David Singer: Britain Shamefully Betrays the Jewish People Again

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

He writes: 
 
Britain – the architectof the San Remo Resolution and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 that led to the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922 – has yet again shamefully betrayed the Jewish People by warning Israel not to extend its sovereignty into Judea and Samaria.

Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that any such action would be in violation of international law – which Netanyahu disputes – despite the Mandate vesting in the Jewish People the right to “close settlement” in Judea and Samaria for the purposes of reconstituting the biblical Jewish National Home in what had been the heartland of the Jewish People 3000 years ago.

Britain had betrayed the Jewish People in 1950 after all the Jews living in Judea and Samaria had been ethnically cleansed by the invading Arab army of Transjordan in 1948.  Britain – supported only by Pakistan and Iraq – recognised Transjordan’s illegal annexation of Judea and Samaria, the renaming of the newly merged entityas “Jordan”whilst “Judea and Samaria”was renamed“West Bank”.

Johnson told Netanyahu:

"I am immensely proud of the UK’s contribution to the birth of Israel with the 1917 Balfour Declaration.  But it will remain unfinished business until there is a solution which provides justice and lasting peace for both Israelis and Palestinians.  

The only way it can be achieved is for both sides to return to the negotiating table.  That must be our goal. Annexation would only take us further away from it."

Peace for both “Israelis” and “Palestinians”?

Neither existed until 1948 and 1964.

There were only “Arabs” and “Jews” in 1917. The Arab residents of Palestine then comprised part of “the existing non-Jewish communities”.

Johnson seems apparently unaware that the “Palestinians”:

• were defined for the first time in recorded history by article 6 of the 1964 PLO Charter

• did not claim “regional sovereignty in the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”or“on the Gaza Strip” under article 24

• were Jordanian citizens between 1954 and1988. 

Johnson’s warning to Israel is the complete antithesis of what he wrote on 29 October 2017 as Foreign Minister – ahead of the Balfour Declaration centenary on 2 November: 

“I have no doubt that the only viable solution to the conflict resembles the one first set down on paper by another Briton, Lord Peel, in the report of the Royal Commission on Palestine in 1937, and that is the vision of two states for two peoples.” 

The Royal Commission was authorised by Royal Warrant dated 7 August 1936 which did not mention  the “Palestinians” – only naming two parties – the “Arabs” and the “Jews” – not three – as disputants.

The Peel Commission after a lengthy and detailed Inquiry concluded that:

“two sovereign independent States would be established  – the one an Arab State, consisting of Trans-Jordan united with that part of Palestine which lies to the east and south of a frontier such as we suggest in [the map] below; the other a Jewish State consisting of that part of Palestine which lies to the north and west of that frontier.”

The Arabs rejected this decision.

The Jews disputed the boundaries.

 Trans-Jordan in 1937 then comprised the remaining 78% of the Mandate territory closed byBritainto Jewish settlement under Article 25.

Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria however was to be facilitated and encouraged under article 6.

The PLO’s outright refusal to negotiate with Israel on President Trump’s Peace Plan strengthens Netanyahu’s decision to restore Jewish sovereignty in 30% of Judea and Samaria after 3000 years. Johnson’s hypocritical posturing should reinforce  – not weaken – Netanyahu’s resolve.

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.

David Singer: Voter Apathy Threatens Reunion of Judea and Samaria with Israel

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

He writes:

Crunch time has come for approximately 6.5 million Jews and Arabs to vote on Israel regaining immediate sovereignty in parts of the Jewish People’s biblical and ancient heartland in Judea and Samaria – 3000 years after its loss.

Voter apathy could possibly see this historic opportunity being lost because of these existing political realities:

• Current Prime Minister and determined proponent for claiming immediate sovereignty in Judea and Samaria – Bibi Netanyahu – could lose voter support as corruption charges against him have been fixed to commence just fifteen days after the 2 March elections
• Netanyahu’s challenger as Israel’s next Prime Minister – Benny Gantz – wants to maintain the current status quo in Judea and Samaria pending agreement in tandem with Israel’s Arab neighbours and possibly in co-ordination with the international community – which could mean never.
• These upcoming elections will be the third held in the last 12 months since two earlier elections in April and September 2019 – which resulted in deadlocks that prevented either Netanyahu or Gantz being able to acquire the 61 seats required to form government.
• Voter turnout at the April 2019 election was only 68.46% and only slightly higher in September 2019 at 69.83%
• Support for the major Arab political parties has risen from 7.82% in April 2019 to 10.6% in September 2019
• Gantz has refused to have any televised debates with Netanyahu.
• Gantz is now facing a probe by the Attorney General into the affairs of a bankrupt company – The Fifth Dimension – of which Gantz himself was Chairman

Voters might be tempted to throw up their hands in despair at this seeming turmoil in Israel’s political system and simply not turn up to vote – thereby possibly denying the fulfilment of a dream that was reborn 100 years ago at the San Remo Conference  in April 1920 and sealed with the Treaty of Sevres in August 1920 – culminating with the League of Nations unanimously creating the Mandate for Palestine in July 1922 recognizing the Jewish People’s right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Palestine.

100 years later the Jewish National Home exists – but sovereignty in its ancient and biblical heartland – Judea and Samaria – does not.

President Trump’s Peace Plan released on 28 January 2020 recognizes Israeli sovereignty being extended into parts of Judea and Samaria whilst recognizing the creation of a 22nd Arab State in the residue for the first time in recorded history.

Rejection of Trump’s Plan by the Arab League on 1 February has led to the formation of a joint American-Israel Mapping Committee which is expected to produce a map in two months designating the areas of Judea and Samaria where Israeli sovereignty can be extended immediately.
Gantz has not embraced Trump’s Plan with the same enthusiasm as Netanyahu – choosing to maintain the existing status quo in Judea and Samaria for an indefinite period of time.

Had Gantz and Netanyahu agreed – voter apathy would not have mattered. Both major political parties would have been locked in to immediately implementing sovereignty in Judea and Samaria with America’s approval. Lack of unanimity demands condemnation by Jews worldwide.
The portents for another low voter turnout have been signalled by the announcement that only 66% of eligible Israeli diplomats, members of official delegations and their families abroad have voted – a decline from the 69.5% turnout in the September 2019 election.

Hopefully, the historic significance of these elections will generate a much larger local turnout of at least 75-80%. The future of the Jewish People’s heartland deserves this level of minimum participation from those Jews and Arabs blessed to have been chosen to make this momentous decision.

Author’s note: The cartoon – commissioned exclusively for this article 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

Modernists versus Medievalists: Bibi on Countering the Iranian Menace

While the Israel-haters twist and shout with venomous bile (see my two previous posts) Israel's great communicator has been doing his utmost to win friends and influencing people.  Here's Bibi talking to director Dr Robin Niblett at Chatham House (Royal Institute of International Affairs) during his visit to London in connection with the Balfour Declaration's centenary (a very long video, which also alludes to that Declaration):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo1PtZaxayo

Meeting British Jewish leaders (an all too brief video):

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpB55w9CNCM

David Singer: Abbas Set to Defy Trump and Netanyahu at United Nations

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

He writes:

PLO chairman Mahmoud Abbas seems set once again to embark on another futile journey to the United Nations (UN) seeking recognition of a second Arab state – in addition to Jordan – within the territory comprised in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

A senior unidentified Palestinian source threatened such action on 21 August:

“If we don’t hear within a month and a half that the American team has stopped talking and started doing, Abbas intends to mobilize anyone and everyone he can for the UN General Assembly session on the establishment of a Palestinian state, regardless of the Israeli and American reactions”

 President Trump was quick to respond  – State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert telling a press briefing on 23 August in answer to a question as to why America was loath to commit – or recommit - to the two-state solution:

“We are not going to state what the outcome has to be. It has to be workable to both sides. And I think, really, that’s the best view as to not really bias one side over the other, to make sure that they can work through it. It’s been many, many decades, as you well know, that the parties have not been able to come to any kind of good agreement and sustainable solution to this. So we leave it up to them to be able to work that through.”

Negotiations – suspended since April 2014 – extending over the past 24 years between Israel and the PLO have not produced any workable and sustainable solution. Abbas is clearly in no mood to resume those negotiations without preconditions.

A replay of Abbas’s appearance at the UN General Assembly on 23 September 2011 therefore seems inevitable. Israel’s Prime Minister – Benjamin Netanyahu – was quick to point out at that time how automatic majorities at the UN had been used to incite institutionalised hatred against Israel.

“After all, it was here in 1975 that the age-old yearning of my people to restore our national life in our ancient biblical homeland  – it was then that this was braided  – branded, rather  – shamefully, as racism. And it was here in 1980, right here, that the historic peace agreement between Israel and Egypt wasn’t praised; it was denounced! And it’s here year after year that Israel is unjustly singled out for condemnation. It’s singled out for condemnation more often than all the nations of the world combined. Twenty-one out of the 27 General Assembly resolutions condemn Israel – the one true democracy in the Middle East.

 Well, this is an unfortunate part of the UN institution. It’s the –  the theatre of the absurd. It doesn’t only cast Israel as the villain; it often casts real villains in leading roles:

 Gaddafi’s Libya chaired the UN Commission on Human Rights; Saddam’s Iraq headed the UN Committee on Disarmament.

You might say: That’s the past. Well, here’s what’s happening now  – right now, today. Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon now presides over the UN Security Council. This means, in effect, that a terror organisation presides over the body entrusted with guaranteeing the world’s security.

You couldn’t make this thing up.

So here in the UN, automatic majorities can decide anything. They can decide that the sun sets in the west or rises in the west. I think the first has already been pre-ordained. But they can also decide – they have decided that the Western Wall in Jerusalem, Judaism’s holiest place, is occupied Palestinian territory.” 

This theatre of the absurd seems set to be repeated once again at the forthcoming 72nd Session of the UN General Assembly.

Israel-bashing can never resolve the 100-years-old Jewish-Arab conflict.

David Singer: Netanyahu Sends Clear Message to Trump, Putin, May and UN

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

He writes:

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has had a busy week meeting with UK Foreign Minister Boris Johnson in Jerusalem, President Vladimir Putin in Moscow and then back to Jerusalem for a five hour meeting with President Trump’s Special Representative for International Negotiations – Jason Greenblatt.

The framework for these meetings was set by Netanyahu – who told Johnson:

“It’s evident that we agree on most things, but not on all things. And one of the things, I think the source of it when you analyze a problem, get to its roots and reason that we haven’t had peace for a hundred years is not the settlements, but the persistent refusal to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. I think if you want to solve a problem, go to the core of the problem, and that is something I look forward to discussing with you further.”

Netanyahu’s claim is substantiated by the following facts:

1. Settlements were not the problem when the first two-state solution was proposed by article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922.

That solution – which envisaged allocating the Arabs 78 per cent of Mandatory Palestine [Transjordan] and the Jews the remaining 22 per cent – was rejected by the Arabs but accepted by the Jews.

Iran – one of the 51 States then unanimously endorsing the Jewish people’s legal right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Palestine – now seeks to destroy the Jewish State in 2017.

2. Settlements were not the problem in 1937 when the Peel Commission recommended partition of the territory of the Mandate into one Jewish State and one Arab State – again rejected by the Arabs but accepted by the Jews.

3. Transjordan remained part of the Mandate for Palestine until Great Britain granted it independence on 22 March 1946. 78 per cent of the Mandate territory was thus irrevocably transformed into an exclusive Arabs-only State contrary to Article 5 of the Mandate.

4. The United Nations recommendation to partition the remaining 22 per cent of the Mandate territory into one Arab State and one Jewish State in November 1947 was again rejected by the Arabs and accepted by the Jews – culminating in Western Palestine being invaded in May 1948 by six Arab armies and the forcible eviction of all Jews living in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. 

5. Settlements were not the problem between 1948 and 1967 when another Arab State could have been created with the stroke of an Arab League pen in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza whilst not one Jew lived there.

6. Offers by Israel in 2000/2001 and 2008 to another Arab State being created in Gaza and the West Bank were rejected by the Arabs.

7. In December 2016 UN Security Council Resolution 2334 declared that the Jewish Quarter and Kotel in East Jerusalem, the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel’s Tomb near Bethlehem were “occupied Palestinian territory”.

UK and Russia shamefully failed to veto this Resolution.

8. Gaza is ruled by Hamas and the Palestine Liberation Organization governs Areas A and B of the West Bank. Both have held onto power without holding elections since 2006. Both refuse to recognize a Jewish nation-state in any boundaries.

Johnson told Netanyahu:

“I first visited [Israel] when I was – as I never tire of telling you – when I was 18.”

Netanyahu should never tire of telling world leaders that the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict will not be resolved until the Arabs recognise the right of the Jewish People to their own independent State.

David Singer: Netanyahu Needs Trump Answer on Bush-Congress Commitments to Israel

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

He writes:

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will be meeting America’s President Trump on 15 February under very different circumstances to those when Netanyahu met President Obama on 20 May 2011.

President Obama had delivered a wide-ranging address on the Middle East just the day before when he dropped the following bombshell on his view of how negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority should proceed:

“The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.” 

Before boarding his plane for Washington Netanyahu said he:

“expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of American commitments made to Israel in 2004 which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress”

Those 2004 commitments to Israel had been made by President Bush in a letter to Israel’s then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon dated 14 April 2004 (“the Bush Commitments”).

Obama never obliged Netanyahu by reaffirming those Bush Commitments.

Neither did Netanyahu press Obama to do so – though he had opportunities during

* Remarks by Obama and Netanyahu After their Bilateral Meeting

* An address by Netanyahu to AIPAC on 23 May 2011

* An emotion-charged speech Netanyahu gave to a joint sitting of the Congress on 24 May 2011

Netanyahu’s failure to mention the Bush Commitments in his Congress speech was a grievous error of judgement – since those commitments to Israel had been endorsed in the House – 407 votes to 9  – and in the Senate – 95 votes to 3.

Such commitments had been given to support Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza and part of the West Bank – marking real progress in realizing Bush’s Roadmap – and included the following: 

“In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.” 

Bush’s “mutually agreed changes” differed markedly from Obama’s “mutually agreed swaps”– which required Israel to swap some of its sovereign territory to gain sovereignty over any territory in the West Bank.

Under the Bush Commitments no such land swaps were required.

Obama had repudiated his predecessor’s commitments to Israel with this sneaky turn of phrase - adding insult to injury by demeaning Congress for its enthusiastic and overwhelming endorsement of the Bush Commitments.

In his AIPAC address Netanyahu made mention of Israel’s: 

“terrific Ambassador to the United States, a man who knows a few things about the U.S.-Israel alliance, Michael Oren” 

Michael Oren – now a Knesset member – made the following call on 5 January 2015: 

“The time has come to revive Bush's letter to Sharon and to act in accordance with it.”

As Netanyahu readies for his ground-breaking meeting with Trump he needs to heed Oren’s call and get a definitive answer this time from both Trump and the Congress.

America’s reputation and integrity as a trustworthy ally that honours its commitments is at stake.

Lightning can indeed strike twice in the White House and on Capitol Hill.

David Singer: Bibi's Claim of Palestinian Ethnic Cleansing of Jews is Certainly Justified

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

 It's entitled "United Nations Rebuked for Promoting Palestinian Ethnic Cleansing of Jews".

Writes David Singer:

United Nations member States need to examine their own consciences and policies following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu castigating them for promoting a Jew-free Palestinian Arab State in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem. In a video presentation last week Netanyahu declared:

“Israel's diversity shows its openness and readiness for peace.

Yet the Palestinian leadership actually demands a Palestinian state with one pre-condition: No Jews.

There's a phrase for that: It's called ethnic cleansing.

And this demand is outrageous. It's even more outrageous that the world doesn't find this outrageous.

Some otherwise enlightened countries even promote this outrage” 

 The Oxford Dictionary defines “enlightened” to mean “having or showing a rational, modern, and well-informed outlook”

Enlightened United Nations member States lost their moral and humanitarian compasses when supporting United Nations Resolution A/67/L.28 passed on 29 November 2012 (“the Resolution”) which reaffirmed:

“the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967”

Among the 138 countries voting for the Resolution were enlightened States such as:
Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Russian Federation, Serbia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Uruguay and Venezuela

Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, and the United States voted against the Resolution, whilst 41 others – including Australia – abstained.

800,000 Jews currently live in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem under rights vested in them by:

* Article 6 of the 1922 Mandate for Palestine,

* Article 80 of the 1945 United Nations Charter, * Israel’s 1967 annexation of East Jerusalem

* The 1993 Oslo Accords.

 Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas declared in 2010:

“We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won’t agree to the presence of one Israeli in it,”

Like Hitler – Abbas made no secret of his racist plan to create a Jew-free State.

Member States of the United Nations remained silent. In voting for the Resolution they chose to march to the same tune.

Abbas repeated his evil message in 2013: 

“But when a Palestinian state is established, it would have no Israeli presence in it.”

Enlightened States still said nothing.

Jews forced from their Jerusalem homes in 1948

They had said nothing after every single Jew had been ethnically cleansed from Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem following Jordan’s conquest of these areas between 1948 and 1967 when the following events happened:

“After the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem was captured, the destruction, desecration and systematic looting of Jewish sites began and continued. 57 ancient synagogues (the oldest dated to the 13th century), libraries and centers of religious study were ransacked and 12 were totally and deliberately destroyed. Those that remained standing were defaced, used for housing of both people and animals. The city’s foremost Jewish shrine, the Western Wall, became a slum. Appeals were made to the United Nations and in the international community to declare the Old City to be an ‘open city’ and stop this destruction, but there was no response.”

The independent Jew-free Palestinian State promoted by the United Nations in 2012 could have been created between 1948 and 1967 with the stroke of an Arab League pen when not one Jew lived in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. That 19-year window of opportunity will not return.

Netanyahu’s rebuke was certainly justified.

Enlightened – and unenlightened – States need to affirm their total opposition to any settlement of the Jewish-Arab conflict involving the ethnic cleansing of any Jews from Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem.

(Note from Daphne. Full text of Netanyahu's speech below):

 I'm sure many of you have heard the claim that Jewish communities in Judea Samaria, the West Bank, are an obstacle to peace.

I've always been perplexed by this notion.

Because no one would seriously claim that the nearly two million Arabs living inside Israel – that they're an obstacle to peace. That's because they aren't. On the contrary.

Israel's diversity shows its openness and readiness for peace. Yet the Palestinian leadership actually demands a Palestinian state with one pre-condition: No Jews.

There's a phrase for that: It's called ethnic cleansing.

And this demand is outrageous.

It's even more outrageous that the world doesn't find this outrageous. Some otherwise enlightened countries even promote this outrage.

Ask yourself this: Would you accept ethnic cleansing in your state? A territory without Jews, without Hispanics, without blacks?

Since when is bigotry a foundation for peace?

At this moment, Jewish schoolchildren in Judea Samaria are playing in sandboxes with their friends.

Does their presence make peace impossible?

I don’t think so.

I think what makes peace impossible is intolerance of others. Societies that respect all people are the ones that pursue peace. Societies that demand ethnic cleansing don't pursue peace.

I envision a Middle East where young Arabs and young Jews learn together, work together, live together side by side in peace.

Our region needs more tolerance, not less.

So the next time you hear someone say Jews can't live somewhere, let alone in their ancestral homeland, take a moment to think of the implications.

Ethnic cleansing for peace is absurd.

It's about time somebody said it.

I just did.

David Singer: Palestine – Russia Following France On Diplomatic Journey To Nowhere

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

He writes:

The media has gone into overdrive after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi revealed that Russian President Vladimir Putin has invited President Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu to Moscow for direct talks.

Al-Sisi broke the news during an interview on 22 August with the chief editors of state-run newspapers Al-Ahram, Al-Akhbar and Al-Gomhouriya:

"The Russian president has informed me that he has invited Palestinian President [Abbas] and Prime Minister Netanyahu for a meeting in Moscow.

Egypt supports these efforts and both sides are urged to participate and respond positively to the initiative for the sake of finding light at the end of the tunnel for Palestinians and establishing their state alongside Israel."

The Russian invitation has not yet been confirmed by Putin.

However even assuming the meeting was indeed to eventuate – it must be crystal clear to any impartial observer that such a Moscow talkfest will end up in the garbage bin of history, like so many similar meetings over the last 20 years that have failed to resolve the 100 years-old Jewish-Arab conflict.

Peace negotiations between Netanyahu and Abbas remain deadlocked on one perennial and fundamental Israeli demand – that Israel be recognised as the Jewish State.

Abbas made his rejection of this demand very clear on 30 November 2014 when speaking to leaders of the Arab world in Cairo:

“We will never recognize the Jewishness of the state of Israel.”

Abbas has now backed up this statement by threatening to sue Britain for issuing the Balfour Declaration in 1917 – which ultimately led to the League of Nations unanimously approving the Mandate for Palestine in 1922 calling for the “reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Palestine”.

Abbas has been emboldened in taking this stance after the Obama administration wavered in America’s previous long-standing commitment to support this Israeli non-negotiable demand.

US Secretary of State John Kerry appeared to downplay supporting Israel’s position when he told a Senate panel in March 2014:

“Jewish state’ was resolved in 1947 in Resolution 181 where there are more than 40—30 mentions of ‘Jewish state’. In addition, chairman Arafat in 1988 and again in 2004 confirmed that he agreed it would be a Jewish state. And there are any other number of mentions.”

Any Arafat declarations are meaningless – having been replaced with statements of outright rejection by Abbas. Arafat cannot rule from the grave.

Obama will soon be political history and his successor – either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump  – have both made clear that the Obama-Kerry position will be reversed.

Hillary Clinton declared on 4 November 2015

“I am deeply committed to Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state” 

 Donald Trump stated on 26 March 2016:

“Basically I support a two-state solution on Israel. But the Palestinian Authority has to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. Have to do that.”

France’s attempt to convene an international conference later this year has been apparently undertaken without first attempting to get Abbas to moderate his stance by finally acknowledging and accepting the decisions of the international community expressed in the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

Indeed Abbas’s threat to sue Britain is a diplomatic kick below the belt for France’s efforts to broker a solution.

Putin would be politically naïve if he failed to sound out Abbas before facilitating any Moscow meeting.

Laying on the vodka, caviar and a Kremlin guard of honour whilst hosting talks that must inevitably lead to nowhere is the last photo-op Putin surely needs.

Strong man being derided with egg on face is not a pretty sight.

David Singer: Israel Sheds PLO As Negotiating Partner

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.  Bibi Netanyahu's speech to the Sabon Forum, to which David refers, can be seen on video on my blog here

Writes David Singer:

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has concluded that completing successful negotiations with the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) on the allocation of territorial sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Gaza and East Jerusalem is a mission impossible to achieve.

Addressing the Saban Forum on 6 December, Netanyahu made his position clear and unequivocal:

“I have said and I continue to say it, that ultimately the only workable solution is not a unitary state, but a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. That’s the solution. But the Palestinians have to recognize the Jewish state and they persistently refuse to do so. They refuse to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That was and remains the core of the conflict. Not this or that gesture or the absence of this or that gesture, but the inability or unwillingness of the Palestinian leadership to make the leap.”

Whilst the issue of a “demilitarized Palestinian State” is one possibly capable of being further negotiated – the issue of recognizing the Jewish State is definitely not.

Recognition of the right of Jewish self-determination in Palestine – whilst simultaneously recognizing the right of Arab self-determination in Syria, Lebanon and Mesopotamia (now Iraq) – has always been an issue with the Arabs – since these decisions were first made at the San Remo Conference in April 1920 establishing the Mandates for Palestine, Mesopotamia and Syria and Lebanon.

These decisions delivered to the Arabs 99.99 per cent of the lands won from the defeated Ottoman Empire in World War 1 whilst setting aside the remaining 0.01 per cent for the Jews.

95 years of bloody conflict between Jews and Arabs has ensued since then because the Arabs wanted – and still want – 100 per cent of the Ottoman Empire pie and have never been prepared to settle for 99.99 per cent.

Netanyahu points out where the Arab world now finds itself in 2015 because of such Arab irredentism:

 “And what we see is the old order established after the Ottoman Empire collapsing and militant Islam, either of the Shiites, Shiite hue led by Iran, or the Sunni hue, led by ISIS, rushing in to fill the void.”

The PLO has never accepted the San Remo carve up of the Ottoman Empire between Jews and Arabs – as its current Charter declares:

 “The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void.” 

The PLO’s rejection of the right of Jews to have one State whilst the Arabs presently have 22 States is also virulently expressed in the PLO Charter:

 “Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood.”

The PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) has no intention of changing this racist and utterly offensive position – as Netanyahu points out:

 'You got a hint of that the other day when Abu Mazen spoke about the “occupation of Palestinian lands for the last 67 years.  Did you hear that? Occupation of Palestinian lands? For the last 67 years?   

Sixty-seven years ago was 1948. That’s when the State of Israel was established. Does Abu Mazen mean that Tel Aviv is occupied Palestinian territory? Or Haifa? Or Beer Sheba?'

The demise of the PLO as Israel’s negotiating partner is long overdue.

President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry must urgently move to fill this negotiating void by replacing the PLO with Israel’s Arab partners in two long-standing signed peace agreements – Jordan and Egypt.

The Jewish-Arab conflict can still be peacefully resolved with the right partners sitting at the negotiating table.

Bibi: "They were Taught that Israelis Were Devils, Now We Are Healing Angels" (video)

Here's Bibi's powerful speech, delivered in a low-key manner but no less compelling for that, concerning today's challenges to Israel and the West from "violent medievalists" and regarding the "root cause" of the conflict with the Arabs and what the latter must do to achieve lasting peace:

The quotation in the header concerns the desperate Syrians whom Israel has helped.

"Ladies & Gentlemen, Leave Your Enthusiasm At The Door" (video)

Obeisance unbecoming

 That includes you, Aussie Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.

"Israel will not permit any force on earth to threaten its future".  See the transcript of this marvellous speech (which also covers prospects for peace with the Palestinian Arabs) here

A taste:

'Thirty one years after I stood here for the first time, I'm still asking:

When will the UN finally check its anti-Israel fanaticism at the door?

When will the UN finally stop slandering Israel as a threat to peace and actually start helping Israel advance peace?  

And the same question should be posed to Palestinian leaders.  

When will you start working with Israel to advance peace and reconciliation and stop libeling Israel, stop inciting hatred and violence?

President Abbas, here’s a good place to begin: 

Stop spreading lies about Israel’s alleged intentions on the Temple Mount. 

Israel is fully committed to maintaining the status quo there.

What President Abbas should be speaking out against are the actions of militant Islamists who are smuggling explosives into the al-Aqsa mosque and who are trying to prevent Jews and Christians from visiting the holy sites.

That’s the real threat to these sacred sites.

A thousand years before the birth of Christianity, more than 1,500 years before the birth of Islam, King David made Jerusalem our capital, and King Solomon built the Temple on that mount.

Yet Israel, Israel will always respect the sacred shrines of all.  

In a region plagued by violence and by unimaginable intolerance, in which Islamic fanatics are destroying the ancient treasures of civilization, Israel stands out as a towering beacon of enlightenment and tolerance. 

Far from endangering the holy sites, it is Israel that ensures their safety.

Because unlike the powers who have ruled Jerusalem in the past, Israel respects the holy sites and freedom of worship of all – Jews, Muslims, Christians, everyone.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, will never change. 

Because Israel will always stay true to its values.

These values are on display each and every day:

When Israel’s feisty parliament vigorously debates every issue under the sun,

When Israel’s Chief Justice sits in her chair at our fiercely independent Supreme Court,

When our Christian community continues to grow and thrive from year to year, as Christian communities are decimated elsewhere in the Middle East,

When a brilliant young Israeli Muslim student gives her valedictorian address at one of our finest universities,

And when Israeli doctors and nurses – doctors and nurses from the Israeli military – treat thousands of wounded from the killing fields of Syria and thousands more in the wake of natural disasters from Haiti to Nepal.

This is the true face of Israel. 

These are the values of Israel.

And in the Middle East, these values are under savage assault by militant Islamists who are forcing millions of terrified people to flee to distant shores.

Ten miles from ISIS, a few hundred yards from Iran’s murderous proxies, Israel stands in the breach – proudly and courageously, defending freedom and progress.

Israel is civilization's front line in the battle against barbarism.

So here’s a novel idea for the United Nations:

Instead of continuing the shameful routine of bashing Israel, stand with Israel.

Stand with Israel as we check the fanaticism at our door.

Stand with Israel as we prevent that fanaticism from reaching your door.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Stand with Israel because Israel is not just defending itself. 

More than ever, Israel is defending you.'

 More regarding Israel's attitude to the Iran Deal here

Simply the best, icy stare and all:

Good on yah, Aussie MP Michael Danby, for strictures against Julie Bishop, as I've outlined here