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

 

September 1, 2012

NAM Convention Answer to Mullahs’ Prayers

The NAM (Non-Aligned Movement) held their conference of one-hundred-twenty nations in Tehran, Iran giving the Mullahs a stage before the world. The Mullahs did not let the world down by almost immediately making inflammatory statements and continuing throughout the week. Likely the low-point was the Iranian Supreme Leader commenting on Israel saying, “ferocious Zionist wolves who digest the Palestinian people.” This and the other comments were so far beyond the cusp of things acceptable that Ban Ki-moon felt pressured and commented that he “strongly rejects threats by any member state to destroy another or outrageous attempts to deny historical facts such as the Holocaust.” Ban Ki-moon added, “Claiming that Israel does not have the right to exist or describing it in racist terms is not only wrong but undermines the very principle we all have pledged to uphold.” The United Nations felt that the atmosphere emitted from the conference in Tehran was so toxic that they needed to make excuses for Ban Ki-moon’s attendance where such bigotry and hatred had become the central part of the message. The statement read, The “Secretary-General conveyed the clear concerns and expectations of the international community on the issues for which cooperation and progress are urgent for both regional stability and the welfare of the Iranian people.” The release continued with further clarifications stating, “On the nuclear question, the Secretary-General said he has been following closely Iran’s talks with the P5+1. He said he regretted that little tangible progress has been achieved so far during these intensive talks and that the talks needed to be serious and substantive. He said that Iran needed to take concrete steps to address the concerns of the International Atomic Energy Agency and prove to the world that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. He said that there is no alternative to peaceful, diplomatic and negotiated settlement which should be reached step by step and based on reciprocity.”

The week before the convening of the NAM Conference both the United States and Israel had requested that Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon refrain from attending the conference as by attending he would give the Mullahs the appearance of acceptance for their hatreds which were sure to be part and parcel of any conference held in Tehran. The Secretary General could have saved himself and the leadership of the United Nations any embarrassment or need for explanations and apologies simply by having heeded the warnings voiced by the American and Israeli leaders. Adding to the public warnings was the statement by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu who recently called the summit, “a disgrace and a stain on humanity.” He has subsequently commented “In Tehran today, the representatives of 120 countries heard a blood libel against the State of Israel and were silent. This silence must stop. Therefore, I will go to the UN General Assembly and, in a clear voice, tell the nations of the world the truth about Iran’s terrorist regime, which constitutes the greatest threat to world peace.” By his presence, Ban Ki-moon allowed for some of that stain to be splashed onto the reputation of the United Nations adding to other injuries from the past such as the Durban Conferences, all three of them thus far, which were nothing more than bigoted hatreds and slanders against solely Israel and the Jewish People all of which were held to blame for every ill and calamity which had ever plagued the human race. The driving impetus which steered the Durban Conferences from honestly investigating racial hatreds, xenophobia, and other social ills and hatreds that still plague the human existence to the singular condemnation of Israel and the Jews was these same one-hundred and twenty non-aligned nations which make up the NAM. Their actions on the world stage during Durban I, Durban II, and Durban III gave a track record which should have acted as a glaring flashing neon warning that their conference, especially with it being held in Tehran, Iran, was going to be problematic at the very least.

Another piece of business that was enacted during the NAM Conference was the passing of the office or the President of the non-aligned nations from the current holder, Egypt, to the next holder, Iran. Other high points were the fact that new Egyptian President Morsi was in attendance in Tehran though Morsi did not make any overt signals of making an alignment between Egypt and Iran. Instead, President Morsi suggested a new proposal for addressing the Syrian situation where a group of nations consisting of Egypt, Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia take the lead in finding a solution to end the slaughters and chaos in Syria. We find President Morsi’s choice of nations to be interesting as we at Beyond the Cusp had predicted that there very possible would be a four way struggle for the leading position should a new Caliphate be formed with Turkey, Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia all vying for the title. By holding the Presidency of NAM and the conference being held in Tehran, Iran took advantage of the leaders of the other contenders for leader of the Muslim world having to come to their capital. This was one of the subtle undertones which were most evident in the number of speeches and press releases committed by the Mullahs and President Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders. That is why Egyptian President Morsi’s announcement of having the four nations working to bring an end to the Syrian civil war for the sake of the Syrian people and the Islamic world. This was also a smart play for extending and improving the chances that the Muslim Brotherhood will end up the eventual winners and rule Syria once Bashir Assad is forced from office. Iran, on the other hand, is heavily invested in continuing the rule of Bashir Assad and likely resented the Egyptian President’s demand that Iran promise to cease arms shipments to the embattled Syrian leader as the first step in finding a sane solution.

On the international stage the NAM Conference had very few surprises. There were the usual denunciations of the United States and Israel. There were the same old calls for the complete revamping of the United Nations to reflect the new and changing world and alignments. They stated a desire for a new formula for the Security Council with the stripping of their veto and permanent status of Britain, the United States, France, Russia, and China and placing far more power in the hands of the NAM members. There were the expected calls for forcing the industrial world to make larger investments in the future and the building of the developing nations. The conference was everything one could either hope or dread would result depending on your point of view. One optimistic item one can take from the NAM Conference is that some of the member states have begun to progress down the road to becoming industrialized nations and have begun the long climb from a purely agrarian economy to an industrial economy. This will also lead to more advanced agricultural methods being implemented as their wealth grows. This is promising as only by bringing these countries up to an industrialized and information age economies which will allow them to share a larger share of the wealth while their contribution to world wealth increases driving the size of the world’s economy even higher thus avoiding the other option where everybody loses and the developed countries are torn down by the less developed world in an effort to make all societies equal. This is most evident when one looks at the advantages and the new visions coming from countries such as India, Brazil, Argentina and other nations which are well on the road to modernity. Perhaps within the next decade or so we will see the number of members in NAM start to decrease as more nations join the first world economic levels and no longer harbor societies filled with loathing and envy for those they see as exploiting their wealth and denying them a future with any chance for success. This can be made more likely if we can encourage representative governances and the rule of law replacing the rule of men which enforces a repressive nature which tends to oppose development and progress.

Beyond the Cusp

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.