David Singer: Trump Should Reaffirm Core Bush-Congress Commitments to Israel

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

He writes:

President Trump’s decision to reverse his partial US government shutdown – the longest in history – could have important consequences for the release of his long-awaited plan to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict – postponed yet again until after Israel’s elections in April.

Trump’s shut down – aimed at forcing Congress to negotiate on Trump’s election promises to build a wall to stop illegal immigration and drug smuggling through a porous border with Mexico – failed in the face of Congress’s unequivocal demand that Trump first reopen the government.

Trump’s supporters are angry and confused at his cave-in to Congress’s demand whilst his detractors are jubilant – as three weeks of negotiations between Trump and Congress now try to resolve the Trump-Congress stand-off.

The Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) will feel vindicated – after Congress’s resolute stance – in having refused – sight unseen – to negotiate Trump’s peace plan with Israel after Trump had recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and relocated the US Embassy there from Tel Aviv.

The PLO will be emboldened to continue rejecting Trump’s proposals until Trump reverses his decisions on Jerusalem.

The Wall Street Journal on 11 November 2016 exclusively revealed president-elect Trump’s intentions to make an “ultimate deal” for “humanity’s sake” on “the war that never ends”.

The further delay in releasing his deal comes as the PLO now assumes virtual control of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) proceedings for 2019 – as chairman of the 134 member Group comprising the G77 and China – ensuring a barrage of UNGA resolutions condemning Trump’s deal when published.

Trump’s attempts to woo Jordan, Egypt and possibly other Arab states to replace the PLO in negotiations with Israel remains a work in progress.  Trump’s chances of now succeeding – after his surrender to Congress – appear to have diminished greatly.

The upcoming Israeli elections will give Israelis the chance to vote on the future direction Israel’s new government should take in resolving the future of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza (“disputed territories”) – the last remaining 5 per cent of the territory of the Mandate for Palestine where sovereignty still remains unallocated between Arabs and Jews.

The choices offered to Israeli voters should be explicitly spelt out by the political parties contesting the elections. The newly-elected government’s stated policy should be implemented. This basic premise of democracy has been undermined in America as Trump’s election commitment to build his promised border wall remains unfulfilled because of Congress’s opposition.

Trump should not similarly attempt to thwart the mandate of Israel’s next government.

Trump should shelve his long-overdue ultimate deal indefinitely – due to the changed circumstances that have demonstrably arisen since his well-intentioned thought bubble in November 2016.

Instead – Trump should:

• Pledge his Government’s full support for Israel’s next duly elected Government
• Reaffirm the core commitments made by President Bush to Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Bush’s letter dated 14 April 2004 – endorsed overwhelmingly by the Congress by 502 votes to 12 (“Bush/Congress Commitments”).

Those core American commitments – made to procure Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza – included:

1. Opposing any peace plan other than the 2003 Bush Roadmap
2. Being strongly committed to Israel’s security and well-being as a Jewish state.
3. Not supporting any right of return by Palestinian refugees to Israel
4. Regarding as unrealistic a full and complete withdrawal from the disputed territories.

Congress could endorse this Trump initiative – reinforcing continuing bipartisan support for Israel.
Peace will remain elusive – but Trump will have saved himself from drowning in a cesspool that has swallowed previous American presidents who believed they had the answer to ending this unresolved 100 years old conflict.

(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: Trump’s Bolton Appointment Signals Curtains for Abbas and PLO

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

He writes:

President Trump’s appointment of John Bolton as National Security Adviser flags the possibility that the centrepiece of Trump’s eagerly-awaited “ultimate deal” could involve the subdivision of Judea and Samaria (“the West Bank”) and Gaza between Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

Such tripartite negotiations would replace the stale-mated Israeli-Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) negotiations – begun in 1993 until suspended in 2014 following a PLO walk-out – at the stage where:

1. The PLO was demanding a new Palestinian Arab State with Jerusalem as its capital in 100% of the West Bank and Gaza (“disputed territories”) for the first time in recorded history – which was unacceptable to Israel.

2. Offers by Israel in 2000/2001 and 2007 to cede its claims to sovereignty in about 95% of the disputed territories had been rejected by the PLO.

3. The 1993 Oslo Accords had seen the West Bank divided into three Areas - “A”, “B’ and “C”:

· “A” (18%) - under total PLO administrative and security control.

· “B” (22%) - under total PLO administrative control and joint Israel-PLO security control

· “C” (60%) - under total Israeli administrative and security control

4. Israel and the PLO had been negotiating the final status of the disputed territories under President Bush’s 2003 Roadmap – endorsed by the United Nations, the European Union and Russia.

President Bush had given Israel written commitments on 14 April 2004 – overwhelmingly endorsed by the US Congress – to support Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza – which Israel honoured in 2005. America committed it would not expect Israel to withdraw from 100% of the disputed territories.

5. Hamas had governed Gaza since 2007 – as Egypt had between 1948 and 1967.

Abbas and the PLO have recently:

1. Rejected considering any future Trump proposals following Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital 

2. Declared the Oslo Accords “dead”.

Enter Trump-appointee John Bolton into this Israel-PLO standoff – as President Trump ponders how to fill this negotiating void.

Bolton has an answer  – provided with amazing prescience on 5 January 2009 in his Washington Post article headlined “The Three-State Solution”:

“Let's start by recognizing that trying to create a Palestinian Authority from the old PLO has failed and that any two-state solution based on the PA is stillborn. Hamas has killed the idea, and even the Holy Land is good for only one resurrection. Instead, we should look to a "three-state" approach, where Gaza is returned to Egyptian control and the West Bank in some configuration reverts to Jordanian sovereignty. Among many anomalies, today's conflict lies within the boundaries of three states nominally at peace. Having the two Arab states re-extend their prior political authority is an authentic way to extend the zone of peace and, more important, build on governments that are providing peace and stability in their own countries. "International observers" or the like cannot come close to what is necessary; we need real states with real security forces.” 

Bolton still retains these views – telling Eric Shawn on 21 January 2018:

“I hope at some point the Administration recognizes and perhaps it is already quietly – that the two-state solution isn’t going anywhere. If anything I would say to King Abdullah of Jordan – “Be prepared to reassert Jordanian sovereignty over part of the West Bank – negotiate with Israel”. I think that’s a far better outcome than the continued pursuit of a mythical – I believe – unattainable viable Palestinian state”

Saudi Arabia’s backing can be anticipated.

Bolton’s appointment is shaping up as yet another Trump-inspired circuit breaker.

Trump’s decision to accept Bolton’s advice would spell curtains for Abbas and the PLO and give Trump the momentum he needs to get meaningful Israel-Arab negotiations started. 

[Author’s note: The above 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]

David Singer: UN, OIC, EU and PLO invite Trump Retaliation

For this and related antisemitic cartoons click here

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

He writes:

Humiliating President Trump by declaring his decision recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel as being “null and void and must be rescinded” – spells financial and political trouble for the United Nations (UN), the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the European Union (EU) and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).

The timing of Trump’s decision can certainly be criticised – but questioning Trump’s sovereign right to make that decision constitutes a flagrant attempt to undermine the offices of the democratically-elected US President and Congress. Trump’s decision was made in accordance with international law and American domestic law – making a mockery of those who have claimed otherwise.

The first two casualties of this unprecedented political and legal attack on America’s governing institutions could be:

1. the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (“UNRWA”) and 

2. the two-state solution proposed by the 1993 Oslo Accords and President Bush’s 2003 Roadmap – as endorsed by the UN, the EU and Russia (“two-state solution”)

US Ambassador to the UN – Nikki Haley – put UNWRA clearly in President Trump’s sights for retaliatory action when she declared:

“The United States has done more than any other country to assist the Palestinian people. By far. Since 1994, we have given over $5 billion to the Palestinians in bilateral economic assistance, security assistance, and humanitarian assistance.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees operates schools and medical facilities throughout the region. It is funded almost entirely by voluntary contributions. Last year, the United States voluntarily funded almost 30 percent of UNRWA’s budget. That’s more than the next two largest donors combined. And it’s vastly more than some of the members of this Council that have considerable financial resources of their own.

I’ll be blunt: When the American people see a group of countries whose total contributions to the Palestinian people is less than one percent of UNRWA’s budget – when they see these countries accuse the United States of being insufficiently committed to peace – the American people lose their patience.” 

UNRWA is facing the grim prospect of having to find up to US$400 million annually from other UN member States if Trump cuts America’s current voluntary contribution to UNWRA.

President Trump has already announced America will withdraw from UNESCO in 2018 – attributed in part to “anti-Israel bias” – which will require another US$143 million – 22% of UNESCO’s annual budget – to be found from other member states.

Biting the hand that feeds you does have consequences.

The catastrophic decisions made by the UN, OIC, EU and PLO over the past two weeks following Trump’s Jerusalem Declaration could seriously impact any “ultimate deal” Trump has been putting together to end the Jewish-Arab conflict.

The two-state solution – which envisages a second (democratic) Arab state – in addition to (undemocratic) Jordan – on the land comprised in the 1922 Mandate for Palestine – remains in limbo since the suspension of negotiations between Israel and the PLO in April 2014.

Trump can now justifiably jettison the two state solution – including Abbas and the PLO – from his ultimate deal – after Abbas defiantly declared on 22 December:

"The United States has proven to be a dishonest mediator in the peace process and we will no longer accept any plan from the United States"

Abbas’s outburst has effectively consigned the two-state solution to the dustbin of history.

Abbas has once again demonstrated the unerring ability of the Palestinian Arabs to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory – as happened in 1922, 1937, 1947, between 1948 and 1967, 2000/20001 and 2008.

Trump’s ultimate deal must now be seriously struggling to see the light of day.

David Singer: Trump Should Adopt Bush Strategy to Encourage Israel to Negotiate

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

He writes:

President Bush’s strategy to secure Israel’s agreement to negotiate under the Bush Roadmap should be given serious consideration by President Trump as he puts together his eagerly-anticipated “ultimate deal” to end the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Bush’s strategy involved him firstly stating his “vision” before actually announcing the Bush Roadmap to turn that vision into reality.

Israel was required to make concrete territorial withdrawals from Judea and Samaria (West Bank) – possibly compromising Israel’s security in the process. Publicly confronting Israel with the Bush Roadmap first up could have seen its outright rejection by Israel before the ink was even dry.

President Reagan had succeeded in doing just that when announcing his peace plan on 1 September 1982.  Reagan’s plan was unanimously rejected out of hand by Israel’s cabinet the very next day – whilst America pleaded with Jordan to accept it over the next twelve months as a means of putting pressure on Israel to cave in and negotiate. King Hussein of Jordan did not take the bait. The Reagan plan was dead in the water.

Bush was savvy enough to not repeat Reagan’s mistake.

Bush first enunciated his “vision” in a speech on 24 June 2002:

· Two states, living side by side in peace and security.

· The Palestinian people electing new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror, building a practising democracy, based on tolerance and liberty.

A draft version of the Bush Roadmap dated 15 October 2002 was “provided” to the New York Times and published on 14 November 2002.

After talks on 31 March 2003 at the White House with President Bush, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom announced that Israel was:

“adopting the vision of President Bush, and anything that will be a genuine, accurate reflection of this vision will be something that we will be able to work with.”

Bush’s Roadmap in final form was made public on 30 April 2003.

Israel’s response was markedly different from its response to Reagan’s proposal:

“The Government of Israel, today (Sunday), 25.5.03, considered the Prime Minister's statement on the Roadmap, as well as Israel's comments on its implementation. Following its deliberations, the Government, by a majority vote, resolved:

Based on the 23 May 2003 statement of the United States Government, in which the United States committed to fully and seriously address Israel's comments to the Roadmap during the implementation phase, the Prime Minister announced on 23 May 2003 that Israel has agreed to accept the steps set out in the Roadmap.

The Government of Israel affirms the Prime Minister's announcement, and resolves that all of Israel's comments, as addressed in the Administration's statement, will be implemented in full during the implementation phase of the Roadmap.”

Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice had given the following assurances to Israel from the lawns of the White House on 23 May 2003:

The roadmap was presented to the Government of Israel with a request from the President that it respond with contributions to this document to advance true peace. The United States Government received a response from the Government of Israel, explaining its significant concerns about the roadmap. The United States shares the view of the Government of Israel that these are real concerns and will address them fully and seriously in the implementation of the roadmap to fulfil the President's vision of June 24, 2002.

This astute and finely-crafted process paid off handsomely – with Israel being sufficiently encouraged by Bush’s assurances to agree to enter into negotiations based on Bush’s Roadmap.

The success of Trump’s ultimate deal could depend on Trump rejecting the Reagan approach and adopting the Bush strategy.

David Singer: Israel Offers Trump Opportunity for Republican-Democrat Reconciliation

Pence swears in Friedman

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

He writes:

No amount of Trump tweeting or political posturing can mask the damage done to President Trump’s legendary deal-making ability following his failure to convince all Republican Party members in the House of Representatives to vote for the repeal of Obamacare and its replacement with Trumpcare.

Trump fared little better when the Senate confirmed Trump’s nominee for US Ambassador to Israel – David Friedman – by 52 votes to 46.

Only two Democratic senators – Bob Menendez of New Jersey and Joe Manchin of West Virginia – supported Trump’s choice.

Bitter partisan Democrat-Republican battlelines – fuelled by a hostile media publishing allegedly-claimed criminal leaks following Trump’s unanticipated electoral victory – increasingly threaten to undermine Trump’s election promises to “drain the swamp” and “make America great again”.

Israel, however, represents a real opportunity for Trump to unite Congress and repair the fractured Republican-Democrat relationship if Trump respects these following three bipartisan decisions:

1. Congress’s overwhelming vote by 502 votes to 12: 

Endorsing the written commitments made by President Bush to Israel’s Prime Minister Sharon on 14 April 2004 to encourage Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza and part of the West Bank and give the Bush-Quartet Roadmap (“Roadmap”) every chance of ending a conflict that had raged unresolved for 85 years.

Bush made the following commitments to Israel:

(i) To prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any plan other than the Roadmap.

(ii) Acknowledged that Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between Israel and the PLO in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338.

(iii) Agreed in light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, that it was unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations would be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949

(iv) That the United States was strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state.

2. Congress’s resolution on 5 January 2017 by a vote of 342-80:

“that the passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 undermined the long-standing position of the United States to oppose and veto United Nations Security Council resolutions that seek to impose solutions to final status issues, or are one-sided and anti- Israel, reversing decades of bipartisan agreement.”

3. The Senate’s vote 96-4 on 24 January 2017:

 Confirming South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley as ambassador to the United Nations.

 During her confirmation hearing Haley told the Senate:

“Nowhere has the UN's failure been more consistent and more outrageous than it is -- than its bias against our close ally Israel. And the General Assembly session just completed, the UN adopted 20 resolutions against Israel. And only six targeting the rest of the world's countries combined. In the past ten years, the human rights council has passed 62 resolutions condemning the reasonable actions Israel takes to defend its security. Meanwhile, the world's worst human rights abusers in Syria, Iran, and North Korea, received far fewer condemnations. This cannot continue.”

 In the two months since her appointment Haley has:

(i) Blocked the appointment of former Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad as the UN’s special representative for Libya.

(ii) Rebuked the UN’s Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia for publishing a report characterizing Israel as an “apartheid state” – pressuring its leadership to retract the document and Commission head Rima Khalaf to resign days later.

Trump’s yet to be announced policy on resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict needs to be based on these three bipartisan massive-majority decisions – guaranteeing that Congress will overwhelmingly endorse Trump’s detailed peace-making proposals when finally formulated for Congress ratification.

Unity is strength – division is weakness.

David Singer: Bush, Obama, Russia, EU and UN buried under Trump Landslide

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

He writes:

President Trump has buried the Bush Roadmap and any lingering hope for the creation of a second Arab State (“the two-state solution”) – in addition to Jordan – in the territory designated under the 1922 Mandate for Palestine.

This inevitability follows Trump’s failure at a White House joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on 15 February to reaffirm the written commitments made by President Bush to Israel in his letter dated 14 April 2004 – overwhelmingly endorsed by the Congress by 502 votes to 12 (“Bush Congress-Endorsed Commitments”).

President Bush had been urged to do so just the day before by veteran US peace negotiator Dennis Ross – who stated it would have: 

“significant implications, both because it was recognizing settlement blocs referred to in the letter as major population centers, but also because it said that no agreement can involve going back to the 1949 Armistice lines or the equivalent of June 4, 1967.” 

Similar calls had also been made by:

* Michael Oren - Israel’s former Ambassador to Washington and currently Deputy Minister in Netanyahu’s Prime Minister’s office

* Tzipi Livni – former Israeli Foreign Minister who had led negotiations for Israel with the Palestinian Authority in the peace talks brokered by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry from July 2013 until April 2014.

* Danny Ayalon – Former Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister.

Former Israeli United Nations ambassador and until recently the Director General of Israel’s Foreign Ministry,  Dore Gold, had been concerned as far back as 9 June 2009 that President Obama was not going to reaffirm the Bush Congress-Endorsed Commitments:

"For example, it still needs to be clarified whether the Obama administration feels bound by the April 14, 2004, Bush letter to Sharon on defensible borders and settlement blocs, which was subsequently ratified by large bipartisan majorities in both the US Senate (95:3) and the House of Representatives (407:9) on June 23-24, 2004. Disturbingly, on June 1, 2009, the State Department spokesman, Robert Wood, refused to answer repeated questions about whether the Obama administration viewed itself as legally bound by the Bush letter. It would be better to obtain earlier clarification of that point, rather than having both countries expend their energies over an issue that may not be the real underlying source of their dispute."

Obama’s clarification never came.

Even Netanyahu – just before boarding a plane to see Obama in the White House in May 2011 – had said he expected: 

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

Netanyahu never received that affirmation then – nor did he from Trump now.

Their reasons however are very different.

Obama proceeded to trash those commitments made with one of America’s closest allies with disastrous consequences for America’s foreign policy, its reputation and integrity.

Trump however had difficulty in reaffirming all of Bush’s commitments because one of them stated: 

“ the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap. The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan” 

Trump doesn’t like long negotiations without any deal – and Trump wants to cut a deal.

Trump has accordingly ditched the Bush two-state solution – endorsed by Russia, the European Union and the United Nations. It now joins the diplomatic graveyard housing other two-state solutions proposed by

* the 1937 Peel Commission

* the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan,

* the 1993 Oslo Accords and

* Israel in 2000/2001 and 2008.

The Arabs have missed yet another opportunity to end the 100 years old Arab-Jewish conflict.

David Singer: Trump and Congress Can Make America Great Again

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

He writes:

President Trump and Republican and Democratic Congressional leaders this week have the last opportunity to resuscitate the two-state solution laid out in President Bush’s 2003 Roadmap adopted by the Quartet – America, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations (“Bush-Quartet Roadmap”).

This can only happen if President Trump and the Congress re-affirm the commitments made to Israel by President Bush in his letter to Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon dated 14 April 2004 – as overwhelmingly endorsed by the House 407:9 and the Senate 95:3 (“Bush-Congress Commitments”). Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu reportedly sees this outcome flowing from his White House visit on 15 February:

“Trump believes in a deal and in running peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians,” the prime minister was quoted as saying. “We should be careful and not do things that will cause everything to break down. We mustn’t get into a confrontation with him.” 

The last six years have seen those negotiations teeter on the brink of total collapse because the framework for such negotiations - the Bush-Quartet Roadmap and the Bush-Congress commitments – has been successively trashed by President Obama, the European Union and the United Nations.
President Obama’s failure to honour the Bush-Congress commitments first emerged on 19 May 2011 –  when he stated: 

“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.” 

Obama’s statement put him on a collision course with America’s position as laid out in the Bush-Quartet Roadmap and the Bush-Congress Commitments.

Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had declared before an international meeting of world leaders called by President Bush in Annapolis on 27 November 2007 – including Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas – that negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority would resume on the basis of UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the Bush-Quartet Roadmap and the Bush-Congress Commitments.
Land swaps from Israel’s sovereign territory for any territory Israel retained in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) was never mentioned or contemplated in the Bush-Congress Commitments or indeed the Bush-Quartet Roadmap.

Certainly Israel might decide to make land swaps if deemed to be in Israel’s national interest – but that was for Israel to decide – not for Obama or Bush to influence or impose. Obama appeared to flip flop during his speech on 21 March 2013 at the Jerusalem International Convention Centre:

"I know Israel has taken risks for peace. Brave leaders – Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Rabin – reached treaties with two of your neighbors. You made credible proposals to the Palestinians at Annapolis. You withdrew from Gaza and Lebanon, and then faced terror and rockets." 

However those “credible proposals at Annapolis” had never suggested that the “1967 lines” and “land swaps” be the starting point for negotiations.

Yet Obama, the European Union and the United Nations persisted with these demands until the dying days of Obama’s Presidency – when America abstained – rather than veto – Security Council Resolution 2334 which expressed: 

“grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines” 

The Bush-Quartet Roadmap and the Bush-Congress Commitments is the only mutually agreed two-state negotiating process.

President Trump and the Congress can ensure the survival of that process – though not necessarily a successful outcome of any negotiations to be conducted under that process – by reaffirming the Bush-Congress Commitments.

Trump and the Congress in so doing would be meeting Netanyahu’s expectations.
America’s restored reputation for keeping agreements made with its closest allies would resonate with Trump’s campaign promise to “Make America Great Again”.

David Singer: UN Security Council Members Trash Quartet Roadmap and Two-State Solution

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

He writes:

Twelve of the fifteen members of the United Nations Security Council have apparently had a major rethink on the terms of Resolution 2334 which they approved 14:0 on 23 December 2016 with only America abstaining.

They were among those who issued the Joint Declaration following the Paris Conference held on 15 January – attended by delegations from 70 countries, the United Nations, the European Commission, the European Union, the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.

Thirteen of the fifteen Security Council member States were in Paris including its five Permanent Members – China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and United States.

Absent were New Zealand and Malaysia – two of the four sponsors of Resolution 2334.

The Joint Declaration differs substantially from Resolution 2334 in three fundamental respects:

1. Resolution 2334 envisages a region where:

“two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders”

The Joint Declaration shredded this objective by affirming:

“that a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, is the only way to achieve enduring peace”

The “two democratic states solution” in Resolution 2334 was replaced by a vague and nebulous “two state solution” in the Joint Declaration. Gone were secure and recognised boundaries.

2. Resolution 2334 aims to achieve:

“without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967”

The Joint Declaration more specifically calls for the resolution of:

“all permanent status issues on the basis of United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973)”

The Quartet Roadmap – so painstakingly put together in 2003 by President Bush calling for negotiations to create a democratic Palestinian State – and under which negotiations had been conducted since then – was unceremoniously dumped in Paris.

This leaves no agreed negotiating framework under which to conduct any resumed negotiations.

3. Resolution 2234 underscored:

“the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative”

The Joint Declaration underscored:

“the importance of the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 as a comprehensive framework for the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, thus contributing to regional peace and security.”

Israel had agreed to negotiate under the Quartet Roadmap but listed 14 reservations – one of which required:

“The removal of references other than 242 and 338 (1397, the Saudi Initiative and the Arab Initiative adopted in Beirut). A settlement based upon the road map will be an autonomous settlement that derives its validity therefrom. The only possible reference should be to Resolutions 242 and 338, and then only as an outline for the conduct of future negotiations on a permanent settlement.”

Replacing the Quartet Roadmap with the Arab Peace Initiative guarantees no hope for the stalled negotiations to be resumed.

The United Kingdom refused to endorse the Joint Declaration.

It is incredible that the other twelve Security Council member States present – especially the five permanent members – could approve the terms of the Joint Declaration that so materially changes what they voted for or abstained on just three weeks earlier.

They obviously engaged in cherry picking bits and pieces of Resolution 2334 that they had rushed through with unseemly haste and now have second thoughts on.

A new agreed negotiating framework for any two-State solution now needs to be constructed to replace the trashed Quartet Roadmap.

The Security Council looks decidedly stupid and increasingly irrelevant.

David Singer: Trump Must Confirm Bush-Congress Commitments To Israel

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

He writes: 
 

Donald Trump's stunning presidential victory – coupled with the Republican Party retaining control of the Congress – presents Trump with the opportunity to restore America's tarnished reputation and integrity by affirming he will honour the commitments made to Israel by President Bush in his letter dated 14 April 2004  – overwhelmingly endorsed by the then Congress by 502 votes to 12.


Those Bush-Congress commitments were seriously undermined by President Obama and his two Secretaries of State – Hillary Clinton and John Kerry – just one of many American disastrous policy failures in the Middle East during Obama's term of office.


The Bush-Congress Commitments were crucial to:

* Israel's unilateral, unconditional and complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 and

* Israel's agreement to resume negotiations with the Palestinian Authority as publicly declared by Israel's then prime minister Ehud Olmert at the international conference called by President Bush in Annapolis in 2007.

 "In the course of the negotiations, we will use previous agreements as a point of departure. U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the road map, and the letter of President Bush to the prime minister of Israel dated April 14, 2004."

Israel has expressed concern that President Obama and current Secretary of State John Kerry might be planning to further undercut the following Bush Commitment at the United Nations or in the international arena during the period leading up to Trump and the new Congress being installed into power on 20 January 2017.

Israel has

"... the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap. The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan"

Obama and Kerry have not leapt to defend Israel's refusal to take part in an international conference currently being planned by France in December – designed to depart from the clear negotiating guidelines laid down in the Bush Roadmap and Bush's 2004 letter – as subsequently clarified at the Annapolis Conference.

Obama has remained mum on using America's power of veto at the the UN Security Council to resist any efforts to depart from the terms of the Bush Roadmap or substitute some different negotiating process outside the Roadmap and the Bush-Congress endorsed commitments.

President-elect Trump made his views clearly known on America upholding commitments to its allies during the election campaign:

"... your friends need to know that you will stick by the agreements that you have with them. You’ve made that agreement, you have to stand by it and the world will be a better place.”

 Senator Marco Rubio, who unsuccessfully challenged Trump for Republican Party presidential nominee but who has now been reelected to the Senate for a further term by a large majority, pledged during that campaign:

"I will revive the common-sense understandings reached in the 2004 Bush-Sharon
letter and build on them to help ensure Israel has defensible borders"

Trump has been withering in his criticism of Obama's conduct towards Israel:

"Israel, our great friend and the one true democracy in the Middle East has been snubbed and criticized by an administration that lacks moral clarity."

Moral clarity demands that Trump immediately inform Obama that no action should be undertaken by Obama between now and January that would in any way depart from or undermine the commitments made by former President George Bush and the Congress to Israel in 2004.


Trump also needs to unequivocally state that his Administration intends to fully uphold those Bush-Congress commitments.


Draining the swamp and making America great again will be given a huge impetus if Trump makes these policy declarations without obfuscation or delay.