What Did Ben-Gurion Really Say?

In the immediate wake of the Six-Day War?

 In refutation of the continuing untruths and misrepresentations  promulgated by the New York Times, Martin Kramer has the answer:

    • We are now in possession of the Sinai peninsula, the West Bank of the Land of Israel, the Syrian heights east of the Jordan river, Gaza, and the Old City of Jerusalem and its environs.

    • We must be prepared to discuss peace with all our neighbors who fought us: Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq. However, I am not sure the other side is prepared for that.

    • If Egypt agrees to conclude a peace treaty with Israel—and commits to our freedom of navigation, not just in the straits of Eilat, but also in the Suez Canal—we will be ready to evacuate the Sinai desert immediately after the signing of the treaty.

    • We will not discuss the Old City of Jerusalem and its environs with anyone. It was the capital of Israel at the time of King David, and so it will remain forever. The State of Israel will safeguard the holy places of the Christians and Muslims not less than [past] Muslim rule, or the rule of the Crusaders.

    • We will propose to the inhabitants of the West Bank to choose representatives with whom we will conduct negotiations on a West Bank autonomy (excluding Jerusalem and its environs), which will be tied to Israel in an economic alliance, and which will have its outlet to the sea via Haifa or Ashdod or Gaza.

    • A Jewish army will be stationed on the western bank of the Jordan river to protect the independence of the autonomous West Bank.

    • The Gaza Strip will remain in Israel, and efforts will be made to resettle its refugees in the autonomous West Bank, or in other Arab territory, with the assent of the refugees and the assistance of Israel.

    • If Syria agrees to sign a peace treaty, and commits to preventing attacks on Israeli settlements by Syria’s inhabitants and from within its territory, we will evacuate the Syrian [Golan] heights now in our hands.

    • All the Jews who lived in Hebron and its surroundings will be allowed to return to their former homes, even after the West Bank is granted internal autonomy.

    • We will propose a peace treaty to King Hussein between Israel and the East Bank of the Jordan, and will agree to give it an outlet to the Mediterranean, like that given to the West Bank.

Read all of Martin Kramer's article here

A Prominent Arab Journalist On Arab Support For Israel Against Hezbollah & Iran (post includes video)

Dubai-based Mr Abdulrahman Al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya television, former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, and a leading Arabic weekly magazine, as well as a well-known columnist on two Arabic dailies, has written the following article in Asarq al-Awsat entitled "How Did We End Up Cheering For Israel?":

Many have welcomed with cheers the sudden Israeli strike on Sunday that killed six Hezbollah members and a general in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps who, for some reason, were secretly present in Syria’s Quneitra region.

The cheering for this act on social networking platforms is an expression of anger and indignation, and we’ve even sensed these feelings expressed by sympathizers with Islamist groups.

This represents a huge change of feelings about Hezbollah, due to its heinous actions in targeting its rivals in Lebanon and its involvement in the killing of thousands in Syria. Many of those who have shifted from admiring Hezbollah to hating the group did so in less than a decade.

These people used to support Hezbollah in Lebanon in the past and they used to adopt the Shi’ite group’s political and military agenda. Anger began to surface when Hezbollah’s militias occupied west Beirut during the events of May 7, 2008, three years after the party’s involvement in the assassination of Sunni leader Rafik Hariri.

Hezbollah, and also Iran, have lost the respect and status they’ve always enjoyed in the name of Islam, Lebanon and Palestine. Hezbollah’s biggest fall came after its clear sectarian bias in Syria emerged when its members joined the terrible war there, which has killed more than 250,000 people in what is surely the most shameful crime in the history of the region. Iranian involvement in Syria will also have further repercussions.

In my opinion there’s no doubt that if a confrontation occurs between Israel and Hezbollah, or between Israel and Iran, many Arabs will pray for the defeat of Hezbollah’s militias and the generals of its Iranian ally. This strange feeling, even if temporary, reflects the change in the region’s alliances and political stances.

The hatred held by many Arabs towards Iran and Hezbollah does not necessarily mean they have suddenly developed affection for Israel—that’s another story. Perhaps this would happen in the event of the brokering of a Palestinian–Israeli peace accord that garners more popular acceptance than before.

In case a regional struggle happens, like an Arab struggle with Iran, and Israel is an apparent party in the Arab camp, people will, I believe, turn a blind eye to a temporary alliance under the principle of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend.” Once again, this does not mean that Israel will be accepted by Arabs on the popular level—unless there is a peace deal with the Palestinians.

We are in a now in a phase where the map and alliances drawn of after 1948 are in transition, and the struggles and hostilities in the region may be shifted in a totally different direction. Iran and Hezbollah may be on the side of the Jewish state if a nuclear agreement is signed with the West that satisfies Israel, which is now considered an obstacle due to its strict stance against American concessions to the Iranians.

In case of a US insistence on reaching an agreement with Iran that angers Israel, the latter could realign itself towards Arab countries to achieve the necessary regional balance. Israel is currently participating, from a distance, alongside an alliance that’s publicly pressuring the administration of Barack Obama against offering any concessions in negotiations with Tehran; however, we can’t count on the formation of an Israeli–Gulf alliance because Israeli disputes with the Arabs of the Gulf regarding Palestine and Syria are not only serious and numerous, but will also be difficult to overcome.

For current developments regarding Israel, Hezbollah and Iran see here

Somewhat off-topic: I admit I haven't had time to look at all of this video regarding Palestinian terror and American campus hate against Israel.  But in view of yesterday's outrage in Tel Aviv I've decided to put it on:

“From the Perspective of the Arab leaders, Reaching a Two-State Solution is to Betray God..."

"I do not understand Stephen Hawking’s refusal to come to Israel. There is a boycott on Israel by the intellectuals. Yet, the people in Boston are the most liberal in the United States, maybe short of San Francisco, and they were really quite happy with people in uniform patrolling the streets, which compromises their civil liberties. But people would rather face reality than lose limbs."

So said former Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Somali-born feminist and critic of the Islam in which she was raised, in a recent interview with Israel Hayom.

Inter alia, she told her interviewer:

"Regarding the Israeli-Palestinian context, the main problem is that you may speak of a peace process, but what you get is a process, not peace. And why is this process so prolonged? Because for the Israelis this issue is a territorial problem. For the Palestinian negotiators, on the other hand, it is not a territorial problem but a religious and ethnic one, It is not only about Palestinians but about all Arabs. Most of all, it is a religious problem.

From the perspective of the Arab leaders, reaching a two-state solution is to betray God, the Koran, the hadith and the tradition of Islam.

The presumption that the Palestinian negotiators are secular is not supported by facts. Were they secular, there would already be a settled territorial agreement of some kind. But there is no agreement as of today, because on one side it has become religious jihad of all or nothing, while on the other side it is still a territorial issue. Of course I know that there are Israelis who also perceive this as a religious problem; but their numbers pale in comparison to the Muslim side. Reaching a settlement that brings about two states is a religious betrayal — not only for the leadership but for most Muslims today. The West does not understand this.

The conception of religion in the West in the 20th and 21st century differs from that of Middle Eastern Muslims. The West successfully separated religion and politics, but even in places in the West where there is no distinct separation, still the concept of God and religion, even in the 13th or 15th century, differs to the current reality in the Middle East.

Islam is an Orthopraxy, Islam has a goal. So if you are a true Muslim, you must fight for that goal. You can achieve a temporary peace or truce, but it is not ultimate, not everlasting. It is not just about the territory. Because the territory does not belong to the people; it belongs to God. So for a Palestinian leader — even if he is secular, even an atheist — to leave the negotiating room with the announcement of a two-state solution would mean that he would be killed the minute he walks out....

In a culture dictated by honor and shame – in addition to the religious issue – defeat of any kind, accepting a compromise, is to leave the room empty-handed. Compromise is loss in this culture. It is very hard to explain this to contemporary Westerners....

An Arab leader who genuinely wants peace has to convince the Arab people first, must get their endorsement and then go and get peace. That is why the first thing that needs to be worked out is not so much the relationship with Israel but changing the culture, Islamic and Arab...."

Read the entire interview here

Diplomacy, Intransigence, & "The Salutary Lesson Of The Yom Kippur War"

Over at BBC Watch Israel-based analyst Hadar Sela, with her customary scholarship and skill, identifies the lamentable and totally inexcusable inaccuracies that the British Broadcasting Corporation (once trusted for the accuracy and integrity of its reportage) has made in its look back at 1973's Yom Kippur War.

Here she points, for instance, to this statement:

“Unable to regain the territory they had lost in 1967 by diplomatic means, Egypt and Syria launched major offensives against Israel on the Jewish festival of the Day of Atonement or Yom Kippur.”

And, launching into a suitable demolition job, she reasonably comments:

"That statement of course suggests that Egypt and Syria had tried engagement in diplomacy – i.e. negotiation between the parties involved – and failed. A reasonable reader would also understand from that statement that it was the failure of negotiations which lead those countries to initiate the Yom Kippur war. But is that actually the case?

With regard to Egypt, the statement over-simplifies the issue and ignores multiple additional factors, including domestic ones, but with regard to Syria, it is obviously inaccurate. 

Neither in this entry or in the one preceding it (1967) is any mention made of the Khartoum Declaration of September 1st 1967, according to which the Arab states rejected negotiations with Israel...."

See her other relevant posts here, here, here, and here 

(I'm sure I'm not alone in considering the BBC's description of Yom Kippur as a "Jewish festival" rather inadequate as a backgrounder: surely pointing out that Israel was attacked on the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, when the country had all but shut down, would show the mindset of its attackers more clearly.  Ignorance on the BBC's part?  Or unwillingness to paint Israel as a victim?)

I'm sure all of us who were around at the time have vivid memories of where we were when we heard the terrible news of the sneak onslaught against Israel.  I was at the time in London, where I recall long lines of people waiting outside the Marble Arch Synagogue to donate blood for Israeli casualties, and I attended a big Solidarity for Israel rally on a Sunday afternoon in Trafalgar Square. I'll never forget that one of the participants at that rally (I see him now, in my mind's eye, standing tall and erect despite his very advanced years, proudly sharing the dais with Jewish communal leaders), was a right-wing Tory peer, Lord Barnby (1884-1982).  He was an instinctive supporter of Israel, and like not a view MPs in the Conservative Party who crossed the floor of the Commons to vote with Labour despite a three-line whip, he was disgusted with the Conservative Heath government's decision to ban spare parts for British-made Israeli tanks. (Alas, the principal non-Jewish speaker at the rally was a well-known British writer whose stirring speech on Israel's behalf belies the fact that she's now to be counted among Israel's inveterate critics.  Deep sigh.)

Like other Jewish newspapers around the world, the current Australian Jewish News has a series of articles on the Yom Kippur War, including an outstandingly evocative and touching reminiscence by the paper's publisher Robert Magid (the guy whose hard-headed views on so-called "asylum seekers" coming to Australia's shores by queue-jumping has made him something of a hate figure for elements in the Jewish Left as well as a punching bag for others, not on the Left, who should know better), who was at that time living in Herzliya Petuach and who with the outbreak of hostilities went to work as a volunteer at a local hospital.

The paper also includes a typically shrewd opinion piece ("Lessons from Israel's 9/11") from Melbourne academic and communal figure Dr Dvir Abramovich, a sabra, who notes, inter alia:

"...In a way, the Yom Kippur War was to Israel what 9/11 was to the United States, a stealth attack by a determined enemy, hell bent on destruction, whose menace should have been plainly obvious.

Of course, the circumstances and motives for the assault were very different.

Still, the Israelis, just like the Americans, underestimated how hatred fuelled by fanaticism can result in such havoc.

The salutary lesson of the Yom Kippur War is that Israel always needs to be alert and on guard.  A small country, with big problems, it lives in a bad neighbourhood where states use poison gas on their own people and seek nuclear weapons.

So many articles marking this occasion are underwritten by a sense of shame and guilt that one is tempted to forget that Israel's heroic warriors repelled the invading forces and were only kilometres away from the Syrian and Egyptian capitals.

Their mindset of total self-blame chimes with much of the prevailing discourse about Israel today....

.... We need to remember and celebrate the magnitude of Israel's achievements and stunning reversal of fortune.

That the Israeli army was able to turn the tide and bring the war to an end after 19 days is a monumental triumph that should be taught to every student learning about this remarkable chapter.

 One commentator maintains that the Yom Kippur War was the IDF's greatest victory, and one of the most spectacular in the annals of military history....

Tellingly, the Arab states understood that prevailing over Israel in the battlefield was now out of reach.

President Sadat of Egypt recognised the harsh reality that he needed to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

A true two-state solution will only be achieved when the Palestinians and Arab states, like Sadat, accept that Israel is not a passing phenomenon, but an irremovable entity in the Middle East.  Diplomacy is the only route.

The Palestinians have continually rejected all generous offers tabled by successive Israeli prime ministers.

Yet it is Israel that's constantly pressured to capitulate to the irrational demands of the international community...."

At a time when many denizens of academia's ivory towers seem to be seduced by the blandishments of J-Street and the New Israel Fund, it's heartening to be reminded that there are still academic opinion-formers who appreciate the situation for what it actually is and not what wishful thinking imagines it to be.

Israel's Surroundings At A Glance ...

Hat tip to the current post on The Almond Rod blog for this find (it's in bigger format over there).

What do Israel's leftist Islamophile critics, of whom there are legion in the UK alone, make of this barbaric statement, I wonder. Just imagine how they'd react if a rabbi said a similar thing:

 
And what do they make of this?

"The Arab World Has Many Enemies & Israel Should Have Been At The Bottom Of The List": Saudi Officer

Retired Saudi commodore Abdulateef  Al-Mulhim is evidently a thoughtful and courageous realist.  Last year he wrote the very well-received article I referred to here, and now (hat tip: reader Jean) he reprises his wise counsels.

Inter alia, he writes:
  
'.... I decided to write this article after I saw photos and reports about a starving child in Yemen, a burned ancient Aleppo souk in Syria, the under developed Sinai in Egypt, car bombs in Iraq and the destroyed buildings in Libya. The photos and the reports were shown on the Al-Arabiya network, which is the most watched and respected news outlet in the Middle East.

The common thing among all what I saw is that the destruction and the atrocities are not done by an outside enemy. The starvation, the killings and the destruction in these Arab countries are done by the same hands that are supposed to protect and build the unity of these countries and safeguard the people of these countries. So, the question now is that who is the real enemy of the Arab world?

The Arab world wasted hundreds of billions of dollars and lost tens of thousands of innocent lives fighting Israel, which they considered is their sworn enemy, an enemy whose existence they never recognized. The Arab world has many enemies and Israel should have been at the bottom of the list. [My emphasis here and below] The real enemies of the Arab world are corruption, lack of good education, lack of good health care, lack of freedom, lack of respect for the human lives and finally, the Arab world had many dictators who used the Arab-Israeli conflict to suppress their own people.

These dictators’ atrocities against their own people are far worse than all the full-scale Arab-Israeli wars.

In the past, we have talked about why some Israeli soldiers attack and mistreat Palestinians. Also, we saw Israeli planes and tanks attack various Arab countries. But, do these attacks match the current atrocities being committed by some Arab states against their own people.

In Syria, the atrocities are beyond anybody’s imaginations? And, isn’t the Iraqis are the ones who are destroying their own country? Wasn’t it Tunisia’s dictator who was able to steal 13 billion dollars from the poor Tunisians? And how can a child starve in Yemen if their land is the most fertile land in the world? Why would Iraqi brains leave Iraq in a country that makes 110 billion dollars from oil export? Why do the Lebanese fail to govern one of the tiniest countries in the world? And what made the Arab states start sinking into chaos?

On May 14, 1948 the state of Israel was declared. And just one day after that, on May 15, 1948 the Arabs declared war on Israel to get back Palestine. The war ended on March 10, 1949. It lasted for nine months, three weeks and two days. The Arabs lost the war and called this war Nakbah (catastrophic war). The Arabs gained nothing and thousands of Palestinians became refugees.

And on 1967, the Arabs led by Egypt under the rule of Gamal Abdul Nasser, went in war with Israel and lost more Palestinian land and made more Palestinian refugees who are now on the mercy of the countries that host them. The Arabs called this war Naksah (upset). The Arabs never admitted defeat in both wars and the Palestinian cause got more complicated. And now, with the never ending Arab Spring, the Arab world has no time for the Palestinians refugees or Palestinian cause, because many Arabs are refugees themselves and under constant attacks from their own forces. Syrians are leaving their own country, not because of the Israeli planes dropping bombs on them. It is the Syrian Air Force which is dropping the bombs. And now, Iraqi Arab Muslims, most intelligent brains, are leaving Iraq for the est. In Yemen, the world’s saddest human tragedy play is being written by the Yemenis. In Egypt, the people in Sinai are forgotten.

Finally, if many of the Arab states are in such disarray, then what happened to the Arabs’ sworn enemy (Israel)? Israel now has the most advanced research facilities, top universities and advanced infrastructure. Many Arabs don’t know that the life expectancy of the Palestinians living in Israel is far longer than many Arab states and they enjoy far better political and social freedom than many of their Arab brothers. Even the Palestinians living under Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip enjoy more political and social rights than some places in the Arab World. Wasn’t one of the judges who sent a former Israeli president to jail is an Israeli-Palestinian? 

The Arab Spring showed the world that the Palestinians are happier and in better situation than their Arab brothers who fought to liberate them from the Israelis. Now, it is time to stop the hatred and wars and start to create better living conditions for the future Arab generations.' 

Read the commodore's entire article here

Update: Hat tip to Dennis L. for this relevant link

"The Green Flag Of Jihadism Waving In Every Direction"; aka "Which Existential Threat Keeps You Awake At Night?" (video)

In this video Yossi Klein Halevi of the David Project  talks interestingly of the delegitimisation movement against Israel, and how delegitimisation should be countered by Zionists of the Left (who, he says, fail to take delegitimisation seriously) and of the Right.

He begins by talking of "a growing sense that many of us feel in Israel ... of growing siege,"  as terrorist enclaves (clients of Iran) take root on Israel's borders contrary to the past strategic policy of both Labor and Likud which has effectively collapsed.  At the same time, there is an increased sense of vulnerability on Israel's southern border, with Egypt, he notes.

Beyond that "inner circle of siege" is the "outer circle" of siege represented by a nuclear Iran and its newfound ally Turkey.  "It appears that our bag of tricks is empty" and that it's likely that only military confrontation will prevent a nuclear Iran. He also talks of the loneliness of Israelis and others who are wary of the so-called "Arab Spring" in view of the Islamism and antisemitism and anti-Israel rhetoric it has thrown up.

He cannot recall a period since May 1967  in which such "existential dread" has pervaded Israel, which nevertheless is far stronger than it was back then, except in one respect: the assault on Israel's legitmacy around the word, which he identifies as the biggest of all threats facing the Jewish people.

Debating the consequences of 1948 and denying the right of Israel to define itself as a Jewish State (a denial widespread throughout the Arab World) represent the essence of the delegitimisation of Israel and of antisemitism, he explains...

Jewish history in the region is being treated as myth, and all Palestinian groups, religious or secular, he laments, deny the peoplehood of the Jews,despite the fact that most Israelis have, however reluctantly, accepted the peoplehood of the Arabs of Palestine, and that denial is the obstacle to peace.

The aim of the delegitimisation movement in the West is to portray the return to Zion as "sinister" - a form of colonialism - and a "powerful motif" running through the delegitimisation movement in the West is to trivialise and misuse the Holocaust ...

But the fight against delegitimisation is "winnable"...

"It is still unclear whether they are inspired by the promise of building a new state, or the goal of destroying an existing one": Ron Prosor To The United Nations

Ron Prosor, the personable and popular (with Israel's friends, at least) diplomat who this year left the post of Israeli Ambassador to the Court of St James to become his country's envoy to the United Nations, has proved his mettle yet again as an outstanding representative of the beleaguered Jewish State.  His speech yesterday at the UN General Assembly on the occasion of the so-called International Day of Solidarity With The Palestinian People inaugurated by that Arab/pro-Arab-hijacked international body in 1977, bears witness to that.

 Declared Mr Prosor:

'A great Jewish sage once wrote, "The truth can hurt like a thorn, at first; but in the end it blossoms like a rose."
His words came to my mind today. His insight could really benefit many in this hall.
It takes a well of truth to water the seeds of peace. Yet, we continue to witness a drought of candour in this body’s discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. On this historic day, real facts in the General Assembly remain few and far between.
 
For any who have been here on November 29th before, today is déjà vu. Some of you may have noticed that some minor changes have been taking place in the Middle East lately, but any changes in this body’s resolutions condemning Israel are very, very rare.
Indeed, it didn’t take a creative writer to craft the language in these resolutions. The exact same text is copied and pasted, year after year – much of it dating back five decades.
 
The account we heard today is one-sided. It is unilateral. It is unjust. And it is unhelpful. It presents a distorted and impartial version of history.  It transforms the cause of Palestinian self-determination into a deliberate attempt to denigrate, defame, and delegitimize the State of Israel.
 

The political dynamics in this body are sadly predictable. Every November, the leaves change color in New York, but the automatic anti-Israel majority never changes its votes.
 
Each and every responsible member of the international community that affixes its seal of approval on this exact same set of resolutions – which are irrelevant at best, and damaging at worst— should do a little soul searching. Is this the message that you want the General Assembly to send to the world.... Let me take a moment to remind this Assembly about what actually occurred on this day 64 years ago – and in the days that followed.
 
On November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted to partition then British-Mandate Palestine into two states: one Jewish, one Arab. Two states for two peoples.
 
The Jewish population accepted that plan and declared a new state in its ancient homeland. It reflected the Zionist conviction that it was both necessary and possible to live in peace with our neighbors in the land of our forefathers.
 

The Arab inhabitants rejected the plan and launched a war of annihilation against the new Jewish state, joined by the armies of five Arab members of the United Nations.
 
One percent of Israel’s population died during this assault by five armies. Think about that price. It would be the equivalent of 650,000 dying in France today, or 3 million dying in the United States, or 13 million dying in China.
 
As a result of the war, there were Arabs who became refugees. A similar number of Jews, who lived in Arab countries, were forced to flee their homes as well. They, too, became refugees.
The difference between these two distinct populations was – and still is – that Israel absorbed the refugees into our society. Our neighbors did not.
 

Refugee camps in Israel gave birth to thriving towns and cities. Refugee camps in Arab Countries gave birth to more Palestinian refugees.
 
We unlocked our new immigrants’ vast potential. The Arab World knowingly and intentionally kept their Palestinian populations in the second class status of permanent refugees.
 
In Lebanon for many years and still today, the law prohibits Palestinians from owning land – and from working in the public sector or as doctors and lawyers. Palestinians are banned from these professions.
 

In Kuwait, the once significant Palestinian population was forcibly expelled from the country in 1991. Few remain.
 
In Syria, thousands of Palestinians had to flee refugee camps in Latakia last August when President Assad shelled their homes with naval gunboats.
 
In the vast majority of Arab Countries, Palestinians have no rights of citizenship. It is no coincidence that the Arab World’s responsibilities for the “inalienable rights” of these Palestinians never appear in the resolutions before you....

The basic question underlying our conflict for 64 years has not changed. That question is: has the Arab World – and particularly the Palestinians – internalized that Israel is here to stay and will remain the Nation-state of the Jewish People?
 

It is still unclear whether they are inspired by the promise of building a new state, or the goal of destroying an existing one. [My emphasis]

Two months ago, President Abbas stood at the podium in this very hall and tried to erase the unbroken and unbreakable connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel.
 
He said the following:

“I come before you today from the Holy Land, the land of Palestine, the land of divine messages, ascension of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the birthplace of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him).”

This was not an oversight. It was not a slip of the tongue. It was yet another deliberate attempt to deny and erase more than 3,000 years of Jewish history. The Arab leaders from those two nations that sought peace have offered a different message.
 
For example, in 1995, King Hussein came to the United States and said (quote): “For our part, we shall continue to work for the new dawn when all the Children of Abraham and their descendants are living together in the birthplace of their three great monotheistic religions.”
In 1977, President Sadat came to Israel’s Knesset and quoted this verse from the Koran: “We believe in God and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes and in the books given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets from their lord.”
 
President Sadat and King Hussein spoke of THREE monotheistic religions, not ONE or TWO.Mr. President,
 
The resolution that gives the 29th of November significance – General Assembly resolution 181 – speaks of the creation of a “Jewish State” no less than 25 times. We still do not hear Palestinian leaders utter the term. 
 

The Palestinian leadership refuses to acknowledge Israel’s character as a Jewish state. You will never hear them say “two states for two peoples”. If you ever hear a Palestinian leader say “two states for two peoples”, please phone me immediately. My office has set up the equivalent of a 9/11 number in the event of such an unprecedented occurrence.
Palestinian leaders call for an independent Palestinian state, but insist that the Palestinian people return to the Jewish state. This is a proposition that no one who believes in the right of Israel to exist could ever accept.The idea that Israel will be flooded with millions of Palestinians is a non-starter. The international community knows it. The Palestinian leadership knows it. But the Palestinian people aren’t hearing it. At this very moment, the gap between their perception and reality remains the major obstacle to peace.
 
Let me repeat that: the so-called right of return is and will remain the major obstacle to peace. It is not settlements. It is not the laundry list of baseless accusations launched against Israel in today’s resolutions.
 
I’ll repeat it again: the so-called right of return is the major obstacle to peace. Everyone knows it.
Yet, all of those who were so vocal today in telling Israel what is has to do for peace – mumbled, stuttered and conveniently lost their voices when it came to telling the Palestinians that the so-called right of return is a non-starter.
 

For decades, this body has rubberstamped nearly every Palestinian whim, no matter how counter-factual or counter-productive. What has this accomplished? The lip service of this body has only done a disservice for peace....

True friends of the Palestinians have a responsibility to tell them the truth.
They will stop promoting the distorted version of history that characterizes this day, and start delivering the real lessons of history that the Palestinian leadership now refuses to heed.
 
These lessons are clear: bilateral negotiations are the only route to two states, for two peoples – living side-by-side in peace and security; negotiations that resolve the outstanding concerns of both sides.
While bypass maneuvers may work for heart surgery and highway construction, they will not bring peace or security to our region.
 

Direct negotiations were the way of President Sadat and Prime Minister Begin, the way of Prime Minister Rabin and King Hussein. It has been the framework for advancing peace between Israel and the Palestinians for the past two decades.
 
Time and again, we have extended our hand in peace to the Palestinians. Prime Minister Netanyahu stood in this very hall last September and declared his commitment to the cause of Palestinian self-determination – and his vision for establishing a Palestinian state, alongside the Jewish State of Israel – two states for two peoples.
 
Yet, today we wait for the Palestinians to give up the false idol of unilateralism – and get back to the real hard work of direct negotiations.  And – as they continue to run away from the negotiating table, the Palestinian leadership continues to move closer into their embrace of Hamas – an internationally recognized terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel.
 
This development brings to my mind Groucho Marx’s famous line: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them … well, I have others." The Quartet has long applied three principles that Hamas must adopt.  It must renounce violence, recognize Israel and abide by prior agreements. At no point has Hamas satisfied these conditions – or indicated any intention to do so.
 

Those who advocate recognizing a Government that includes Hamas are urging a Groucho-Marxist policy in a complex, unstable region. If Hamas is too extreme to accept these principles, they argue, we must tailor our principles to match Hamas's extremism.The bar has been set very low. On these basic requirements for peace, there can be no adjustments. There can be no bargaining. There can be no Holiday Season discounts – in this hall or anywhere else....

Even more than the words spoken in the speeches here today – or the words in the resolutions before you— it is the words not spoken that speak volumes. This Assembly has made clear that it does not stand in solidarity with many people in our region today.
 
In this hall, I hear no solidarity with the one million Israeli men, women and children who live under the constant rain rockets, mortars and missiles from the Gaza Strip.
 
I hear no solidarity with the 16-year old boy who was killed last April when a Hamas anti-Tank Missile struck his school bus. Or the thousands of other Israeli civilians who have been killed and injured.
 
I hear no solidarity with the Israeli children who learn the alphabet at the same time that they learn the names Kassam, Grad, and Katyusha – the rockets that keep them out of school for weeks at a time.
 

I hear no solidarity with the Palestinians who are victims of brutal Hamas rule – with the political opponents who are tortured, the women who are subjugated, or the children who are used as suicide bombers and human shields.  [My emphasis]
 
And – ... today I hear no solidarity with the many people in the Middle East who are being repressed and slaughtered every single day for demanding their freedom. From Syria to Iran to Yemen, these people are no longer content with their leader’s explanations that Israel is to blame for all the problems of the Middle East – a fiction that is advanced through resolutions like those before us today.
Today the People of the Middle East demand real answers for their plight.
 

I also heard no discussion today about the incitement that continues to fill the West Bank and Gaza, where the next generation of Palestinian children is being taught that suicide bombers are heroes, that Jews have no connection to the Holy Land, and that they must seek to annihilate the State of Israel.
 
From cradles to kindergarten classrooms; from the grounds of summer camps to the stands of football stadiums; from the names of public squares to the public pronouncements of Palestinian leaders, these messages are everywhere.
 
Just last month, President Abbas declared that the Palestinian Authority would provide a grant of up to $5,000 to every terrorist released in exchange for Gilad Shalit, Israel’s kidnapped soldier.
These are people like Ibrahim Shammasina, who helped to murder four Israelis, including two teenagers. People like Walid Anajas, who planned bombings in the heart of Jerusalem and Rishon Lezion, which killed 32.
 

People like Wafa-al Bis, who unsuccessfully tried to blow herself up in an Israeli hospital.Washed in the blood of innocents, these terrorists are being held up as role models for the next generation of Palestinian children.
 
Palestinian Authority television broadcast President Abbas’ remarks to these released terrorists last October. He said, “You are people of struggle and Jihad fighters for Allah and the homeland... Your sacrifice and your effort and your actions were not in vain.”....

Sustainable peace must take root in homes, schools, and media that teach tolerance and understanding so that it can grow in hearts and minds.
 
It must come from a Palestinian leadership willing to tell its people about the difficult compromises that they will have to make for statehood.
 
It will come through the hard work of state-building, not the old habit of state-bashing.
 
Today none of these truths have been spoken.
 

Today I hear no solidarity with the principles of peace.
 
I know that the truth can be a burden. I know that old habits die-hard. I know that the convenience of the moment sometimes weighs heavy on the interests of the future.
 
Yet, only the truth will set us free. After years of darkness, I call on this Assembly to bring new light to this debate.
 
I call on each and every delegate in this hall to embrace pragmatic solutions, not automatic resolutions; to speak with candor, and not slander; to grapple for a new vision, and not old divisions.
 
I call on this Assembly to finally glean truth from this historic day, nourishing the seeds of peace in our region that can blossom into a brighter future.'

(Hat tip: Challah)
Update: see Michelle Huberman's interesting blog about this speech, specifically in relation to the refugee issue, here

Mark The Islamic Expert's Words: It's Not About Politics and Borders - It's About Theology and Annihilation

Part of the London crowd; photo from Richard Millett's Blog

At yesterday's angry demonstration outside the Israeli Embassy in London (see my previous post for a nine-minute video), where Hezbollah flags were waved by many in the mob, a certain genocidal chant rang out.

To quote Tom Friedmann, who has a most evocative description of the demonstration that deserves to be read in full:

"Over at the [simultaneous] Israeli demonstration Jewish teenagers waved Israeli flags, sang traditional Jewish songs and joined in chants declaring their will to peace. If they could have been described as provocative at all it was when they chanted ‘We love life, you love death’ yet undeniably quite accurately reflecting the statements of countless Islamist clerics on the subject. Nor could the Palestinian side really attempt to claim that they were not championing the Islamist cause; several Hezbollah flags could clearly be seen among their crowed. And while the Israeli demonstrators made their calls for peace and that Gaza be freed from Hamas the Palestinian group decided to go for a rendition of ‘Khyber al-Yahud’ which calls on Jews to remember how they were slaughtered by Mohammad and his men at Khyber in 7th century Arabia. [My emphasis] Indeed much of the chanting was in Arabic as most of the crowed appeared to be of Middle Eastern origin, many in traditional Islamic dress. The odd Quaker/Anarchist that had ill-advisedly come along nervously struggled to join in with the Arabic, but for the most part Middle England had stayed away this time. There was of course Lauren Booth who seemed to have come in fancy dress; sporting an amusingly dysfunctional combination of designer sunglasses, a pink jacket and a keffiyeh for a hijab, but then she can hardly be said to count."  See: http://tomfriedmann.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/two-very-different-demonstrations-at-the-israeli-embassy/ and also http://richardmillett.wordpress.com/2011/05/15/naqba-day-extremists-spew-hate-outside-israeli-embassy/

No doubt the genocidal chant pierced the air at similar "Nakba Day" rallies in other cities round the world.

Binyamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, in assuring his compatriots that  "we are determined to protect our borders and our sovereignty" from "Nakba Day" incursions by Arab trouble makers, added:

"The leaders of these violent demonstrations have personally stated that their struggle is not over the '67 lines, but rather to undermine the very existence of the State of Israel, which they define as a disaster which must be corrected."

This fact - that the issue is not one of borders but of Israel's very existence - is powerfully expressed by Egyptian-born expert in Islamic radicalism Dr Tawfik Hamid, of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies in Arlington, Virginia.

 A former Islamic extremist who once belonged to the same terrorist organization as Al Qaeda's second-in-command, Dr Ayman al-Zawahir, he has a message for American diplomats that deserves to be heard and heeded by all who place the onus for peace upon the Jewish State:

"Approaching the Arab-Israeli conflict from the perspective that it is about land, so that giving more land to the Palestinians will solve the problem, is a failed endeavor.

Israel has already given Egypt the whole of the Sinai, and got nothing in return except a cold peace and rising anti-Semitism in the country. Similarly the disengagement from Gaza did not magically lead to a decline in the wave of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world.

Pro-Palestinian Muslim demonstrators across the world repeatedly use the chant “Khyber Khyber Ya Yahood... Gaish Muhammad Sawfa Yaood,” which reminds the Jews that the army of Muhammad is coming back for a repeat of what was done to the Jewish Khyber tribe.

According to authentic Islamic history books, the Islamic army, led by Muhammad, annihilated the Jewish tribe of Khyber, raping its women and killing all its men.

Such barbaric statements against the Jews have been used by many in the Muslim world, and even inside the US and Europe. Sadly the chant was also used on Friday by thousands of pro-Palestinian demonstrators in Cairo’s Tahrir Square.

The Hamas charter also calls for the destruction of Israel. This violent principle has its roots in the traditional Islamic teaching, based on Hadith books, that encourages the killing of all Jews before the end of days.

.... [T]he problem in the eyes of the Palestinians and their supporters is not the borders of Israel but the very existence of the country, all future missions will similarly fail. Solving the Arab-Israeli conflict must be done initially at the theological rather than the political level, as the former is impeding the latter.  [My emphasis]

It is unfair to ask Israel to trust those who shamefully advocate the killing of Jews, and claim that Islamic annihilation of the Jews by an Islamic army is a model that must be emulated today.  [My emphasis]

The problem is not only in the existence of violent teachings in historical Islamic texts, but also in the dangerous desire of many Islamists and violent Islamic scholars to revive such violence in modern times....

The problem is that this disastrous anti-Semitic religious dimension is not limited to verses in books, but is also propagated by a powerful media machine that utilizes vicious, Nazi-style propaganda across the Muslim world. Publishing dehumanizing cartoons in the mainstream media, and blaming Jews for nearly every problem in the world has become much too common in the leading Arab media over the past few decades.

It is virtually impossible to promote any form of peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict without reducing such levels of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world. 

Until future envoys to the Middle East understand the religious dimension of the problem, and that the Arab- Israeli conflict is not about borders but about the existence of the state of Israel, all future attempts to make peace in the area will fail. [My emphasis]  See: http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=220694

And for a truly repellent Israel-delegitimising piece by Jody McIntyre in The Independent newspaper today that says, inter alia:

"I often wonder how I am expected to recognise the legitimacy of a state that does not recognise its own borders. I often wonder how I can recognise a state that has invaded and occupied every country it shares a border with. How can I recognise a country that refuses to recognise the right of return, as enshrined in international law, of the Palestinian refugees? Yesterday, those refugees proved that they will never allow that right to be forgotten. Despite the combined efforts of Israel, the US, and the Palestinian Authority, they will never forget the homes that they left in 1948."

see http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/05/16/a-right-to-return/

Stand by Israel, the "Fall Guy": Glenn Beck, Dore Gold and Others in Defence of Israel (videos)

Glenn Beck holds forth in a show that includes such studio guests as Dore Gold, a show dedicated to the defence of Israel. Beck tells his audience that it's imperative that the public step in to the vacuum created by politicians and speak up for the Jewish State.
Included is a quickie animated history of the Middle East.
It seems clear that a great many people in the studio audience realise that, as Beck says at the beginning, Israel is the "fall guy" whose sacrifice on the altar of appeasement would not save the West from its Islamic enemies.

This is Israel, Stand with Israel (video)

An awesome video that pulls no punches:

Some of the language might strike people as hyperbolic, but the video is a tour de force; I don't like the blanket denigration of Muslims and Palestinians, though.

"The Arabs Have a Different Concept of Compromise," he warned...

With the looming threat of acquiescence by the UN General Assembly in September in the Palestinian Authority's quest for recognition of an independent state with the pre-1967 borders, it's hardly surprising that Israel is contemplating pre-emptive unilateral action - perhaps the annexation of the West Bank "settlement blocs".

Of those borders as they were at the start of the Six Day War, a prominent Israeli politician has said:

"Most Israelis will tell you that these are deadly lines, very difficult to defend.  These would bring back the horrors of pre-1967 Israel."

He added:  "I believe the Arabs understand that as long as Israel is strong they will have to reach some type of modus vivendi with us.

In other words, so long as Israel is not pushed back to her 1967 borders there is no way to get rid of Israel.  This explains the vehemence with which the Syrians and others want Israel to return to the 1967 lines.  They want this not to live in peace with Israel but to recreate the situation that existed before 1967 and reverse the course of history.  The weakness that Israel would project to the Arab world would be such that ... instability would be invited.

.... We must be able to defend ourselves and the ability to guarantee our defense has much to do with not returning to the 1967 lines.  The Arabs realize this.  It is essential that we find a solution that does not lead us to these old lines."

The following video shows just how vulnerable Israel would be if it returned to the situation prior to the Six Day War, given the jihadist threat, and spells out Israel's essential security requirements:

The politician I'm quoting warned that the Arabs:

"make no distinction between Ariel, Efrat, Ma'ale Adummim and Jerusalem.  This is a very interesting Jewish debate but is irrelevant when dealing with the Arabs.  They want all the land.... All the Jewish towns and villages that have Jewish inhabitants should be uprooted and the Jews expelled.... First they want us out of Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights and Jerusalem.  Perhaps after that they have other things in mind....

The problem really has a lot to do with the difference in perceptions between the Arab and Western concepts of conflict resolution.  According to the Western concept, if you and I have a conflict over a house, a car, money or any type of transaction and we cannot work out an arrangement where we are both completely happy we sit down and compromise.  I will not get everything I want and neither will you.  W keep bargaining until we reach an arrangement that is mutually satisfactory.

The Arabs have a different concept of compromise.  Let us say that we have a dispute about something.  My solution [if I were an Arab] is not to compromise but to wait a year, a decade, or a century.  Perhaps not my time or my son's time or his son's time.  I will not compromise but simply wait you out. [He gave as an example President Assad's remark that "I am not worried about the Golan Heights.  I will not get it now but in 25 years I will get it."]

If we ever reach the stage where the Arabs believe they need to compromise we will make some progress."

An interesting observation in light of the poll of Palestinians taken late last year, which indicated that a majority envisage a two-state solution as the precursor to the disappearance of Israel and a single Arab state in Israel's place. See http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2010/09/from-river-to-sea-public-opinion-in.htmland http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2010/11/still-crazy-after-all-these-years.html 

Interesting in view of the stubborn insistence on the refugees' and so-called refugees' "right of return". And interesting also in view of the following photographs.

Note the map on the wall behind Mahmoud Abbas.  It surely symbolises "the writing on the wall".  For it depicts Palestine as he wishes, indeed how he apparently ultimately intends, it to be:

Here's Abbas with another map of his future state:

And here he is with a stone model of it:

No wonder he's smiling slyly.

These children are well-prepared for what he has in mind for their inheritance :

The Israeli politician whom I've been quoting is Dan Meridor, once touted as a possible prime minister, speaking in Jerusalem to interviewer Norman Frankel nineteen years ago.  The entire interview appears in Middle East Focus: Canada's Magazine on the Contemporary Middle East (vol. 14, no. 3, Summer/Fall 1992, pp. 14-18.

I reckon it's still basically relevant to the situation today.

For Abbas and those maps: http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=3467 

See also http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4049873,00.html



Caroline Glick warns about the Arab Uprisings and Israel (videos)

Here's the great Caroline Glick, of the Jerusalem Post, speaking this week in Toronto (5 April 2011):

A Saudi Officer Reflects on What Might Have Been Had the Arabs Recognised Israel in 1948



Signatures on Israel's Declaration of Independence, 1948

 "What if Arabs had recognized the State of Israel in 1948?" asks retired Saudi commodore Abdulateef Al-Mulhim in a remarkable op-ed in Arab News.  He continues, inter alia:

"If Israel was recognized in 1948, then the Palestinians would have been able to free themselves from the hollow promises of some Arab dictators who kept telling them that the refugees would be back in their homes and all Arab lands will be liberated and Israel will be sent to the bottom of the sea. Some Arab leaders used the Palestinians for their own agenda to suppress their own people and to stay in power....

If Israel was recognized in 1948, then there would have been no need for a coup in Egypt against King Farouq in 1952 and there would have been no attack on Egypt in 1956 by The UK, France and Israel. Also there will be no war in June 1967 and the size of Israel will not be increased and we, the Arabs would not have the need for a UN resolution to beg Israel to go back to the pre-1967 borders. And no war of attrition between Egypt and Israel that caused more casualties on the Egyptian side than the Israeli side....

Now, the Palestinians are on their own.  Each Arab country is busy with its own crisis. From Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Jordan, Somalia, Algeria, Lebanon and the Gulf states. For now, the Arab countries have put the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on hold."

Read the entire article: http://arabnews.com/opinion/columns/article322715.ece