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)
Showing posts with label Barack Obama and Jerusalem. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama and Jerusalem. Show all posts

Wednesday, 19 June 2019

David Singer: Trump Reverses Obama-UN treachery on West Bank and East Jerusalem

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

President Trump’s decision to back Israel’s claims to sovereignty in the West Bank and Jerusalem has resurrected America’s commitment to the Jewish people made by President Bush and Congress in 2004 after that commitment had been subsequently repudiated by President Obama in the last month of his Presidency in December 2018.

Bush’s Congress-endorsed commitment was given to Israel in a letter from President Bush to then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on 14 April 2004.  Bush confirmed that America regarded it as unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority would see Israel withdraw from all of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

President Bush’s commitment was overwhelmingly endorsed by Congress by 502 votes to 12.

Bush’s commitment procured Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza and part of the West Bank in 2005 involving the forcible removal of 8000 Jews living there – a decision which has had disastrous consequences for both Israel’s and Gaza’s civilian populations after Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 from the Palestine Liberation Organization.

President Obama shredded this Bush Congress-endorsed commitment when he abstained – rather than vetoed Security Council Resolution 2334 on 23 December 2016, which declared:
 “the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace”
Secretary of State John Kerry offered this pathetic explanation on 28 December 2016 for Obama’s failure to veto Resolution 2234:
“the vote in the United Nations was about preserving the two-state solution.  That’s what we were standing up for: Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living side by side in peace and security with its neighbours.  That’s what we are trying to preserve for our sake and for theirs.”
Resolution 2334 however was asserting:
  • The West Bank and East Jerusalem were “Palestinian territory” and
  • 600,000 Jews currently living there had no legal entitlement to do so despite the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations own Charter legally vesting that right in the Jewish people.
Obama and Kerry were knowingly complicit in America not vetoing this overtly-hostile anti-Jewish Security Council resolution. Obama invariably had vetoed similar Security Council resolutions during his eight years as president.

Obama’s then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had misleadingly denied on 6 June 2009 that any such Bush-era commitment existed. Yet she had voted in the Senate to endorse Bush’s commitment on 24 June 2004 when a Senator.

Obama’s refusal to veto Resolution 2334 as he was exiting the White House – leaving this poisoned chalice behind for President Trump – was shameful.

Trump recognition of Israel’s right to retain portions of the West Bank and East Jerusalem has restored America’s reputation for honouring commitments made by its president and endorsed by its Congress.

Trump’s decision sends a clear message to the United Nations that it needs to act in accordance with its Charter if it is to have any influence or relevance in ending the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Trump has also put the Arab States on notice that America stands strong in its continuing support for Israel and its claims to sovereignty in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The sooner the Arab States understand this change in America’s position post-Obama – the sooner Trump’s yet to be released “deal of the century” has a chance of succeeding.

Obama and the United Nations’ treacherous attempt to entrap Trump has spectacularly failed.

(Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”  one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog)

Friday, 26 October 2012

Obama's Befuddled Thinking Sends Peace Prospects Sinking

This is the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

'President Obama has dramatically lowered his support for Israel over the past four years when one compares his latest response to a questionnaire from the American Jewish Committee to the answers he provided  before the 2008 elections.

President Obama's 2012 response is both vague and essentially directionless: 
"Last year, I stood before the United Nations General Assembly to address the Palestinian bid for U.N. recognition of statehood.I believe now, as I did then, that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own.However, I continue to believe that lasting peace will only come from direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians themselves and not from unilateral Palestinian actions at the United Nations.That is why I made it clear that there can be no short-cuts to peace, and called on the world to recognize the legitimacy of Israel and its security concerns as a Jewish, democratic state.
We cannot impose peace or any final status details on the Israelis and Palestinians.Ultimately, it is up to the two parties to take action. Final status issues can only be resolved by the Israelis and Palestinians themselves.What we can do is state frankly what is widely known: that a lasting peace will involve two sovereign, independent states.And I am convinced that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would rather look to the future than be trapped in the past.However, my Administration has made it clear that Israelis cannot be expected to negotiate with a partner that refuses to recognize its right to exist.That’s why it’s imperative that Hamas abides by the Quartet conditions to renounce violence, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements."
His response was far more direct four years ago – indicating the parameters of the two-state solution he then envisaged should be the outcome of negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization through it's agreed negotiating entity, the Palestinian Authority (PA).
"The United States cannot dictate the terms of a final status agreement. We should support the parties as they negotiate these difficult issues, but they will have to reach agreements that they can live with. In general terms, Israel clearly must emerge in a final status agreement with secure borders. Jerusalem will remain Israel's capital, and no one should want or expect it to be re-divided. As for refugees, the Palestinians will need to reinterpret the notion of a right of return in such a way that will preserve Israel as a Jewish state, while Israel would likely contribute to international compensation for the refugees.
But these details are for the parties to decide. While negotiations are ongoing, both sides should take steps to improve conditions on the ground, so that people believe they have a stake in the process."
The following differences between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 are starkly evident:
•    President Obama would find it virtually impossible to criticize the PA acquiring "a state of its own" by demanding as a necessary condition that all 500,000 Jews living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem be expelled from their homes and businesses.
•    The Palestinian Arabs' deserved right to a state is timeless - no matter how many offers made by Israel are rejected by the PA. With that kind of Presidential mind set – Arab rejectionism of such a state – first proposed in 1937 and rejected  on many occasions since then – is bound to continue without fear of any political consequences from America.
•    Whilst direct negotiations still remain the pathway to create any such  Palestinian State - the President is apparently prepared to allow those negotiations to continue to be stalled indefintely without any express policy being proposed by him as a possible circuit breaker. Such Presidential inertia can only encourage the PA to prolong the resumption of negotiations until its demands to return to the negotiating table are first agreed on by Israel.
•    Whilst President Obama states that he has called on the world to recognise the legitimacy of Israel and its security concerns as a Jewish democratic State, he makes no similar direct call on the Palestinian Arabs.
•    Gone are the 2008 pronouncements on secure borders, Jerusalem, and refugees - positions agreed on in an exchange of letters in 2004 between Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President George W Bush. President Obama's abandonment of his predecessor's commitments will only embolden the PA to maintain its rejectionist stance on each of these issues.
Ironically, the President's stated policy positions will please many Jewish voters who want to see an end to the two-state solution and futher expansion of Jewish settlement in the West Bank – where sovereignty still remains unallocated.

It will equally please many Arab voters who are girding up to push the idea of just one state west of the Jordan River where they believe the Arabs living there would eventually become the majority population.

But most Jewish and Arab voters would sense that continuing to state what he says is "widely known" – that lasting peace will involve two sovereign independent states – is at best a pipe dream and far removed from the reality that has seen this objective still unachieved after nineteen years of fruitless negotiations.

President Obama's latest response to the American Jewish Committee certainly guarantees the two-state solution is not going to happen if he is re-elected for a second term.

It also ensures that Israel will be left to hang out to dry by America as calls to divide Jerusalem are increased, territorial adjustments to the 1967 armistice lines in the quest to ensure Israel's national security are ignored and calls for the unconditional right of return of millions of Palestinian Arabs and their descendants into Israel are stepped up.

As Israel continues to be delegitimised and denigrated as the national homeland of the Jewish people  in pursuit of these Arab objectives, a second term President Obama will maintain a studied silence.

If a week is a long time in politics the next four years will prove to be an eternity for any prospects for peace if President Obama makes it to the White House again and the present status quo is allowed to continue.'

Friday, 14 September 2012

Don't Vote For Obama!: A Democrat Politician's Urgent Warning To American Jews (video)

"It's a disease; it has to be dealt with," says New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, himself a Democrat, of American Jewry's tendency to vote Democrat and to give priority to domestic issues such as gay marriage despite the grave danger that a second term of the Obama administration poses to Israel.

"I do not trust the President of the United States with regard to the security of the State of Israel," he tells Fox News, warning in impassioned tones that with Israel's very survival in dire peril American Jews should not vote for Obama.


This interview shocked Democrats across America.  For Israel's sake, let's hope it jolts America's Jews into taking Hikind's advice.

Thursday, 13 September 2012

Democratic National Convention Chairwoman Regarding Obama's Stance On Israel (videos)

Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz does her best to defend the One ("He has a stellar record on Israel") in the face of Don Lemon's probing:


Friday, 3 August 2012

"Next Year, President Romney In Jerusalem, The Capital Of Israel" (video)

Here's a new ad from the Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI).


In explanation, ECI has issued the following statement:
'What's the capital of Israel? President Obama once knew. In 2008 he declared that “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.”
Today, he's not so sure. In fact, he won't even acknowledge the plain reality that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Mitt Romney has no such problem. On his recent trip abroad, he said: "It's a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel."
To highlight this contrast, today the Emergency Committee for Israel released a 30-second TV ad that will air hundreds of times in the coming days in Florida. The spot will appear during weekend Marlins games, on popular cable news shows and broadcast programs.
ECI's chairman, William Kristol, said:
"The contrast couldn't be clearer. Barack Obama is agnostic, at best, about whether Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Mitt Romney understands the meaning of Jerusalem, whole and free, the capital of Israel."'

Saturday, 28 July 2012

Emergency Committee For Israel: Obama & Jerusalem, Obama & Israel (videos)

Here's a telling video released by the Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI) regarding the Obama administration and Jerusalem.  Does Obama recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital, or doesn't he?


Hot on the heels of its newspaper ad (see my previous post but one), the ECI has released a television ad called "postcards" lasting half a minute.  It appears today and Monday on MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News in Washington and New York, and through next week on broadcast and cable in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio:


 Observes the ECI:
'Where's President Obama?
He's quite a world traveller. But not to Israel. An oversight? Or an indication? According to a front-page story in the Washington Post two weeks ago, Obama has pursued a strategy of putting "daylight" between the U.S. and Israel. He's traveled to the Middle East multiple times –  to accept an award in Saudi Arabia, to give a major speech in Cairo, to hold town hall meetings in Turkey -–  but never stopped to visit our closest ally in the region.'
On Obama and American Jewry see this new article

Meanwhile, here's how the Mayor of Tel Aviv views the issue of Israel's capital (hat tip: reader Ian):