chairman of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas. Chairman Abbas was met with the cordiality of an old friend, a friend who was the first person contacted by the newly sworn in President Obama upon entering the Oval Office immediately after his initial swearing in ceremony in January of 2009, even before calling any actual head of state of any nation be they friend or foe. The fact of that phone call should have sent a chill down the spine of every supporter of Israel and been the sounding of a loud klaxon warning of ill tidings, a rough road ahead and challenges that would crush a lesser spirit to any Zionist or lover of Israel. In the initial press conference before they dove into their meeting President Obama, hemming and hawing aside, spoke hesitantly but warmly seeming to have chosen his words with care to what end we can only presume. I got the feeling that the President was attempting to sound optimistic while not appearing to favor Chairman Abbas’s side of the negotiations or giving too much grist for the mills of the media. Then came Chairman Abbas’s time to speak and he chose not to speak in English and instead spoke what I gather was Arabic, a point that is interesting as Chairman Abbas is perfectly able to speak almost perfectly fluent English and usually chooses to speak in Arabic when he is selecting his phrases carefully and to have hidden meanings which convey underlying thoughts to the Arab world that are not conveyed when the translation is given by his translator. There are often phrases which have dual meaning or imply something completely different from their literal translation which allows Chairman Abbas to later claim that he did not mean or actually state what somebody quotes from the translation and purport that the meaning was lost in the translation which was for some unknown reason not exact or precise enough. He has utilized this tactic regularly and is something that should arouse suspicions immediately when he refuses to speak in English as there is always an angle in his double entendres.

 

As far as what was exchanged between President Obama and Chairman Abbas is up for conjecture but should become readily obvious as the peace talks go forward and we hear of supposed promises given Chairman Abbas. The problem is whether the promises claimed by the good chairman were actually offered or are simply imaginings of his wildest desires is something that the world will never know with absolute certainty. One reason for this is there is very little that President Obama would be hesitant to grant to the Palestinians no matter how deep the resulting wound would be to the Israelis. We know this from the first year of President Obama’s Presidency and the lack of evidence of any real change of heart. Right from the start President Obama made obvious that he knew for sure what the problem was that prevented peace in the Middle East and he set right to work to correct the injustices committed by every leader before him. The first move was to demand that Israel initiate a building freeze, preferably permanently. Eventually President Obama accepted a ten month building freeze by the Israelis and Prime Minister Netanyahu obliged despite the move almost collapsing his ruling coalition, yet somehow he persevered. Did the building freeze lead to the guaranteed peace as expected by President Obama? Well, it did bring Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chairman Abbas together long enough to shake hands and then there was no contact, no exchange of points, no negotiations, absolutely no contact for almost nine months, and then Chairman Abbas contacted President Obama demanding that he pressure the Israelis into making the building freeze permanent until an actual peace had been finalized. For some unfathomable reason, OK, for some obvious reason Prime Minister Netanyahu refused to extend the building freeze. President Obama still forged ahead undaunted and insisted that the borders between Israel and any future Palestinian State be based on the 1967 Lines, in reality the 1949 Armistice Lines that the Arab League refuse to recognize and demanded never ever be construed to act as a border in fact or negotiation. President Obama was not finished and continued in his indomitable manner stating that the capital for any future Palestinian State had to be all of East Jerusalem which would include all of the Old City including the Temple Mount and the Kotel including the Western Wall. By the end of President Obama’s first term virtually any of the Palestinians wildest dreams, items they would have never initiated on their own, had been brought to the fore and presented as the new starting parameters for future negotiations and the Palestinians had taken every demand made of Israel by President Obama and molded them into their new Red Line minimal demands that Israel would now be obligated to surrender hence forth and forever going forward.

 

So, what could the two leaders, President Obama and Chairman Abbas have possibly talked about during their tête-à-tête? The greatest fear that grips the hearts of those who love Israel is that Chairman Abbas and President Obama got into a mutual stroking exercise with each attempting to outdo the other at inventing new demands which could be made of Israel. Who could imagine what these two might hatch together that will become the newest parameter forced onto the peace process making it even more slanted against Israeli existence as the home of the Jewish People. The one thing I was able to glean from the press presentation by Chairman Abbas was his claim that the Palestinians had recognized Israel in 1988 and 1993. Where that statement is truthful, it is also couching a lie. That recognition is the very same recognition that the Palestinians, the Arab world and the Muslim world have always contended was their recognition of Israel, namely that Israel could continue to exist with the Jewish People permitted to live within as long as they accepted their status as Dhimmi under Islamic rulers. Israel as a democratic styled state where the Jews would be permitted to have self-rule is unacceptable to the Muslims, the Arabs and the Palestinians. That is the entire argument based around the right of return of the refugees from both 1948 and 1967 along with their children and their children’s children and their children’s children’s children and so forth in perpetuity. The normal definition under International Law for refugee has been rejected by the Palestinians and the Arab and Muslim worlds which is why their refugees are not under the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and instead are under United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) which has its own unique definition for refugee. Any normative refugee loses their status once they take up residence in another nation, get employment in another nation and are not able to pass their status on to the next generation; their children are citizens of whatever nation they may be born within. Palestinian refugees are refugees even if they take on citizenship of another nation and are not only able to but are obliged to pass that refugee status on to the next generation and every generation afterwards in perpetuity. This is why the original approximately 700,000 refugees, the vast majority or which voluntarily fled their homes at the behest of the invading Arab armies and the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al-Husseini, a personal friend of Adolph Hitler and the entire Nazi hierarchy, as they were told that once the invading armies of over a half dozen Arab nations had crushed and destroyed the Jews and their infidel state, they could return and take the spoils of the vanquished Jews. Somehow Israel refused to die but did lose the lands of Gaza, Judea and Samaria with Egypt retaining control over Gaza and Judea and Samaria being held by Jordan who renamed them the West Bank to hide their Jewish roots. When Jordan annexed those lands only the British and Pakistanis recognized their claim and even the Arab League refused to recognize their claim. So, if Jordan did not legally hold Judea and Samaria because they had gained these areas in an offensive war, from whom did they steal and occupy the area, Palestine or Israel? (Hint, throughout recorded history, and likely even before that, only one of the two names was that of an actual nation.)

 

The one item that Prime Minister Netanyahu has actually insisted upon, and even Tzipi Livni is in complete agreement on, is that the Palestinians must be insisted upon to recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish People and have the right to hold a Jewish nationality forever into the future. The reason that this demand is made is because the Israeli leadership insists that any peace agreement reached will have to be the end of the contesting between the Israelis and the Arab world. There must not be any hope or chance that there be future claims insisting that the so-called Palestinian refugees be permitted to return into Israel and possibly, if not likely, change the demographics such that Israel would simply become a binational state, or worse, another Arab state where the Jews would no longer control their destiny. The Palestinian argument has been that Judaism is a religion and that there is no such thing as a Jewish People thus there cannot be a Jewish State as there are no states anywhere in the world which are based on a religious belief. Of course that ignores the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republics of Pakistan and the Islamic State of Afghanistan. So, the statement that the Palestinians have recognized Israel is only partially true as they have only admitted that a state or nation may have the name Israel but have at the same time refused to allow any state thusly named to be Jewish and only recognize it if it is Islamic and Arab with the Jews, if at all permitted, to be permitted to live there as Dhimmi as long as such serves and pleases their Arab Islamic masters. Should at any time the ideas be pressed that they convert to Islam or face the sword, then the Jewish People would no longer be accepted living within the Islamic dominated state of Israel. The refusal to recognize Israel as the state for the Jewish People would result in the termination of the Palestinian refugees’ demands to be permitted to reclaim their lost homes resulting from the Arab invasion to destroy Israel when Israel was first established. Their claim does not hold any real legal standing under International Law for a myriad of reasons of which principally that they lost their homes resulting from a war of aggression where they sided with the aggressors which, by International Law, negates any claims they may have had to lands within the areas lost from such an aggression. There are also reasons stemming from numerous treaties, conferences, legal legislative declarations, accords, mandates and commissions entered into by the victorious allied powers of World War I which pertained to the lands surrendered by the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

 

There are a few items we have been given a glimpse of by statements and other venues that will likely be proven in the forthcoming negotiations. We know that Chairman Abbas has placed great significance on Israel releasing the final set of prisoners which were agreed upon as an Israeli concession to bribe Mahmoud Abbas to even sit and talk for nine months. That was one-hundred-six prisoners for two-hundred-seventy-two days of talks; that is a mere 2.72 days of negotiations for each terrorist murderer released from Israeli prisons. That does appear to be a very steep price, especially when considering what the Palestinians had to give in return, nothing, absolutely nothing. The really unamusing item was that from the very first day of the negotiations all we heard from Chairman Abbas was incessant whining over his not also being given another building freeze. It did not matter that when Abbas was presented with choices which included at a minimum a building freeze or the prisoner release, he chose the prisoner release and was informed at that time that Israel would continue to build in the areas where Israel intended to retain the lands through land swaps. Abbas accepted this arrangement and then instantly demanded that Israel also initiate a building freeze because he was Chairman Abbas and that entitles him to anything and everything he desires because he says so. Chairman Abbas stated clearly going into the meetings in Washington with President Obama that he would not make the mistake again and that he would only agree to any extension of the peace talks if and only if Israel agreed to further releases of terrorist prisoners including Marwan Barghouti, an arch terrorist planner who is serving multiple life sentences for the murders of numerous Israeli civilians including women and children of every persuasion including Jews, Druze, Christian, Muslims and others as long as they were Israelis, and a total and comprehensive Israeli building freeze. What other demands Abbas is likely to demand is anybody’s guess. What would Abbas be willing to give in return? Come-on now, you’re joking, right? Abbas does not give, he takes.

 

Abbas does not believe that the Palestinians owe anybody anything but firmly believes that the world owes him everything and anything he desires. He has mismanaged the Palestinian territories to the tune of a 4.8 billion dollar deficit and claims the reason is that he has not been able to collect taxes from the Jews living in Area C of Judea and Samaria. Never mind that Area C is under Israeli security and governance while Area A is under Palestinian security and governance while Area B is under Palestinian governance and mutual Israeli and Palestinian security. Abbas and the Palestinian Authority are permitted to collect taxes from the Palestinians living in Areas A and B while those living in Area C pay taxes to Israel. There are absolutely no Jews residing in Area A and very few within Area B while there are Palestinians living within Area C which includes areas of Jerusalem. There are other debts owed by the Palestinian Authority which are not included in that 4.8 billion dollar amount and that is an exorbitant amount to the Israeli Electric Company and unpaid charges to numerous petrol stations throughout Judea and Samaria. Abbas knows that should Israel shut off the electricity for nonpayment or the petrol stations refuse to give fuel to Authority vehicles that all Abbas would need do is complain that Israel has shut off the electricity or refused to fuel their vehicles and the entire world would go into panic mode and come down on Israel forcing her to give away these services simply because the world demands such. Abbas believes that his permitting negotiations that he has absolutely no intention of compromising any single item and will walk away from as soon as he has garnered whatever concessions he can pry from Israel with the able assistance of the rest of the world entitles him to be bribed and honored as if he has actually accomplished some noteworthy and great feat. Therein lies the secret on how to forge a real and actual peace between the Arabs and Israel, deny Abbas any aid, preferential treatment, world tours with accommodations in the finest hotels and restaurants all free of charge, flattery and other spoils until he actually takes concrete steps to make a lasting and working peace. Why would Abbas make peace when by doing so the Palestinians would no longer receive trillions of dollars from foolish governments around the world, especially those in Europe who despite financial troubles still finance Abbas as if he were a messiah, and he is treated with dignity, respect and lauded with the finest accommodations, travel and food where he insists on other nations to grant him treasure so he can continue to live the lifestyle he has become accustomed to. Abbas realizes that all of this ends once peace is attained, thus there will never be peace as long as the gravy train continues. Why give up the life of splendor when if peace is made he will actually need to rule a nation which means picking up the trash, actually developing a workable tax base, establishing industries, maintaining roads and utilities, and paying the bills or losing the electricity and fuel he currently gets for free and takes for granted. Ruling a nation takes work, accepting bribes to negotiate in bad faith and refusing to agree to anything is easy. Until Abbas is brought down to earth and made accountable he will continue to live off of those who are for too willing to pay his way as long as he continues to work to destroy Israel. And do not get that wrong, his sole desire in life beyond even being treated as if he were royalty is to destroy Israel and be acclaimed throughout many areas of this world for having committed a second Holocaust. That is the individual the world holds up as a man of peace and that is the sorriest circumstance of all.  

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

March 8, 2014

The Quest to Deliver Israel by President Obama

Filed under: 1949 Armistice Line,1967 Borders,Administration,Amalekites,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Appeasement,Arab Appeasement,Arab World,Arabist,Arabs,Balfour Declaration,Blood Libel,Building Freeze,Churchill White Paper,Civilization,Condemning Israel,Conflict Avoidnce,Divided Jerusalem,Domestic NGOs,Europe,European Council,European Governments,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,Foreign Funding,Foreign NGOs,Government,Hate,History,International Politics,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Israel,Israeli Capital City,Jerusalem,Jewish Heritage,Jewish Home,Jewish Leadership,Jewish State,Jews,Jihad,John Kerry,Jordan River,Judea,Judean Hills,Land for Peace,Mahmoud Abbas,Middle East,Muslim World,Netanyahu,Old City,One State Solution,Oslo Accords,Palestinian,Palestinian Authority,Palestinian Pressures,Partition Plan,Peace Process,Peel Commission,Politics,Pre-Conditions,President Obama,Recognize Israel,Refugee Camp,Refugees,Right of Return,Russia,Samaria,San Remo Conference,Sanctions (BDS),Secretary of State,Statehood,Support Israel,Tel Aviv,Temple Mount,Terror,UNHCR,United Nations,United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights,United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees,United Nations Presures,United States,UNRWA,West Bank,World Opinion,World Pressures,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 4:39 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

President Obama once again delivered a shot across the bow immediately before Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu arrived in Washington DC earlier this week with an interview given to Bloomberg columnist Jeffrey Goldberg where he stated, “I have not yet heard… a persuasive vision of how Israel survives as a democracy and a Jewish state at peace with its neighbors in the absence of a peace deal with the Palestinians and a two-state solution.” This was President Obama’s way of reinforcing the threats which have become part and parcel of Secretary of State Kerry and the rest of the Obama Administration demanding that Israel must surrender to the Palestinians’ endless demands and preconditions immediately because it has no other option and the United States will not be capable of finding reasons or excuses necessary to protect Israel from the consequences the world will demand. The small and inconvenient fact is that there has been definitive proof that Secretary of State Kerry has been assisting and facilitating efforts to further the boycott, divestment and sanction (BDS) pressures on European governments. The leaning on Israel while coddling the Palestinians in the recent negotiations has been reminiscent of the early efforts to rectify the imbalance which Obama perceived in the Israel-Palestinian peace process where he not only sided with the Palestinian cause but actually introduced concepts and demands on the Israelis which even the Palestinians had never had the audacity to propose. A couple of examples of these initiatives which originated from the mouth of President Obama and have now become the central demands of Mahmoud Abbas and the other Palestinian negotiators are the concept of Israeli building and construction freezes in Judea and Samaria, the return to the pre June 1967 Armistice Lines drawn after Israel defended successfully against over a half dozen Arab armies which attacked the nascent Jewish State immediately after her independence in May of 1948, the establishment of the Palestinian Capital City in Eastern Jerusalem and the return of the entirety of East Jerusalem including the Old City and the Temple Mount to Palestinian rule, and Israel granting some recognition for the Palestinian Right of Return by permitting a partial repatriation of Palestinian refugees possibly numbering as high as two or three million. All of these trends beg the question of whether or not Israel will be capable of weathering the storm and wait out the remainder of President Obama’s last term in office or will they be pressed beyond the breaking point.

 

There is one path which Israel could take which would end the ability of any nation, even the United States, to pressure Israel any further and would give President Obama the definitive proof that Israel does have an answer to the challenge by President Obama’s demand, “I have not yet heard… a persuasive vision of how Israel survives as a democracy and a Jewish state at peace with its neighbors in the absence of a peace deal with the Palestinians and a two-state solution.” Israel has the option which has stronger support in International Law than do any of the claims made by the Palestinians based on the San Remo Conference which was a treaty approved by 52 League of Nations members in 1922 and by the United States which was not a member of the League of Nations but approved it by a Joint Resolution of Congress in 1922 and in a separate treaty, the Anglo-American Convention of 1924 making the claims that Israel, the Jewish State, be defined as all the Mandate Lands west of the Jordan River not only valid under International Law but also the law of the land defining the position of the United States into the future in perpetuity.

 

The presumed problem Israel would need to address to the satisfaction of the United Nations, European Union, the United States, Russia, China, and a plethora of other NGOs and entities is once all the lands west of the Jordan River were annexed officially and incorporated as part of the State of Israel, would be providing a path through which the Palestinians will be included as full citizens with complete rights incorporating the people along with the lands. The first promise that Israel could make would be to extend water, sewage treatment, waste disposal, electricity, gas lines and all other infrastructure to include all of the Samaria and Judea bringing the services to all the new areas now under Israeli autonomy. There would also need to be a proposed path through which all those who desired to become citizens of the State of Israel could realize that goal. Giving all of the current Palestinians instantaneous citizenship would not be feasible as Israel should not be forced to grant the privilege of citizenship to those who had been convicted of acts of terrorism until some means of gauging the renunciation of such animosities had been met and a period of good faith passed without any further acts against the State of Israel and her peoples. Furthermore, Israel could offer a monetary package to those who desire to refuse Israeli citizenship and instead desire to make their home anywhere else in the world thus, making their accommodation of that desire easier to facilitate. Israel also should make their position firmly known and understood that any person found guilty of acts of terrorism will be deported as soon as possible without any enumerations as those funds are reserved for those choosing to resettle and not to criminal elements being deported. This is one of the available options out of many others which are defined as the One State Solution.

 

The principle item which would also require the assistance and cooperation of the world is that the descendants of the refugees would need to be incorporated and resettled somewhere other than within Israel. The refugees themselves largely left their homes under the auspices and direction of the Mufti of Jerusalem who claimed that their departure would allow the invading Arab forces could simply annihilate everyone they came across without need to determine whether they were Arab or Jew. They were promised after a few days and the quick victory by their imposing and unstoppable assault they could return and enjoy the spoils of war taking possession of the wealth and properties that formerly belonged to the Jews. The idea that not only the original persons who left or fled automatically instil the definition of refugee on their children and their children on into perpetuity is preposterous and a definition which the world only has attempted to apply to the Arab refugees of the War to Annihilate the Jews of the new State of Israel and on no others. The fact that this definition for refugee is solely applied in the case of the Jewish State of Israel meets the definition of an act of anti-Semitism and not an act of justified accusation on Israel as a state like any other. The correction of this travesty and the incorporating the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) agency responsible for Palestinian refugees removing them from the corrupt and politicized United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) which has a self-interest in perpetuating the refugee status into a permanent class of people that can and will never by fully satisfied. UNRWA has proven that it has long since become an agency whose unofficial job is to bring about the end of the Jewish state and the submission of Israel to Arab Islamic rule. That travesty must be terminated.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: