More Anti-Israel Agit Prop in London (videos)

Oh, the perils of moving house and being assured by your Internet service provider that everything would be up and running within ten days, only to then learn that the provider in question has run out of space and that you will have to sign on with another.  That's the Aussie provider Dodo for you, at least as far as poor old Daphne's experience is concerned.  So for the next week or even fortnight I shall have to blog from the homes of friends, and inevitably blogging and posting comments will be rather sporadic..

Hence this present post has been put on mainly to show that I'm still alive.

First, footage early in August of the Big Ride for Palestine as the intrepid pedallers all the way from Edinburgh (and locations en route) hove into the home stretch.

Secondly, similar foes of Israel a couple of days ago, in Slough, a bedroom suburb of London that's not known for its beauty, even though it's not that far, as the crow flies, from the pretty village Stoke Poges of Gray's Elegy fame.

Kerry's Key to Ending the Current Deadlock? David Singer Explains ...

Entitled  "Palestine – History and Geography Can Unblock Deadlock", here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

'It is a pity the US State Department chose to focus this week on the private remarks of Israel's Minister of Defence [Moshe Ya'alon] labelling US Secretary of State John Kerry as being delusional and messianic – rather than concentrating on PLO Chairman Abbas's very public remarks in the Jerusalem Post that go to the heart of the 130 years old Jewish-Arab conflict:

"Israel's problem is that the Palestinians know more than the Israelis about history and geography. We talk about what we know"

Is Abbas correct in his contention or has he become a victim of his own propaganda?

The answer depends on how one views Abbas's following statement to the United Nations on 26 September 2013:

"However, as representatives of the Palestinian people, we have long been aware of our responsibilities towards our people and had the necessary courage to accept a two-State solution: Palestine and Israel on the borders of 4 June 1967, establishing a Palestinian State on 22 per cent of the land of historic Palestine."

Are the West Bank and Gaza in fact 22 per cent of historic Palestine or do they comprise only 5 per cent of historic Palestine?

The answer to that question first involves an answer to this question:

"Is Jordan 78 per cent of historic Palestine – as the PLO Charter claims – or is Israel 78 per cent of historic Palestine – as Abbas suggested at the United Nations?"

Resolution of the conflict will stand a far greater chance of success – and be more enduring
– if Jews and Arabs can first reach a consensus in answering this fundamental question.
That is a challenge that should excite Kerry as he seeks to find a way through the complexities of a conflict whose solution has eluded so many eminent people, organisations and Committees before him – including those appointed by both the League of Nations and the United Nations.

Agreement that Jordan comprises 78 per cent of historic Palestine would greatly enlarge the territorial field within which the Jewish-Arab conflict can be resolved – making the conflict much easier to settle.

Jordan's inclusion could materially advance the prospects for the creation of a new Arab state between Israel and Jordan  – the subject of the current negotiations – or open up other alternative solutions to end the conflict if they fail – which seems destined to happen.

Kerry needs to urgently determine if there is any consensus between Israel, the PLO and the Arab League on the history and geography of "Palestine".

History books and atlases can be used to resolve any disagreements – supported by eminent historians and geographers well qualified to express their opinions.

To achieve this end result Kerry could instruct his State Department to prepare a questionnaire for Israel, the PLO and the Arab League to complete by a specified date.

To ensure the process is fair and transparent, Kerry could recommend that a panel be constituted comprising Kerry as Chairman and six history and geography experts – three appointed by Israel and three by the PLO and the Arab League – with Kerry holding a casting vote should the experts be equally divided.

The questionnaire could possibly include these questions:

1. When was "Palestine" first so named and by whom?

2. Was the name of "Palestine" prior to its change "Eretz Yisrael"?

3. When was "Eretz Yisrael" so named and by whom?

4. Is Israel 78 per cent of "Palestine" or only 17 per cent of "Palestine"?

5. Is Jordan 78 per cent of "Palestine" or does it form no part of "Palestine"?

6. Is the "West Bank" 22 per cent of "Palestine" or 4 per cent of "Palestine"?

7. When was the "West Bank" first so named and by whom?

8. Was the name of the "West Bank" prior to its change "Judea and Samaria"?

9. When was "Judea and Samaria" so named and by whom?

10. When was "Jordan" first so named and by whom?

11. When were "Palestine's borders" first defined and where were they located?

12. Did the Mandate for Palestine include what is today called Israel, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza?

13. Were the West Bank and Transjordan unified into a single territorial unit between 1950 and 1967?

14. Where was the border between Israel and Jordan immediately prior to the outbreak of the 1967 Six Day War?

15. What date did the Arab residents of the West Bank become Jordanian citizens and on what date was their Jordanian citizenship terminated?

16. What settlements were established by Jews in the West Bank prior to 1948?

17. Who was the last sovereign power to legally occupy the West Bank and for what period did such occupation last?

18. On what date and in what part of Palestine were the provisions of the Mandate for Palestine relating to the reconstitution of the Jewish national Home in Palestine postponed or withheld?

The questionnaire would seek to flesh out the extent to which Jewish and Arab historic and geographic narratives coincide – with the objective of eventually reaching a joint consensus in answering the questions posed.

The questionnaire should be answered by Israel, the PLO and the Arab League before Kerry presents Israel and the PLO with his proposed framework agreement for peace.

If the parties cannot first agree on the territory within which the Jewish-Arab conflict is to be resolved, how can meaningful and serious discussions on Kerry's framework agreement even be contemplated or commenced?

Kerry needs to focus on this issue – rather than concerning himself with negative comments affecting him personally.

Abbas's claimed knowledge of history and geography needs to be tested.

The result could be Kerry's key to ending the current deadlock and resolving the conflict.

Jeopardising Jordan

The latest incisive article by Sydney lawyer David Singer, a founder member of the International Analysts Network, is entitled "Jordan –  Abbas Offers Abdullah The Kiss Of Death".  The article comes via the antipodean J-Wire service.

Writes David Singer:

'Jordan’s King Abdullah is clearly worried about the future direction of his country – if developments over recent weeks are any indication.

His Majesty told the Washington Post on 16 June:

“2011 will be, I think, a very bad year for peace,  Although we will continue to try to bring both sides to the table, I am the most pessimistic I have been in 11 years.”

Whilst the Palestinian Authority refuses to resume negotiations with Israel any hope of peacefully resolving sovereignty in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza will deteriorate and the King‘s pessimism will  become self-fulfilling.

The absence of any such negotiations impacts on Jordan (known as Transjordan until 1950) because of its following historic, geographic and demographic ties with the West Bank and East Jerusalem:

Jordan comprises 78% of former Palestine – whilst Israel comprises 17%. The remaining 5% comprises the West Bank and Gaza.

Jordan’s population is overwhelmingly comprised of Arabs (or their descendants)  who fled the invasion of Palestine by six Arab armies (including Jordan) in 1948.

Jordan was the last Arab occupier of the West Bank and East Jerusalem from 1948-1967 – driving out all the Jews who had lived there prior to 1948.

In 1950 a joint parliament comprised equally of members from the West Bank and Transjordan voted to unify the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Transjordan into one state which was renamed Jordan – and it remained so unified until the loss of the West Bank to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War. Only Great Britain and Pakistan recognized such union but it flourished unchallenged for 17 years.

West Bank Arab residents became Jordanian citizens and enjoyed that status from 1950 until 1988 – when Jordan finally relinquished all claims to the West Bank  – but not its custodianship of the holy sites in East Jerusalem.

Jordan has kept its territorial claims alive to the West Bank and East Jerusalem as a result of clause 2 [A] of Annex 1 (a) of the peace treaty it signed with Israel in 1994. Sovereignty in all or part of the West Bank and East Jerusalem could be claimed by Jordan at any time under this clause – with Israel‘s concurrence – notwithstanding Jordan’s earlier repudiation in 1988. Any renewed claim would not result in a breach of the terms of Jordan’s peace treaty with Israel.

King Abdullah’s pessimism has no doubt been also heightened as Jordan has  become increasingly caught up in the turbulence spreading throughout Arab countries in the region.

Thousands of Jordanians demonstrated on 1 July  in the cities of Irbid, Maan, Karak and Tafileh, in addition to the capital, Amman, demanding transparency and an end to corruption. The number of participants has been increasing in recent weeks, organizers and witnesses have reportedly said, and the slogans have taken on a notable harshness.

Unrest of any kind cannot be accepted kindly by King Abdullah. It could well grow into a call for the removal of the Hashemite ruling dynasty in Jordan and its replacement by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) – as was last attempted by Yasser Arafat in 1970 when thousands of  deaths and injuries occurred and the PLO was expelled to Lebanon.

The PLO claim to Jordan still remains clearly expressed in unequivocal terms in the PLO Charter which states in Clause 2:

“Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate is an indivisible territorial unit.”

Jordan remained part of the British Mandate from 1920-1946 until Great Britain  purported to grant it independence in apparent breach of  Clause 5 of the Mandate which provided:

“The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power. “

Statements made by Arab political leaders including the late Yasser Arafat and the late King Hussein of Jordan acknowledge that  Jordan is part of Palestine.

PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas however was quick to assure Jordan he had no intention of a PLO takeover when he met a delegation of Jordanian parliamentarians in Ramallah on 6 July.

Abbas reiterated the Palestinian people would turn down any proposal that involves “resettling Palestinian refugees at the expense of Jordan”, stressing that Jordan is for Jordanians and Palestine is for Palestinians.

Given the clear terms of Clause 2 of the PLO Charter  – and the composition of Jordan’s population – Abbas’ statement certainly makes intriguing reading.

Abbas appears to have been motivated in giving this assurance hoping to change Jordan’s view – as expressed by a senior Jordanian official on 29 June to UAE based al-Bayan – that Jordan would vote against recognition of a Palestinian Arab state scheduled to be put before the UN General Assembly in September.

The official issued this further warning:

“Jordan’s top national interests will be in danger if the Palestinian Authority declares statehood unilaterally – especially in everything related to the issue of refugees, water, Jerusalem, and the borders.”

No doubt the Abbas assurance was hoping  to change Jordan’s view – which could have disastrous consequences for Abbas should he seek United Nations recognition in September.

The Hashemites have been around far too long to fall for this sudden PLO show of affection.

The Hashemites have astutely ruled in Jordan for over 90 years and have preserved Jordan as an independent and exclusively Arab State in 78% of Palestine since 1946.

The Hashemites – together with Israel – have been the stable and constant political influences in the region which has otherwise known nothing but turmoil since the League of Nations unanimously endorsed the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Palestine in 1922.

Should Abbas refuse to return to the negotiating table then Jordan remains the only Arab interlocutor able to negotiate the future sovereignty of the West Bank and East Jerusalem with Israel.

As the two successor states to the Mandate for Palestine and the signatories to a peace agreement that has held fast for the last 17 years – Jordan and Israel have the credentials and the clout to peacefully resolve sovereignty of the remaining 5% of Palestine that still remains unallocated between them – and to guarantee that any agreement between them is honored and enforced.

Believing any Abbas assurance that the PLO does not covet a takeover of Jordan is tantamount to King Abdullah accepting the kiss of death.'

Is Jordan Palestine? (videos)

This video is one of several available that insists that it is.

And so does this instantly recognisable gentleman.
I posted the script of Geert Wilders's speech in Tel Aviv at the time he made it.  But if you'd like to see the controversial Dutch politician actually delivering it, here he is, warning that "ideologies cannot be defeated by concessions" and that the conflict in the Middle East "is not about land and borders but about Islamic jihadism":