Beyond the Cusp

February 19, 2017

Hamas Appointments Signal Coming Conflict

 

The appointment by Hamas of 55 year old Yehya al-Sinwar, released from Israeli prisons after serving a mere twenty-two years of his four lifetime sentence as part of the Gilad Shalit exchange, as the new political leader of Hamas with his deputy Khalil Alhia, both coming out of the Izz a-Din al-Kassam terror group with links to the extreme Islamic Salafist movement promises future conflict. Yehya al-Sinwar gained fame for killing of Palestinians who he called “collaborators” including one senior Hamas commander without the bother of a trial because he perceived him to be a potential rival and thus he just had to be a traitor. Sinwar is well known by Israeli intelligence agencies who reveal that his dreams are for the founding of the two state solution as he knows full well that Hamas will take control of the Palestinian entity from Fatah and the Palestinian Authority and Mahmoud Abbas “either through the ballot box” if elections are held “or by the bullet,” Sinwar’s actual phrasing, and “have Israel subject to rockets from all directions.” He dreams of a final glorious battle where he will scatter the Jews back to the far corners of the world as predicted by the Quran from the Seventh Century. He fully believes in Jihad exactly as laid out in the Quran. He intends to force the world through the BDS Movement to estrange Israel from the body of nations. If need be he will implement plans to buy the necessary political, media and academic leaders in crucial position to attain this end. He intends to first separate Jerusalem completely from Israel having the world proclaim Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and have Hamas force Israel completely from the entirety of the city believing that Israel cannot survive once Jerusalem has been taken. History actually backs this prediction which makes him all the more dangerous. Yehya al-Sinwar and Khalil Alhia being placed at the top of Hamas portends a coming war likely starting this spring and continuing into the summer. The question is of when, not if, the violence will begin. The recent launching of four rockets at Eilat may be the signal of the start of rocket launches ever couple of weeks eventually becoming more common building into a full assault with hundreds of rockets each day or more just as the last two wars. We can also expect that the world media will wait until Israel responds to report anything and then to lead their reporting with Israel attacked Gaza, or Gaza City, and only later in the article mention that the Israeli actions was in response to weeks of rocket attacks by Hamas, if they even admit that Hamas initiated the attacks.

 

This situation signals that Hamas has decided that total war and perpetual Jihad is the path they need to implement going forward. There are certain things which Israel has available to perform in reaction to these obvious moves by Hamas towards a more violent path. Israel currently provides Gaza much of their electricity, water, natural gas and other petroleum products. These take a deal of effort to keep operating, especially when the difficulty is within sniper range from Gaza as Hamas and Islamic Jihad will often shoot the repair personnel who are working to repair and return electric power to Gaza. Hamas and the residents of Gaza do not pay for the provided power and the United Nations, European Union and many nations demand that Israel not deduct the costs from funding for Gaza as that is collective punishment. These entities and nation do not care that the nonpayment for services is a collective lack of payment and there is no concern for the collective punishment of Israelis who pay additional rates to cover the costs of power and water and other provisions which Israel provides both Gaza and the Palestinian Authority, both entities which refuse to pay their power and water bills. This is collective punishment on Israel and the world shrugs and claims that Israelis can afford to pay for the very people’s power and water who are attempting to kill them on a regular basis. Where else is such a situation forced on a people, nowhere. Only Israel is subjected to being forced to provide power, fuel, water and even medical provisions and even often provide medical treatment all for people who support the murder of Israelis, many often giving active support. There are numerous stories of Palestinian Arabs attempting to bomb the very hospital or clinical care facility which has treated them and often saved their lives. So, let’s talk common sense and what Israel ought to do in order to persuade Hamas that attacking Israel will not be in their better interest and that if they expect to live in a modern society with nice homes and facilities and shopping centers, then they need to act civilly with Israel, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and recognize Israel in every way if they expect Israel to continue to provide them with essentials.

 

The first promise Israel should make the leadership of Hamas, both political and military, that Israel knows the location of their homes and if a new war is waged, their homes will be amongst the initial targets which will be destroyed. Israel should promise the most prominent people in Gaza that their homes will be targeted one house at random for every rocket position which has to be destroyed which is placed on apartment buildings in the less well-off neighborhoods. No longer will only the poor lose their homes and have their lives destroyed by Hamas violence, the wealthy will now also be targeted and pay a similar price. The wealthy who hold the money and thus influence and power are going to be targeted and more. The malls and fine restaurants and theaters and other pleasure palaces the wealthy enjoy will be destroyed at night when they are empty to decrease the loss of life but not the loss of property and convenience. When violence breaks out there will be a similar cutting off of water, electricity, gas and less gasoline and diesel fuel provided. The higher the violence the lower the provided fuels, electricity, water, gas and other provisions which Israel provides. Perhaps Hamas had better make deals with Egypt to provide these essentials before they start a war with Israel and have to go without. But Egyptian President Sisi is not exactly enamored with Hamas so that too may prove difficult. Another war from Hamas and Islamic Jihad will have ramification on the nice lives lived by the leadership of these terror groups and continued violence will result in ramifications for the leadership and wealthy of the whole of Gaza and not just the poor people, the unfortunates which the wealthy are more than willing to sacrifice and whose homes do not matter to the wealthy, well, that should change and the leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and their wealthy friends should be made to know this.

 

Israel has to get serious about demanding the right of a nation to peace and secure borders and this should start with making a deal with Jordan and Jordan Opposition Coalition (JOC الائتلاف الاردني للمعارضة) who have offered a solution to the Arab Palestinian situation and desire peaceful coexistence and cooperation with Israel to their mutual benefit. They desire to build a democratic style governance in Jordan for all the Palestinian Arab population and recognize the Israeli right to the lands west of the Jordan River as defined by the British Mandate, San Remo Conference, Treaty of Sèvres and backed by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter and all of International Law. Such a deal would finally bring the Arab-Israeli conflict to a sustainable resolution which also would recognize the agreements made after World War I and the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire which happened in parallel with the dissolution of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire in Eastern Europe. Israel has every bit as much legitimacy as Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Algeria, Jordan and the rest of the nations defined by the series of treaties reached settling the disagreements and other considerations at the end of World War I and affecting all the nations and empires which fought in that war even including Japan and the United States which both were members or observers to every agreement, conference and treaty. It is finally time for the world to make good on their promises to the Zionist Congress and other interests which finally resulted in the formation of the State of Israel on May 15, 1948 with the borders as pictured below which were immediately invaded on all sides at the first light of dawn. Israel survived but did not come out as the victor in any means other than survival. Instead Israel lost the Gaza Strip to Egypt and Judea and Samaria lands and Eastern Jerusalem (West Bank) to Jordan. In the Six Day War of June 1967 Israel liberated these lost lands and took the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, which has since been returned, the Golan Heights from Syria, which has been annexed to prevent the return of Syrian snipers shooting Israeli farmers and others and provide a more stable and defendable border which has been a blessing with the current situation in Syria. Gaza will remain with Hamas as Israel released those lands in a treaty though a revolution all but immediately replaced the Palestinian Authority government.

 

Definitive Map of Israel May 15, 1948 As the Sun Rose Immediately Before Half a Dozen Arab Armies Invade Assisted by Militias from Several Entities

Definitive Map of Israel May 15, 1948
As the Sun Rose Immediately Before
Half a Dozen Arab Armies Invade
Assisted by Militias from Several Entities

 

The time and situation have reached a critical mass where Israel must exercise her rights to her full border promised, the border which the world is fully aware includes everything west of the Jordan River including all of Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem. The Palestinian Arab, those are the non-Israeli Arabs, may have Jordanian citizenship where the group mentioned above desire forming a self-rule governance, either without their current King or with the King having a ceremonial position at his preference as he spends much of his time away from Jordan and not particularly ruling, has promised to accept them as citizens even arranging with Israel to allow those desiring to remain in their current location to have voting rights in Jordan and resident alien status with Israel as long as they remain law abiding, and make a deal, where Israel would provide those who would desire moving to Jordan a generous buyout of their homes and business as well as a relocation bonus all for a limited time. The Palestinian Arab leadership would likely relocate somewhere in Europe or the Arab world as the Jordanians remember the revolution attempted by Yasser Arafat and would probably not be willing to risk their presence again. There would need be a limit to the time in which the new Jordanian Arabs could receive the buyout and relocation bonus of maybe as much as three years and perhaps even an offer to Israeli Arabs who have relatives living in Jordan and other cases on a case by case basis all considering the benefit to Jordan as well as Israel. It would be unlikely that the Palestinian Arabs would be offered Israeli citizenship, especially when they were being offered citizenship by the Arab nations of Jordan which was originally intended to be the Arab state formed from the British Mandate. The idea of the Hashemite Kingship was a British idea to satisfy their World War I promise to the Hashemites who lost their lands which included Mecca and Medina when the Saudis took the lands by force around World War I and the Hashemites also aided the British against the Turkish Ottomans during World War I. None of these complications in Jordan should ever have had any influence on Israel other than the Jordanian illegal occupation of Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem for nineteen years. Just because Jordan occupied the lands of Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem does not translate into any rights for them to give it as a present to the Arabs which resided there or were transferred there by Jordan against International Law, especially when their claims to have given the areas to Yasser Arafat’s PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) terrorist group came in July 1988, twenty-one-years and one month after the loss of the lands in June of 1967. First, one cannot give away land which was occupied and not legally theirs to begin with and most definitely cannot give those lands away over twenty-one-years after the rightful owner liberates them.

 

The reason there need be a solution to the problem in Judea and Samaria, which includes Eastern Jerusalem, such that Israel retains full rights over the lands with the Arabs only permitted, at most, self-rule in either a semiautonomous region or as resident aliens with Jordanian citizenship granted self-rule potentially in selected cities is so the IDF retaining full operational rights throughout the areas prevents any opportunity for Hamas to establish an operational base from which to attack Israel. Simply stated, the two state solution already exists with Gaza and Israel and a three state solution must be put to rest and buried never to resurface even in a horror film. It is hoped that this was stressed with President Trump and needs be discussed with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping (习近平) and whichever other international leaders who might be sympathetic or require being informed for other considerations. Israel must start making the process that she will retain all the lands other than Gaza and that there is no such thing as another Arab nation being carved from the body, the legal body, of Israel and that Israel will be retaining control over all the lands which were and still are promised her under all of international law, United Nations Security Council Chapter Six Resolution 2334 included as that particular resolution must be voided by the United Nations due to it breaking Article 80 of the United Nations Charter and thus cannot stand if the United Nations desires to continue to have relevancy and any degree of credibility. If this resolution stands then the United Nations Charter is invalidated and thus the entire credibility of the United Nations is sunk and nothing the United Nations ever does can be considered as permanent if it is unable to observe its own charter. Stating it in easy to understand English, “No Charter, No Credibility.” As for the European Union and the other NGO’s and countries which decide they really desire to back carving up Israel further, we all know what is driving that desire and such hatred will be at best ignored and if too persistent should be acted against with Israeli sanctions enforced and even joined by other nations who side with Israel. The time has come for Israel to stand definitively and take an active stand stating with strong enforcement that Israel will retain all the lands promised by the world, the League of Nations, the United Nations and every nation which recognized Israel in the United Nations vote in November 1947. Any nation wishing to renege on their promise can decide to risk Israeli sanction if they so choose and with so many applications for computers, cell phones and so many other developments, discoveries and inventions, how many nations really wish to do without Israeli discoveries or goods, that is the risk they are entitled to take. Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions can work both ways, something to remember and consider going forward, think hard.

 

Beyond the Cusp 

 

February 4, 2017

Two States for One People Solution

 

The world through governments, leaders, politicians, statesmen, reporters and editorialists all tout the “Two States for Two People” as the agreed upon mantra for the solution of the Arab Palestinian-Israel Conflict. As an example, under the heading “What is the two-state solution?” New York Times journalist Max Fisher defined the two principles as being the same: “The two-state solution would establish an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel — two states for two peoples.” Would but such be true the conflict would have very long ago been settled. Unfortunately, this is the side taken by only one of the sides in the debate, the Israelis. The Palestinian Arab leadership has a very different set of parameters for a solution. Perhaps a short list of their favorites would be in order. There is their “River to the Sea, Palestine must be free” solution in which there is one Arab state named Palestine founded upon the graves of over six-million dead Israeli Jews. Even then the Arab Palestinians would have another set of problems, what to do with these Jewish bodies and what to do with the Jewish bodies which have been interred within these borders throughout history back into antiquity. One need understand that when the Arabs claim there must not be one Jew on their precious and pure lands that includes on top, alive or dead, or beneath it no matter how long dead. When Israel surrendered Gaza they were forced to reinter their dead which only added to the calamity and sociological shock suffered by the Jewish communities which were uprooted even unto their dead friends and relatives. Imagine being forced from your home, your place of work being destroyed and having to dig up friends and family from their resting places and rebury them locating them sometimes a great distance from where they resettled making their graves now difficult to visit and tend. That was part of the horror of the plan to solve everything by simply giving the Arab Palestinians the Gaza Strip so they could prove how they could be productive and live peaceably beside Israel. Simply stated, that experiment was a dismal failure.

 

The New York Times once again in an article, “The Two-State Solution: What It Is and Why It Hasn’t Happened,” would have one believe that the Palestinian Authority government fully supports the idea of “Two States for Two People” solution to the conflict with Israel. But what do Arab Palestinian leaders have to say on the Two State Solution? Back in July 2011, Senior Palestinian Official Nabil Shaath slammed the French peace initiative because it called on them to recognize the Jewish State, so he told ANB TV that the French Initiative had,

reshaped the issue of the ‘Jewish state’ into a formula that is also unacceptable to us — two states for two peoples. They can describe Israel itself as a state for two peoples, but we will be a state for one people. The story of ‘two states for two peoples’ means that there will be a Jewish people over there and a Palestinian people here. We will never accept this — not as part of the French initiative and not as part of the American initiative.

Additionally Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas also was quoted in 2011 stating, “I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. I will never recognize the Jewishness of the state, or a ‘Jewish state.’” Both of these were statements directly contradicted what French President Nicolas Sarkozy stated in 2012 where he clearly underscored this difference between the statements made by Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership and the generally accepted beliefs of the Western World when he posited,

It is not enough to have two states; there must be two states for two nations. I know very well that there are two ways to destroy Israel: from without and from within. This is why the two-state solution is not enough. We need to have two states for two separate nations. One for the Jewish people and one for the Palestinians.

There is an additional slander which claims that Israeli complaints about the PA instigating violence have no basis in credibility. This has been the mantra of many reporters, editorialists, and largely European political leaders. This can be proven ridiculous simply by playing this now infamous video of Mahmoud Abbas and others speaking in the language nobody outside of a select few Westerners are capable of translating, Arabic (see videos below). These two videos are but a small example of the horrific statements almost always stated in Arabic knowing full-well that the European and American leftist and mainstream medias will pretend they are unable of making heads or tails of such statements only quoting that which these leaders of the Arab Palestinians feed them in English. We wish we could attribute this to their being lazy except with the proof of what was said already translated by MEMRI, they have no excuse other than a severe anti-Israel and thus anti-Semitic bias. Finding the lies could not be easier either, simply visit CAMERA and read almost any coverage they show about Israel and the Palestinians. Be prepared for news you may not have seen before and for much of what the nightly news has fed you to be upended with quotes and references.

 

 

 

Now prepare yourself for our small dose of food for thought. In the December of 2000 as President William Jefferson Clinton was desperately attempting to solve the unsolvable Arab-Israeli Conflict he held a series of meetings. The crux of these attempts to bridge the gap between Yassir Arafat and Ehud Barak led to an interesting turn of events during the desperate days in Paris. President Clinton met for hours with Yassir Arafat finally getting him to actually state what terms he would accept believing the Israelis would never in a million years meet these demands. They were for Israel to turn over 90% of the “West Bank” (Judea and Samaria) and all of the Gaza Strip as well as half of Jerusalem to become the Capital City for Palestine. Late in the evening President Clinton visited Ehud Barak and set forth the terms which Arafat had given him. It took some time and arm twisting but in order to make peace Ehud Barak agreed to returning 95% of Judea and Samaria along with all of the Gaza Strip and dividing Jerusalem. Once receiving Barak agreement, President Clinton sent word to Arafat’s delegation that they were to meet early the next morning for a joint session to negotiate face-to-face. Yassir Arafat smelled that he was a rat trapped by his own admissions and ordered secretively for his car to be brought around to the front entrance fully packed, door open, and driver ready to hit the gas as soon as Arafat was in the vehicle. When President Clinton presented copies of the agreement to the two leaders, Ehud Barak reached for a pen while Yassir Arafat bolted out the long corridor. Immediately afterward, Madeline Albright dashed after the fleeing Arafat in an ungainly and borderline hideous limping gallop never closing the distance. She cleared the door to have the cameras of the news reporters recording over her shoulder the black limousine circling out of the drive with Arafat seated in the back seat. A subsequent offer was tendered from Taba later that week which was not even dignified with a response and thus ended the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton. But wait, there’s more.

 

Next comes along President George W. Bush and the ending of his term. He has successfully forced Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to turn the Gaza Strip over to the PA in exchange for some sweet words and fourteen promises written in a letter as an understanding between the two offices. This was supposedly an agreement between governments and this one won overwhelming affirmation from both houses of Congress garnering a total of comfortably over five-hundred votes from the combined Congress. These were the fourteen conditions under which the release of the Gaza Strip was performed and their refutation could have led to Israel retaking all of Gaza or some sections thereof. President Obama did indeed crumple up this agreement and trashed it completely with his assisting the passage of UNSC Res. 2334 during the closing days of his administration. This act will likely leave an unpleasant taste in any world leader’s mouth and be seen as a dire warning against accepting the world of any American President for the foreseeable future, especially one would hope Israeli leaders if no others. So, in late 2008 President George W. Bush and his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice were pressing Israel once again to make the necessary sacrifices for peace. Again an Israeli Prime Minister, this time Ehud Olmert, made the supreme sacrificial offering of dividing Jerusalem and again over 90% of Judea and Samaria with land swaps for the remaining lands. This time they were dealing with Mahmoud Abbas, presumably a more reasonable and honest broker simply because instead of wearing fatigues and having a revolver strapped to his side, Abbas wears a business suit. Well, the apple did not fall far from the tree and Mahmoud Abbas proved to be a suitable (all inferences to a pun intentional) follow-up to Yassir Arafat as he officially received the offer and never even bothered to reply or make a counter offer. Instead he simply closed the negotiations with no further communication except to threaten to take the entire matter to the United Nations and the Court of The Hague and internationalize the conflict.

 

Division of lands between Israel and Semiautonomous Arab Zone

Division of lands between Israel
and Semiautonomous Arab Zone

 

With the ample assistance proffered by President Barack Hussein Obama, Mahmoud Abbas has done exactly that, internationalized the conflict such that any European nations, the United Nations in any of its near infinite capacities and anyone or anywhere else can jump in and demand Israel make concession after concession receiving nothing but threats and violence in return. The world is internationalizing the conflict quite adequately with city after city in Europe and numerous colleges conducting some level of boycott against Israel, often all Israel claiming all of Israel is responsible for there being no solution. Technically, from the Arab point of view, they are correct; the fact that there is an Israel which makes the statement that it is the Jewish Homeland, that is sufficient to make peacemaking impossible as the Arabs of the PA and the Arab World demand the end of Israel as Jewish. They will accept an Israel provided the Arabs rule and the Jews, if permitted, remain as Dhimmis, second class citizens with restricted rights who may be executed at any time by whim of any with the authority to do so, often meaning any Muslim. Since this United Nations Security Council Chapter Six Resolution 2334 which blames Israel, particularly the “settlements” which are simply Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, legal under International Law, for blocking the path to peace, the Arab Palestinians are free to demand anything while doing nothing and the world gets to blame Israel for not appeasing the Arabs sufficiently through boycotts and calls for “Kill the Jews.” What is surprisingly illegal are any claims made by the PA and other Arab representatives as while they have legal rights to their property, they have no legal leg to stand upon claiming self-rule or requiring an independent state. The reality, as we have stated near endlessly, and are working on endlessly, is the lands all belong to Israel for use as the Jewish State and that the only means by which any of the land can become an Arab State is if Israel signs a treaty relegating our claims and rights to these lands. And one does not need believe us, but one might feel inclined to take the wording of a decision made by the Third Chamber of the Court of Appeal of Versailles in a case brought by the PA against the French companies Alstom and Veolia for building Jerusalem’s light rail system. Their final decision was also a warning to the PA that Israel has the sole claim to all of Judea and Samaria and that they would do best not to take this into any court of law. The fact this came from the friendliest court system the PA was able to find makes this all the more impressively important. Please take our kind invitation to read for yourself a copy of the Court Ruling. Furthermore, in an earlier case brought before Egyptian Judge, Justice El Araby, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), who sat in judgement as part of the panel which heard the case where the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) sought an advisory opinion in 2003 from the ICJ on the legality of the security barrier erected by Israel; the Honorable Justice El Araby warned the UNGA and others, including Mahmoud Abbas and the whole of the PA, that filing further ran some risks, as he stated,

“The international legal status of the Palestinian Territory (paras. 70-71 of the Advisory Opinion), in my view, merits more comprehensive treatment. A historical survey is relevant to the question posed by the General Assembly, for it serves as the background to understanding the legal status of the Palestinian Territory on the one hand and underlines the special and continuing responsibility of the General Assembly on the other. This may appear as academic, without relevance to the present events. The present is however determined by the accumulation of past events and no reasonable and fair concern for the future can possibly disregard a firm grasp of past events. In particular, when on more than one occasion, the rule of law was consistently side-stepped. The point of departure, or one can say in legal jargon, the critical date, is the League of Nations Mandate which was entrusted to Great Britain.”

 

Mandate of San Remo for French and British including actual treaty demarcations for each nation

Mandate of San Remo for French and British including actual treaty demarcations for each nation

 

Things are not only not as they are portrayed by far too many in the Western Media Enterprise, but actually quite the opposite. Israel is not the occupier; the Arab Palestinians are the actual occupiers. International Law which is constructed from treaties, conferences, agreements and other contracts between men and nations is usually understood to have some leeway or allowance for differing opinions. The fact that Israel is defined on her east by the Jordan River and on the west by the Mediterranean Sea is an exception as it is delineated and spelled out with diagrams and maps in several agreements, conferences, treaties, Mandates and even Article 80 of the United Nations Charter. As the border of Israel is accepted as stated above in the United Nations Charter Article 80, the recent UNSC Res 2334 is invalid as the United Nations individual bodies cannot overrule the Charter thus in any instance where there might be a conflict, such as the statement that the Jewish communities defined as “settlements” due to their location east of the 1949 Armistice Line, also called the Green Line, is invalid as these communities are all west of the Jordan River and thus legally on Israeli lands. All of Judea and Samaria by default are Israeli lands unless Israel gives them away in a treaty, not agrees to talk about the possibility but actually agrees, until then the lands remain as an integral part of Israel. Those are the hard and true facts and the only lands that Israel signed away has been Gaza. How anybody can even think for a second after the catastrophic results of the Gaza giveaway that repeating the same motions this time with Judea and Samaria including the tactically significant Judean Heights and the Jordan Valley and its overlooking mountains has to be suffering from some severely debilitating mental disorder or actually desire to plot the end of Israel and her Jewish population. Gaza has proven that once the land has been signed away, no matter how severe the resulting rocket barrages and other acts of warfare committed against Israel, any reaction by Israel will be condemned by the world bodies and numerous governments where the best Israel can expect is half a dozen friendly nations, possibly the protection of the United States Veto in the Security Council (not an automatic despite what anybody says as Presidents change) and the great sacrifice some European nations and a few others might take by abstaining from a vote to condemn Israeli defense of her citizens from attacks. Former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Abba Eban said it best stating, “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” Abba Eban, having resided for a period in New York City, was able and took the opportunity to enlighten and grant the New York Times a singular piece of literary brilliance along with a moment of fresh air in the form of actual truth concerning Israel when he was quoted stating,

“Nobody does Israel any service by proclaiming its ”right to exist.” It is disturbing to find so many people well-disposed to Israel giving currency to this contemptuous formulation. Israel’s right to exist, like that of the United States, Saudi Arabia, and 152 other states, is axiomatic and unreserved. Israel’s legitimacy is not suspended in midair awaiting acknowledgement by the royal house in Riyadh. Nor does a group such as the Palestine Liberation Organization have any juridical competence to accord recognition to states, or withhold it.
A majority of the 155 states in the modern international community are younger in their sovereignty than Israel, which was the 59th member of the United Nations. There is certainly no other state, big or small, young or old, that would consider mere recognition of its ”right to exist” a favor, or a negotiable concession.
What Israel is entitled to have in return for the increase of its territorial vulnerability is not verbal recognition but an effective security system, to be arrived at by negotiations.
Back in 1967, when the world community adopted its unanimous policy for the Middle East in Security Council Resolution 242, some members suggested that Israel should be satisfied with a solemn declaration of the right of all states to exist. They added that Israel might, if it chose, regard itself as included in that definition. At that time, hardly any responsible government in the Western world or elsewhere accepted that definition of Israel’s rights as adequate…”

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

February 1, 2017

And What if They Only Moved the U.S. Embassy Eastward?

 

The current United States Embassy building was opened back in 1966 and is probably electronically challenged with dated wiring and deficient ability for upgrades and very likely would be replaced soon in order to implement a great amount, one might say groundbreaking, upgrades to its capabilities with modern meeting facilities, internal wiring to integrate greater networking and other modernizations and security upgrades bringing the United States Embassy into the twenty-first century. The United States Embassy is half a century old and was built with an outlook for future technology which probably included cathode ray tubes, not flat screens, old word-processing equipment and not computers and interconnectedness beyond the imagination fifty years ago. The building probably had been upgraded as far as it was capable and still leaves much to be desired. The embassy is currently located at 71 Hayarkon Street in Tel Aviv, Israel. What if the United States built a new embassy under fifteen kilometers to 18 Shalom Shar’abi Street, Petah Tikva across the street from the School for Gardening and Planting and next to the Zharia Kohlani Garden which would provide for a peaceful and relaxing atmosphere and nice picturesque environment allowing for a new building with all the modern requirements an embassy could require. Did we mention that this move would be eastward placing the embassy almost fifteen kilometers closer to Jerusalem? As the current embassy is almost on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, any move would most likely place the embassy closer to Jerusalem. We understand that the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas and the PLO would all prefer for the new United States Embassy be placed offshore on a ship in the Mediterranean Sea as that is also where they would like to locate Israel as well. This is highly unlikely to ever happen, so the United States Embassy, when modernized with a new building and location, it will very probably be east of its current location as central Tel Aviv does not have much, if any, open spaces of sufficient size to place a new embassy. Moving the embassy, even just to Petah Tikva, a suburb of Tel Aviv, would move the building eastward and thus closer to Jerusalem, not to Jerusalem, but in that direction. I think we all know exactly how our Arab friends would react. They would claim that the United States was making the move towards Jerusalem as being recognition of Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel and a move designed to indicate the United States opposition to dividing Jerusalem and allowing the Arab Palestinians to use East Jerusalem as their capital. The sharing of Jerusalem with Israel would result in denying Israelis access to the Old City, Temple Mount, Western Wall and also deny Christians access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre on the Temple Mount. Any claims made that these places would be shared would be just as honest as the Jordanian promises to do likewise, a promise they had and never did fulfill. If you do not believe the United States could use a new embassy, simply look at the old style, block architecture with its straight lines all parallel with a cement facial appearance which resembles a prison more than the embassy of a world power (see image below).

 

United States Embassy Tel Aviv, Israel

United States Embassy Tel Aviv, Israel

 

We all probably can almost hear the caterwauling and threatening coming from not just the Arab Palestinians but from across the Arab world and other nations under Islamic rule across all of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). The main drift of their all but ridiculous complaints and difficulties would be that the simple fact that the United States was building an embassy in Israel (see our idea for the building below) would be construed as supporting the Israeli side of the Arab Israel Conflict and would have demands that the United States also build an embassy to the PA in Ramallah or Nablus or likely in East Jerusalem. Of course having an Arab Palestinian Embassy built in East Jerusalem would be viewed by the Arab and Muslim world of MENA as the proper recognition of their claims to the city. Placing a United States Embassy for Israel in Western Jerusalem would be critical and a display that abrogated the fairness for the United States to adjudicate any settlement and lead to demands that only the United Nations, the General Assembly in particular could be a fair adjudicator of the conflict. The fact that there would be such a different set of claims for embassies with an embassy to the PA in East Jerusalem being a wise and politically correct and approved move while an embassy to Israel in West Jerusalem would be a declaration of Israeli imperial claims to Jerusalem would bring on no feel of hypocrisy in the Arab world.

 

Imagined New Style for United States Embassy in Petah Tikva, Israel

Imagined New Style for United States Embassy in Petah Tikva, Israel

 

The same is true of their call for any further decisions to be adjudicated by the United Nations General Assembly, the same body which has passed declarations that Zionism equals racism, has targeted Israel more than the next ten nations targeted combined, is all but ruled by the Arab and Muslim nations with their allies from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM a group of undeveloped and developing nations usually depicted as the Third World Nations usually with dictatorial governance and many virulently anti-Israel and even anti-Semitic in their official positions). Even many of the European Union nations in such cases of denunciations of Israel either join those condemning Israel or simply abstain with only rarely having them vote against such declarations. The only blocking for denunciations of Israel brought before the Security Council historically has been the United States with the few times anti-Israeli motions pass through the Security Council, such as the recent denunciation contained in UNSC Res. 2334, is when the United States abstains, as President Obama instructed Ambassador Powers to do in the recent passage of UNSC Res. 2334 declaring Israeli “settlements” as a major obstacle to peace and against International Law. We must point out that UNSC Res. 2334 and its claims run counter to the United Nations Charter Article 80 as well as numerous historic treaties including but not limited to the Balfour Declaration, San Remo Conference, League of Nations 1922 Mandate on Palestine, Treaty of Sèvres, Treaty of Lausanne and the Anglo American Treaty. Of course the one thing we did find out early from President Obama was that the history of events and any agreements made by the “colonial powers” including but not limited to Britain, France, Netherlands, Germany, the remainder of Europe, and especially the United States and Israel were meaningless and his position and mark he would try to leave for posterity would be the upending of everything these powers had ever accomplished and to favor all others and their claims over these nations he found to have such horrific histories of exploitation. President Obama appeared to have a special animosity and visceral hatred for Israel and particularly Prime Minister Netanyahu. Life goes on and perhaps things will return to a more balanced form of insanity going forward.

 

The promise by President Trump to move the United States Embassy to Israel to Jerusalem would be a wonderful fulfillment of what the United States Congress promised over twenty years ago. Israel had officially annexed all of Jerusalem and granted the Arabs residing in East Jerusalem Israeli identification cards and resident alien status with an additional right for voting in Jerusalem City elections. There will likely be movement to make these Arabs full citizens as time passes. There will be no dividing of Jerusalem no matter what the rest of the world, the United Nations specifically included, believes or attempts to rule. Should the European Union, United Nations, United States or any other group of nations or organizations decide that they will divide Jerusalem and grant the PA to control the eastern parts which had been illegally occupied by Jordan, they had better be prepared to take those areas by military force because Israel will not be relinquishing any part of Jerusalem, period, end of story. Israel should be taking on a new approach which recognizes the new realities of having friends who are willing to enforce the aforementioned treaties and conferences above returning all of the promised land of Israel to Israeli rule. That would include everything from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. In recognition that even some in Europe who are ascendant also support these promises and we wish them the best going forward and in the upcoming elections imminent in Europe, Israel should drop all efforts to evacuate Amona or any other of the so-called “settlements” which are actually Israeli cities, towns and communities. Many of these communities also have industrial and other economic entities, many of which employ a fair number of Arabs from the neighboring villages and these Arabs work side-by-side with the Jewish employees, receive the same salaries, and make more than other Arabs working anywhere under the PA rule. Whenever the BDS movement or other entities claim success in forcing these businesses to relocate to within the 1949 Armistice Line (named the Green Line), as they did with SodaStream, many Arabs lose extremely well-paying jobs and become unemployed. When these do-gooders have such a success they laud their great victory presumably to assist Arab Palestinians; meanwhile, when they forced SodaStream, through coercion to relocate, hundreds of Arabs lost their jobs being unable to make the transit to the new location. That was some assistance these Arabs received, losing the best paying jobs they could have hoped to find, but why should reality rain on these do-gooders’ parade. The same goes for the European Union Nations when they also pressure Israeli companies through boycotts either nationwide or location by location as many cities and even counties in Spain are targeting these enterprises, some are simply boycotting everything Israeli made. Well, most things Israeli made as they continue to import Israeli stents for use in heart surgeries, continue to use Israeli security software, cell phones using Israeli technologies, instant messengers using Israeli coding, Microsoft operating systems and applications such as Windows and Office, and numerous other wonders of the modern world. These boycotts refuse to actually make any real sacrifices, they just boycott mostly products they were not using in the first place, they just like to proclaim how anti-Israel they are. Israel need call the world’s bluff and simply take the lands which rightfully belong to Israel, allow the Arabs not aligned or contributing to terrorism to remain as legal resident aliens with voting rights in their local elections, grant them elections for the first time since Mahmoud Abbas was elected in 2005, and grant them freedom to rule their towns themselves and live free of the oppressive PA and its dictatorial regime and make a decent living free of the corrupt rule of Abbas robbing them at every turn. Israel would be granting these Arabs their futures back and eventually potentially to be Israeli citizens if they choose or even to move away and return to their families elsewhere in the Middle East or Europe and North America, something currently denied them as they are not allowed to sell their properties without Abbas and the PA taking their cut providing they do not claim they were selling to a Jew and steal their land and allow gangs to execute them.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.