Arab Summit Lays Traps for Trump and Israel

 

The 29th Arab Summit which adjourned April 15, 2018, has been panned by many as having provided President Trump with a great opportunity to finalize and end the Arab-Israeli conflict. Their resolution which was the main subject on their final days all but ignored the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Bahrain and Sudan, giving them scant attention. Their statement released gave full attention to the Palestinian situation declaring, “We reaffirm that the Palestine Cause is the entire Arab nation’s main priority, stressing the Arab identity of occupied East Al-Quds as the capital of the State of Palestine.” Their mention of East al-Quds is a restatement of the Arab laying claim to eastern quarter of Jerusalem which includes the Old City and the Temple Mount with all the holy sites of three religions. One small item which bears great weight on their claim is the way Jordan refused to permit Jews at all times and Christians and other non-Muslims access to any of the holy areas of the Old City including the Temple Mount and the desecrations which caused the grave markers of the Mount of Olives cemetery to be strewn and broken utilized as paving stones and to construct bathrooms. This was the Jordanian idea of full and equal access for all religions which has only been realized since 1967 after Israel liberated their occupied territories from Jordan who had illegally held these areas since the 1948 war to eradicate the Jewish State which failed but still managed to steal away lands belonging to the Jewish State under the San Remo Conference and the treaties which followed. Should the world desire that the Temple Mount remain accessible to all, then the Arab Summit trap must be sidestepped and the Arabs denied their supersessionist demands. Their statement put their demands succinctly and in full claiming, “The conflict could be ended through a two-state solution that guarantees the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the borders of July 4, 1967, with East Al-Quds as its capital.” The demand that the borders be set as they were on the day before the Arab attacks started the Six Day War where Israel liberated her formerly Arab occupied lands as well as the Sinai Peninsula, the region returned to Egypt in exchange for peace. The Arab Summit is demanded a complete reset of the situation which brought on the Arab assault to destroy Israel on July 5, 1967, something which completely ignores all previous treaties and agreements which all allowed Israel to retain lands such that Israel have a defendable border. The borders of July 4, 1967, would not allow for Israel to be defendable as it would leave Tel Aviv in direct range of the Judean Hills and a mere nine miles from Arab forces standing on the high ground overlooking most of Israeli infrastructure.

 

Let us look first at the United Nations Security Council and their suggested solution laid out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, the carefully worded plan for the basis in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. The clause which has caused the most bafflement and confusion within the debates states, “Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;” which was debated to great extent with Hugh Mackintosh Foot, Baron Caradon taking the center stage in the debate on the wording of the resolution. Allow us to quote from this in depth article explaining Lord Caradon’s reasoning and purpose for his wording, “Much play has been made of the fact that we didn’t say “the” territories or “all the” territories. But that was deliberate. I myself knew very well the 1967 boundaries and if we had put in the “the” or “all the” that could only have meant that we wished to see the 1967 boundaries perpetuated in the form of a permanent frontier. This I was certainly not prepared to recommend.” Lord Caradon was specific that Israel was not to be forced to return to the same borders present on July 4, 1967, which was a major cause of the Six Day War. Many believe that the real intent of UNSC Res 242 was to have Israel return parts of the Sinai Peninsula, possibly allowing the Israel border to follow along the central mountain spine of the Sinai Peninsula and to have the Jordan River as the Israeli eastern border. Needless to point out, the Arabs have always stated this resolution claiming it actually states either, “the territories” or worse, “all the territories” while refusing to recognize the actual wording of simply “territories” allowing for the Israeli borders to be altered providing Israel with the additional territory to provide her defensible borders with the strategic depth required to do so. At a minimum, the vast majority of military strategists agree that for Israel to have the strategic depth and a defensible border, Israel should necessarily continue to hold the lands east of the Jordan River, the high grounds overlooking the Jordan Valley as well as the high grounds overlooking central Israel from the Judean Heights (see the cutaway showing the tactical necessities). President Trump had best familiarize himself with the tedious and specific arguments and deliberations which contributed to the formalized final draft of UNSC Res 242 before finalizing any presentation of his Deal of the Century so that he avoids falling into the Arab Summit laid trap.

 

Cutaway View of Tactical Advantage and Necessity
of the Jordan Valley and Judean Hills for Defending
Coastal Plains and Israel Alongside the Mediterranean Sea

 

The Arab Summit has produced the only solution the Arabs, including the Palestinian Authority, have ever claimed will work and even then they make that conditional. They make a point to stress that they “affirm the illegality of the American decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel,” as such a recognition also makes a recognition of the existence of the State of Israel, something the Arab World still rejects and refuses to recognize. They further emphasize this with their declaration, “we categorically refuse to recognize Jerusalem (Al-Quds) as the capital of Israel, where East Al-Quds will remain the capital State of Palestine. We warn against taking any action that would change the current legal and political status of Al-Quds.” The Arab Summit did not miss the opportunity to blame Israel for the entirety of the situation claiming, “will end the political stalemate resulting from the intransigence of Israeli positions.” The most dangerous of the Arab Summit statements was their unwillingness to positively end the unstableness of the area and the conflict the Arabs insist on continuing against Israel until they succeed in destroying the Jewish State. This was made evident in their posturing with, “The conflict could be ended through a two-state solution that guarantees the establishment of an independent Palestinian state on the borders of 4 July 1967 with East Al-Quds as its capital.”

 

Allow us to now get a tad upset with the entirety of the Arab Summit declarations over three words, “could be ended,” and not would be ended or shall be ended or anything to indicate finality of the agreement in cementing a complete and total end to the Arab-Jewish Conflict, and make no pretense, that is the reality of the conflict. The Arab Summit insists on continuing their denial of the right of the Jews to self-determination. The sad part is that most of Europe also does not recognize the right of the Jews to self-determination. According to Islam, the driving force behind the lives of the Arab World, the Jews are forever Dhimmi, second-class citizens with limited rights, needing to be cared for by their betters, the believers of Islam. In Europe, this was initially driven by the Church which believed they had replaced the Jews as the Chosen People and the Jews being rejected by Hashem were now considered as followers of the devil and accursed. This belief has carried on through the Reformation to the numerous Protestant forms of Christianity and has been accepted by secularist in Europe, as it has become second nature to both Europe and the Islamic World of the MENA* states. Both Christianity and Islam have a problem with the existence of Israel in that should the Jews return to their ancient homeland and prove the prophesy that the Jewish People would be gathered again to Eretz Yisroel, then the idea that Christianity replaced Judaism and that Islam replaced both in both cases because the formers had a better and more final version of the Word of Hashem, then this becomes challenged as the original Word of Hashem of Judaism becomes reestablished. This makes Israel a threat to both faiths with an interesting exception of Christianity which has embraced the return of the Jews to their ancient homelands as one of the precursors for the coming of the Messiah. In Christianity, that return is the “Second Coming” while in Judaism it is the initial coming of the Messiah.

 

This problem that the Arab Summit nations refuse to accept the existence of Israel and use the phrase, “could be ended,” instead of accepting any agreement as a final and acceptable end to hostility, such as terrorism, warfare, rocket attacks or Iranian nuclear attack, they leave open the intent and near certainty that all of these aggressions are to be continued. That is not peace by any definition; they are simply demanding a reset of the borders to the most advantageous set of borders for their attempts to erase Israel. This is not an offer of peace but a guarantee of ever-continuing warfare and violence in all of its numerous variations. The only peace which can be had would be to find a means of having the Palestinian Arabs in the Shomron to be returned their Jordanian citizenship and their being given enticements to move to Jordan or find a new homeland which will accept them and the granting of citizenship to the refugees by the nation where they reside as their camps are more like neighborhoods with apartments and stores surrounded by barbed wire. If the refugees were also permitted to choose where they are to reside, all of them outside of Israel being the only stipulation, even given some enticement which would likely cost less than one year’s funding of UNRWA** and the aid sent to the Palestinian Authority. This would have the advantage of finality ending this seventy-year plus struggle, but the Arabs will not accept any finality in which Israel remains and Jews have self-determination. This is, unfortunately, the position taken by many nations in the world whenever there is a vote in the United Nations. In reality, Israel is far more accepted when it comes to international relations as Israel has embassies in over one-hundred-fifty nations. Israel is a healthy nation with a thriving and growing economy and has given the world many wonderful discoveries as well as being amongst, if not the, first nation to arrive after there has been a disaster, natural or otherwise, anywhere in the world when permitted by the government, providing aid, search and rescue and often a field hospital which has functional departments for virtually any service a full sized hospital offers. Israel is a member nation in the United Nations despite being deprived of normalcy due to the Arab World and the European nations both of which do whatever they are able to prevent Israel sitting on the Security Council or to be a member, let alone chair, and of the numerous United Nations agencies. It is because of these irrational acts of belligerence against Israel often exemplified by the actions of the United Nations Agencies such as the Human Rights Commission, UNESCO, UNICEF and especially the General Assembly that Israel should fear the world accepting the phrasing, “could be ended,” as actually meaning an end to the violence and an actual peace treaty. Israel is being served by the Arab Summit a guarantee of continued violence with intent to destroy the Jewish State depriving Jews of self-determination and depriving them of life and only allowing the Jews of Israel the peace of the grave, not a peace of arms. Of course, Arab selectivity of decisions, declarations, resolutions and even wording where the words must be as they perceive them and not as they were approved, comes to the fore with their rejection of President Trump, including his recognition of Jerusalem as the Capital City of Israel, and their complete acceptance of President Obama and especially his claims that Jerusalem was actual al-Quds and that Israel must return to the July 4, 1967 lines; yet it is Israeli rejectionism that is the problem and Arab rejection of Israel is absolutely natural and completely understandable and utterly defensible, thus whatever the Arab Summit decides must be accepted as completely fair and just why Israel must be rejected as an abomination. Please excuse us if we refuse to accept Arab rejectionism concerning Israel and their demands that Jews accept their Dhimmi status.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

*MENA = Middle East and North Africa

**UNRWA = United Nations Relief and Works Agency