Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Thursday 2 January 2014

The Hypocrisy That Denies Israel's Right To Define Itself As The Jewish State

This report in the Jerusalem Post today regarding Israel as the "Jewish State" jogged my memory regarding an article written a few years ago by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer, who is, of course, no stranger to regular readers of this blog.

In the course of his article (here) David Singer wrote:

 'Israel needs to introduce a circuit breaker - one that places the ball firmly in the Arab court. The Arabs can then decide whether to negotiate with the Jews or not on the final allocation of sovereignty in the West Bank and the acceptance of each other‘s right to exist.
 Such a result can be swiftly and effectively achieved by Israel renaming itself officially as “The Democratic Jewish Republic of Israel” - or some other suitable name.
This  would in one fell swoop create the appropriate description of  the Jewish State and actually represent its innate character in the eyes of the world and its own citizens.
Ironically Israel’s bitterest Arab enemies and some of  its Arab treaty partners have no problems in so describing the unique character of their own States in their official titles.
Some examples of those countries and their official names are:
 Libya: “The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya”
 Jordan: “The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”
 Syria: “The Syrian Arab Republic”
 Egypt: “The Arab Republic of Egypt”
 Iran: “The Islamic Republic of Iran”
 Emirates:“The United Arab Emirates”
Had Israel’s founding fathers been influenced to go beyond the bland title of “The State of Israel” perhaps the political situation would have been entirely different today.
David Ben Gurion - then the representative of the Jewish Agency - had made an impassioned appeal to the United Nations Special Committee On Palestine on 4 July 1947 when he stated:
 “And here we are, not only we the Jews of Palestine, but the Jews throughout the world the small remnant of European Jewry and Jews in other countries. We claim our rightful place under the sun as human beings and as a people, the same right as other human beings and peoples possess, the right to security, freedom, equality, statehood and membership in the United Nations. No individual Jew can be really free, secure and equal anywhere in the world as long as the Jewish people as a people is not again rooted in its own country as an equal and independent nation.
An international undertaking was given to the Jewish people some thirty years ago in the Balfour Declaration and in the Mandate for Palestine, to reconstitute our national home in our ancient homeland. This undertaking originated with the British people and the British Government. It was supported and confirmed by 52 nations and embodied in an international instrument known as the Mandate for Palestine. The Charter of the United Nations seeks to maintain "justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law."  Is it too presumptuous on our part to expect that the United Nations will see that obligations to the Jewish people too are respected and faithfully carried out in the spirit and the letter?"....'
David Singer's reminder of the official names of Arab countries leads me to note that the constitutions of Arab/Muslim countries pull no punches in describing the Islamic nature of the countries concerned.

For example:

In its Preamble, the Moroccan Constitution declares at the outset that Morocco is "An Islamic ... state ..."

The Jordanian Constitution declares:
"Article 1
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan is an independent sovereign Arab State... The people of Jordan form a part of the Arab Nation ....
Article 2
Islam is the religion of the State and Arabic is its official language."

The Iranian Constitution declares that:
"The form of government of Iran is that of an Islamic Republic, endorsed by the people of  Iran on the basis of their longstanding belief in the sovereignty of truth and Qur'anic  justice, in the referendum of Farwardin 9 and 10 in the year 1358 of the solar Islamic  calendar, corresponding to Jamadi al-'Awwal 1 and 2 in the year 1399 of the lunar Islamic  calendar (March 29 and 30, 1979], through the affirmative vote of a majority of 98.2% of  eligible voters, held after the victorious Islamic Revolution led by the eminent marji'  al-taqlid, Ayatullah al-Uzma Imam Khumayni....
In order to attain the objectives specified in Article 2, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has the duty of directing all its resources to the following goals:
[inter alia] 
 the expansion and strengthening of Islamic brotherhood and public cooperation among all the people;
framing the foreign policy of the country on the basis of Islamic criteria, fraternal commitment to all Muslims, and unsparing support to the mustad'afiin of the world....
All civil, penal financial, economic, administrative, cultural, military, political, and other laws and regulations must be based on Islamic criteria. This principle applies absolutely and generally to all articles of the Constitution as well as to all other laws and regulations, and the fuqaha' of the Guardian Council are judges in this matter....
In accordance with the sacred verse of the Qur'an ("This your community is a single community, and I am your Lord, so worship Me" [21:92]), all Muslims form a single nation, and the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has the duty of formulating its general policies with a view to cultivating the friendship and unity of all Muslim peoples, and it must constantly strive to bring about the political, economic, and cultural unity of the Islamic world...."
The Iraqi Constitution declares that:
'....Islam is the official religion of the State and is a foundation source of legislation:
A.        No law may be enacted that contradicts the established provisions of Islam
B.        No law may be enacted that contradicts the principles of democracy.
C.        No law may be enacted that contradicts the rights and basic freedoms stipulated in this Constitution....'
And so on and so forth.

It is, therefore, sheer hypocrisy on the part of Israel's enemies to deny Israel's right to define itself as the "Jewish State".


  1. No there's little need. Why? You can't shame the shameless, you can't scold people who admit they are hypocrites. All of this is really for the cheap seats anyway. It's for the NYTs and the White House and the so called 'public opinion'. But the NYT and the White House are opposed to Israel no matter what. They're not interested in a solution, they're interested in hate. That's the role they've taken on. So a more useful tack is to have Israel agree with anything and everything the Arabs appear to demand. Just nod. It won't matter because as soon as someone agrees with the Arabs they either run away or make even more insane demands, which in turn lead to more demands and so on. Because the objective of the Arabs is to make demands. That's their definition of success. They don't want a 'state'. They want to pretend they are supreme kings who can't make endless demands and proclamations. If one were to agree to what they demand, and the Arabs actually began to act on it, it would lower their self esteem it would lower their prestige in their own eyes. Their only response can be yet more demands. You don't even have to worry that agreeing with them would ever put you in a weak position. It can't. That's not the point of it.

    1. Thanks for your usual forthright view, Trudy.

  2. You do not have to resort to the Islamic houses of horror to find a dripping double standard when it comes to the Jewish state

    The preamble to the constitution of the Republic of Ireland reads as follows:

    "In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,

    "We, the people of Éire,

    "Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial,

    "Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation,

    "And seeking to promote the common good, with due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity, so that the dignity and freedom of the individual may be assured, true social order attained, the unity of our country restored, and concord established with other nations,

    "Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution."

    Ireland is not alone in constituting its state on a particular religious tradition. Many European states do it including of course the UK where it is constitutionally impossible for a Catholic to be head of state. (it goes without saying, nor a Jew). I'm picking on Ireland because Irish are so prominent with those anti-Israel sneers about "God being a real estate agent". There is none of this religious sectarianism (for example) in Israeli basic law. There is no reason why a Muslim or Christian (or atheist) could not be president.

    Daphne, the rev Lucy Winkett of the Piccadilly WALL church breaks silence here - she might as well be breaking wind, the stupid woman

    1. Thanks, Anon. What she writes is vacuous nonsense, and I imagine CiF Watch will have a field day with it. "Beautiful resistance" - that phrase reminds me of Sizer, reputedly architect of the Wall idea - "Resistance is Existence" (I'm told by reader P) Sizer sometimes observes on Facebook re Israel/the Palestinian Arabs. I'm sure the phrase does not originate with him.

  4. Think you all miss the point of my article which Daphne was kind enough to raise again here.

    The Jew-haters are always keen to to try and claim to differentiate between the Zionists who live in Israel and the Jews who live elsewhere.

    A change of name to the "Jewish Democratic Republic of Israel" would end that charade once and for all.

    The Arabs have learned to appreciated the power of words to influence public opinion.

    It is time we Jews did as well.

    Would Abbas and the Arab League be prepared to negotiate with the Jewish Democratic Republic of Israel? My bet is they would not. They need to be exposed for the racist bigots that they are.

  5. UN has no right to give land that is occupied. If so, then all American jews better gladly give their assets to th Native Americans here in the US if the UN deems it law. Like hell they will. Hypocrites.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.