The mainstream media has spent gallons of ink on newssheet and/or ASCI code on digital memory storage mediums covering the Arab proposal before the United Nations Security Council. This proposal, which Jordan has initiated for the Palestinian Authority (PA), is seeking a Chapter 7 binding resolution. This would result in forcing a mere twelve months for negotiations after which the United Nations member states would be put upon to enforce vacating all Israelis, both civilian and military and security personnel from all the lands gained during the Israeli defensive war known as the Six Day War of early June 1967. Pushing Israel back behind the Green Line, regardless of whether any agreement was attained during the period of negotiations, places the nation into what former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nation Abba Eban referred to as the Auschwitz borders due to the threat and indefensibility these borders entailed. The twelve months for negotiations was added in order to satisfy and quell the complaints voiced by some Security Council member states including one or two permanent member demands for the inclusion of at least token negotiations. These negotiations have little if any ability to alter or effect the final enforcement sought by Jordan and the PA as the resolution itself presupposes the final solution when it demands for United Nations enforcement to return all Israelis back within the Green Line regardless of any other influences or alterations. Currently the PA is continuing to add amendments and change the wording softening some assumptions while playing with the time frames and addressing other concerns in order to gain more nations’ support and potentially avoid the veto from any of the permanent members. These alterations and refinements are presumably a worthless waste of time as it is assumed that the United States will veto the resolution should it ever receive sufficient support for ratifications. Granted, the United States has not stated openly that it will veto the resolution though its representatives have expressed displeasure with the resolution in each and every rendition and form.
The main reason for the Arabs to seek an imposed solution, which sidesteps a negotiated settlement with Israel by having the United Nations enforce the formation of a Palestinian Arab state without demanding or requiring any agreement reached through negotiations or reaching an actual peace agreement with Israel, was to be able to continue their terror war as they will have gained the desired territories without needing to declare an end to hostilities. This is the alternate method that Mahmoud Abbas has sought through pressuring nations worldwide as well as seeking United Nations organizations, accords, committees, treaties and courts to officially recognize a Palestinian Arab state as a member or observer state as it is all about those statehood recognitions. The aim by the PA has nothing to do with establishing their statehood over the lands lost by Jordan and Egypt in the Six Day War, it is about the definition given by Yasser Arafat, and echoes and repeated by Mahmoud Abbas and other Arab leading representatives, when he claimed to be following the plan for defeating the Zionist entity (Israel) in stages of which reclaiming the lands lost by Egypt and Jordan in 1967 was simply the first and very important stage. The concept, as defined by both Arafat and Abbas, demands that first one needs to gain as much lands through negotiations as is conceivable even if such required expanded terror wars and a lengthy time before such a deal was granted and then restart the terror war while demanding further lands be ceded until defeating the Zionists becomes readily simple and easily achieved and then executing that final battle. There is no expectation for establishing two states for two peoples living side-by-side in peace, security and economic prosperity; they have and still do seek a one state solution where an Arab state replaces all of Israel covering the lands from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. That right there is the definition and description as to why there will never be an agreement but only the leadership of the PA seeking to circumvent having to negotiate and thus will consistently refuse to recognize Israel as the homeland of the Jewish People and they continue to refuse to ever agree that the occupation has ended, further that a treaty ends all claims, any agreement signifies the end to resistance of the Zionist occupation of Arab lands and amongst other forms of actively maintaining aggressive acts against Israelis they refuse to alter the textbooks and teaching of incitement radicalizing their children such that they learn that dying as a martyr by killing Israelis who are the reason for poverty and all social and individual ills which plague each and every Arab as well as their families and friends whether they perceive it or not.
Proof of how Hamas imposes restrictions even to the point of preventing orphans taking a trip during which they might actually enjoy themselves and even, dare we say, smile and laugh with members of the Zionist occupiers; Hamas Interior Ministry spokesman Iyad Al-Bozom wrote this entry on his Facebook pages Sunday, “Security forces prevented thirty-seven children of martyrs from entering the land occupied in 1948 for a suspicious visit to a number of settlements and occupied cities. This move came in order to safeguard our children’s education and protect them from the policy of normalization.” Iyad Al-Bozom was referring to an invitation by Israel’s Kibbutz movement and two Israeli Arab towns for the orphans going to visit were not part of what the world is told is “occupied territory.” Hamas was harping on the occupied places defining them such that every place on their itinerary was Israeli territory. This defined even those lands prior to the Six Day War in June 1967 which was defined as Israel, that is Israeli within the Green Line, was also defined as “occupied territory.” This meant that Hamas held the same views which the Palestinian Liberation Organizations (PLO) held and defined in their charter as “occupied territory” by the Zionist entity in 1964 when it was formed. The same definition passed on to Fatah which was to be the political arm of the PLO adopting and based on the same premises even though Yasser Arafat always permitted the western representatives to differentiate between the two entities claiming that Fatah did not view Israel within the Green Line as “occupied territory” thus making them a viable entity with which Israel had a partner for peace. Carrying the entire political splitting of hairs even further the western nations and their leadership then allowed the formation of the Palestinian Authority which, being one step further apart from the PLO and also a step away from Fatah, simply had to be the Israeli partner for peace which obviously had to meet the western definition which separated the lands gained by Israel in 1967 as separate from the lands Israel gained in the defensive war in 1967, the Six Day War.
In reality, Yasser Arafat and his second in command from the very forming of the PLO in 1964, a time before there existed any “occupied territory” by Israel, all three entities defined in their charters the terminology defining everything between the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea as occupied Palestine, an Arab state which must be made Judenrein, devoid of any and all Jews. This western self-delusion has continued from the very start through to and continuing today and is at the heart of the efforts by the United States to forge a peace deal between Mahmoud Abbas and the PA with Israel. This western delusion is also very much the reason that the Israelis now demand that any peace deal, in order to be considered and acceptable to Israel, must include two stipulations which the PA must agree with; first, the PA recognizes that Israel is the nation state of the Jews and second, the PA must recognize any peace as an affirmation that all grievances are settled and no further claims or violence be instituted by either side. Because both Fatah and the PA are actually in complete agreement with Hamas on the what the definitions of “occupied territories” consists of that Mahmoud Abbas cannot agree to any peace which ends the conflict and also makes all territorial claims satisfied as neither stipulation is true. This is why Mahmoud Abbas is seeking for the United Nations to institute the Green Line as the borders for the Palestinian state as having those gains guaranteed by the international powers, Abbas, and thus the PLO, Fatah and the PA, can agree to this being enforced without having to recognize Israel or having to end incitement and their terror war with Israel continuing to claim the rest of Palestine is occupied and thus the interim solution was exactly that, an interim solution, or a Hudna as it is define by the Islamic laws and customs.
The fact that the PLO, Fatah and the PA are in complete agreement with Hamas as far as territorial claims, the sole difference is one of authorization of the claims to all of the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Hamas claims the lands based on their religious grounds where the Quran defines the areas considered a part of Dar al Islam as once lands are so defined it becomes every Muslim’s religious obligation to assure that these lands remain forever within Dar al Islam and thus Israel is a religious abomination which must be returned to being Dar al Islam which requires that Sharia be the ruling law and that Muslims are the rulers with all those outside of Islam accept their Dhimmitude, their lower position as second class citizens beneath any Muslim accepting of their demeaning restrictions both socially and before the law. This further causes problems for Hamas as the Israeli justice system does not differentiate thusly though many Israelis would beg to differ with such a claim as they view decisions by the Supreme Court of their lands. On the other hand, both the PLO and Fatah are secular nationalists and claim the lands as part of the political entity of the Caliphate which was defeated and cut into separate national identities of which both Israel and Lebanon were unacceptable as they were denoted to be lands not under the autocratic or religious rule under an Islamic governance. Thus the PLO and Fatah held the same belief but under slightly different reasons which while accepting the required dictates of Islam, they did not accept Sharia as the basic law of the lands. This led to a simple confrontation of secular socialists and the Islamic Fundamentalists, the very same battle being waged between Saudi Arabia and Iran as well as the difficulties Egypt is facing against the Muslim Brotherhood. No matter how one parses the differences between Hamas and the other entities, Hamas is a product of the Muslim Brotherhood while the PLO and Fatah are ghosts resulting from the efforts of the Soviet Union’s subversive outreach with the KGB playing a strong role which resulted in numerous nations which practiced secular socialism to varying degrees as long as these beliefs did not necessarily run contrary to Islam.
No matter the route one takes be it down the religious demand of Hamas or the secular socialist demands of the PLO, Fatah or the PA, Israel poses a problem as she resists being subverted and surrendering to the powers of Islamic society be that religious or strictly political surrender. The key word in both instances is surrender. We have taken a long route back to a premise we investigated in our article, ” Similarities Between Islam and Communism.” What we discussed was how in both Islam and Communism both systems demanded that the nations of the world necessarily must eventually surrender and accept being ruled under such a system. Thus both Islam and Communism demand not only one’s surrender to the will of either but also to recognize their eventual unavoidable and unalterable victory over all competing ideas and ideals. The failure of both systems to produce productive societal frameworks is due to this surrender as well. Both systems claim the reason behind their inevitability is a more perfect vision of the future with a society filled with fellow believers whose acceptance of either Islam or Communism is part and parcel of the definition accepted by Islam or Communism. What is interesting is that Communism purports that there is no G0d and the state runs supreme while Islam claims the Allah is the one and only and, just as important, the deity over the final incarnation of G0d and will rule over all of society in some perfect end-times. Either philosophy taken by the Arabs claiming to be the Palestinians will have similar arguments which are backed up with claims that their demands are valid because they who know the only truths that matter are making those demands. Their argument goes one step further and posits that their victory is guaranteed simply because they are the followers of the final victorious political or religious entity depending on which you support, Hamas or PLO/Fatah/PA. Where it gets interesting is within the PA, which claims to include both Fatah and Hamas, it is pretended that both systems are permitted and which one prevails will very likely be dependent upon which one has the support of the larger numbers of people, currently that appears to be Hamas but that will probably change with whomever controls the economy and other portfolios in any future Arab government. Ruling the Arab areas is actually the recipe for failure which will result in the winner simply being the last man standing. Currently polls show the PA as favored to win in Gaza which has been ruled by Hamas while the PA ruled Judea and Samaria are expected to vote overwhelmingly for Hamas should elections be held in the near future. Such an outcome is unlikely as Mahmoud Abbas has resisted holding elections regularly since 2006 when the last elections were held for the parliament and Hamas proved victorious. This fact led to the cancelling of elections for the leader of the PA, a position which Abbas has clung to ever since those cancelled elections in 2006.
There are a few things which we can expect in the near future other than no PA elections, or at least not for the office held by Mahmoud Abbas. The lack of such elections will eventually cause the rift between Hamas and Fatah and the PA to widen eventually leading to a return to Hamas control in Gaza and the PA clinging to control in Judea and Samaria for as long as the Shin Bet (Israeli intelligence) and the IDF continue to patrol and control checkpoints. Abbas will be in no hurry to force the Israeli security forces from Areas B and C as their operating is a large part of why Abbas remains in office. This became evident when the IDF arrested a group of Hamas members who had been tasked by their leadership in Turkey to foment violence and lawlessness which they were to utilize removing Abbas from office. So, Mahmoud Abbas may allow a vote on the resolution currently before the United Nations Security Council but he will find some manner or path by which to make it impossible to implement the expulsion of the Jewish settlers along with the Shin Bet and the IDF and thus the PLO and Fatah will survive remaining in control of Judea and Samaria for the foreseeable future. After it becomes plainly obvious that Abbas is refusing to fully implement any of the agreements by which a unity governance agreement was reached with Hamas being permitted reentry to the PA which was presumably leading to elections with the appointment of a board of members to run the PA until new leadership had been established, those elections will be postponed indefinitely. At the Security Council of the United Nations the current resolution in its eight-hundred-fifty pound form will be postponed and withdrawn such that it can be reworked making the phraseology more acceptable. In the meantime the French initiative for a solution will make its way to the floor of the Security Council where the United States may be less likely to use their veto provided the resolution is merely a Chapter 6 and not Chapter 7 thus making it not much more significant as a resolution than had it been passed by the General Assembly. This will be followed by the usual protestations by Mahmoud Abbas as he demands that Israel be forced from the lands as suggested by the Security Council’s non-binding resolution. This may even lead to the PA petitioning the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or the International Criminal Court (ICC) immediately after being accepted, and as Abbas and the PA have been tentatively approved by the ICC, which tries war crimes and crimes against humanity, the threats to drag Israel before the court on charges are already being made. Things between Israel and the United States will continue in their downwards trending until a new election for President has been held and the new President sworn into office. This will remain true no matter who wins the upcoming Israeli elections. Meanwhile, the United Nations Security Council has been rocking back and forth between permitting a vote or further postponing the PA initiative. Any prediction this far out on the Israeli election when not even all the candidates and leaders of the parties have been chosen in the party primary elections, makes prediction nearly impossible and quite worthless. The daily polls continue to place Labor and Likud tied which is not surprising as that is exactly what one would expect this early on. The real winner has been undecided as when that option has been offered the polls show it having the largest number of votes usually having comfortably over fifty percent. My prediction is that will change and eventually undecided will lose its leading slot.
Beyond the Cusp