David Singer: Trump Rejects UN and UNESCO’s Fictitious Palestinian State

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

He writes:

President Trump’s National Security Adviser – John Bolton – has exposed the fiction that there is a legally-constituted “State of Palestine” – shredding United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and United Nations (UN) resolutions misleadingly recognising such a state when none – in fact – exists.

Bolton was unequivocal in his statement:

“Palestine” is not a state… It’s not a state now. It does not meet the customary international law test of statehood. It doesn’t control defined boundaries. It doesn’t fulfill the normal functions of government. There are a whole host of reasons why it’s not a state.”

Article 1 of the 1934 Montevideo Conventioncompletely substantiates Bolton’s claim.
Holding out the carrot after administering the stick – Bolton continued:

“It could become a state, as the president said, but that requires diplomatic negotiations with Israel and others… We have consistently, across Democratic and Republican administrations, opposed the admission of ‘Palestine’ to the UN as a state, because it’s not a state.”

Bolton’s tempting offer may have been made to try and get the PLO to negotiate with Israel on Trump’s soon to–be-released peace plan. It seems certain to fall on deaf ears as the PLO wants nothing to do with Trump’s plan.

The PLO will only be more infuriated at this latest Trump effort to engender some reality into the Arab-Jewish conflict – as happened when Trump recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

UNESCO’s decision to admit “Palestine” as a member in 2011 in clear breach of UNESCO’s own Constitution has come back  to bite UNESCO with a vengeance –  with America and Israel quitting

UNESCO on 31 December 2018.

UNESCO anti-Israel decisions made since “Palestine” was admitted to UNESCO membership have included:

• January 2014 – cancelling an exhibition at its Paris headquarters on the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel
• October 2016 – disregarding Jewish ties to the Temple Mount – only referring to it by its Muslim names – then several weeks later – passing a softer version of the resolution that referred to the Western Wall by its Jewish name – though still ignoring Judaism’s ties to the site.
• July 2017 – designating Hebron and the two adjoined shrines at its heart — the Jewish Tomb of the Patriarchs and the Muslim Ibrahimi Mosque — as a “Palestinian World Heritage Site in Danger”.

On 29 November 2012, the UN General Assembly granted Palestine“non-member observer state” status.

Pure fiction.

The PLO hopped on the UN bandwagon – PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas decreeingon 3 January 2013:

 “Official documents, seals, signs and letterheads of the Palestinian National Authority official and national institutions shall be amended by replacing the name ‘Palestinian National Authority’ whenever it appears by the name ‘State of Palestine’ and by adopting the emblem of the State of Palestine.”

Pure fiction.

In November 2014 – Sweden became the 135th member of the UN to officially recognize Palestine as an independent state.

Pure fiction – 135 times over.

More truth-telling involving Jordan-Israel negotiations are on the Trump agenda – Bolton having signalled on 18 January:

“In fact, [Jordan’s] King Abdullah II should be preparing himself for a larger role in the West Bank. Before the 1967 war, Jordan had no hesitation asserting sovereignty over West Bank territory from Britain’s former Palestinian mandate, territory conquered by Jordan’s Arab Legion during the 1948 to 1949 war with Israel.
Once it becomes clear the two-state solution is finally dead, Jordan should again be asked to exercise control over suitably delineated portions of the West Bank and have the monarchy’s religious role for holy sites like the Temple Mount reaffirmed.”

 Fact – not fiction – will resolve the Arab-Jewish 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 Exposes Abu Mazen's Porkies

A few hours ago I posted an item regarding mendacious Palestinian propaganda and later added a video which perfectly illustrates one of the key contentions made: please take a look.  Meanwhile, in this new article, entitled "United Nations Bedazzled By Abbas Word Wizardry," Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer continues the theme of propagandistic Palestinian falsehoods, focusing on the United Nations' willing beguilement by Mahmoud Abbas.

Writes David Singer:

PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s speech to the UN General Assembly last week contained a concoction of half-truths and outright lies that everyone listening to him should question.

Here are some prize porkies:

1. “The question of Palestine was one of the first just issues brought before the United Nations from the time of its inception, and yet it remains unresolved until this moment”

17 May 1948; Photo: Detroit Jewish News

Abbas failed to mention that it has remained unresolved since then because:

(i) The Arabs did not accept the 1947 UN Partition Plan to partition western Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State – whilst the Jews did.

(ii) The Arabs – instead - unsuccessfully sent six Arab armies to invade Palestine in May 1948 to rout the newly declared Jewish State – Israel – and drive its Jewish population into the sea

(iii) Jordan and Egypt successfully drove out and permanently expelled the Jewish population living in the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria (later termed “the West Bank”) – keeping those areas Jew-free from 1948 until 1967

(iv) No attempt was made between 1948 and 1967 to create the Palestinian state Abbas says he will now accept. That opportunity has been well and truly missed.

2. Abbas described the Palestinian Arabs as “a people that had lived peacefully in their land and made genuine intellectual, cultural and humanitarian contributions to mankind”.

Abbas was gilding the lily.

(i) The Arab riots in Jerusalem in 1920, the Hebron massacre of the Jewish community in 1929 and the Arab riots between 1936 and 1939 give the lie to his claims.

(ii) No genuine intellectual, cultural and humanitarian contributions have been made to mankind by the Palestinian Arabs – unless airline hijackings, suicide vests, and indiscriminate targeting of Jews is what Abbas had in mind

3. “While Palestine was partitioned into two states – according to which Israel was established 67 years ago – the second part of that resolution still awaits implementation.”

Abbas suffers from a selective memory.

(i) Palestine was effectively divided 92 years ago in 1923 – when 78 per cent – originally designated for the Jewish National Home by the 1920 San Remo conference and the Treaty of Sevres – was denied to Jewish settlement by Article 25 of the Palestine Mandate.

(ii) This area subsequently became the Jew-free independent Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan in 1946 – renamed Jordan in 1950 after being unified with Judea and Samaria.

 4. 'We recall here the words of the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1976, when he stated that Israel will become an apartheid state if it continues its occupation of the Palestinian territory and described the Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as “cancer”.'

Abbas misleadingly failed to tell the General Assembly that Rabin’s view had changed markedly just before his assassination in 1995 – after experiencing 19 years of unremitting terrorism and rejectionism by the PLO – telling the Knesset:

(i) The borders of the State of Israel would be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. Israel would not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.

(ii) Jerusalem would be united and would include both Maale Adumim and Givat Zeev as the capital of Israel under Israeli sovereignty

(iii) The security border of Israel would be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term

(iv) Gush Etzion, Efrat, Beitar and other communities in the area east of what was the "Green Line" prior to the Six Day War would be included in the State of Israel;

(v) Blocs of settlements would be established in Judea and Samaria like the one in Gush Katif

(vi) No single settlement would be uprooted in the framework of the Interim Agreement, nor building hindered for natural growth

5. “Palestine is a country of holiness and peace. It is the birthplace of Christ, the messenger of love and peace, and the Isra’ and Mi’raj [ascension to heaven and night journey] of Mohammed”

Abbas omitted any mention of the Jews – the forebears of the Christians.

6. “It is no longer useful to waste time in negotiations for the sake of negotiations; what is required is to mobilize international efforts to oversee an end to the occupation in line with the resolutions of international legitimacy.”

Abbas supposedly supports “resolutions of international legitimacy” – yet the PLO he heads has declared that the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void.

The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and Article 80 of the United Nations Charter are resolutions of international legitimacy that cannot be swept away because Abbas does not like them.

7. "The state of Palestine, based on the 4th of June 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, is a state under occupation, as was the case for many countries during World War II.”

(i) “The state of Palestine” does not meet the legal requirements of customary international law as encapsulated in the 1933 Montevideo Convention.

(ii) There were no borders – only armistice lines.

(iii) How can “Palestine” be a state under occupation since there was no such State in existence prior to 1967?

The applause accorded Abbas in the UN General Assembly indicates how his deceptively misleading word wizardry continues to confound attempts to end the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict.
Exposing its false peddlers must never cease.

Time the United Nations woke up and restored its own credibility.

"J'Accuse!": Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor's Latest Superb Speech To The UN

The United Nations' hypocrisy and double standards ... The shameful stance of the European Union ... Palestinian Statehood without peace ... Arab antisemitism ... Lies about Jerusalem ...

Listen to it, every impressive point of it.  Or, if you'd rather skip the video (20 minutes long), read the transcript, and relish every word.

For here is another superb presentation (24 November) of the truth by Israel's ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor:

"I stand before the world as a proud representative of the State of Israel and the Jewish people. I stand tall before you knowing that truth and morality are on my side.  And yet, I stand here knowing that today in this Assembly, truth will be turned on its head and morality cast aside.

The fact of the matter is that when members of the international community speak about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a fog descends to cloud all logic and moral clarity.  The result isn’t realpolitik, its surrealpolitik.

The world’s unrelenting focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is an injustice to tens of millions of victims of tyranny and terrorism in the Middle East. As we speak, Yazidis, Bahai, Kurds, Christians and Muslims are being executed and expelled by radical extremists at a rate of 1,000 people per month.

How many resolutions did you pass last week to address this crisis?  And how many special sessions did you call for? The answer is zero. What does this say about international concern for human life?  Not much, but it speaks volumes about the hypocrisy of the international community.

I stand before you to speak the truth.  Of the 300 million Arabs in the Middle East and North Africa, less than half a percent are truly free – and they are all citizens of Israel.

Israeli Arabs are some of the most educated Arabs in the world. They are our leading physicians and surgeons, they are elected to our parliament, and they serve as judges on our Supreme Court.  Millions of men and women in the Middle East would welcome these opportunities and freedoms.

Nonetheless, nation after nation, will stand at this podium today and criticize Israel – the small island of democracy in a region plagued by tyranny and oppression....

Our conflict has never been about the establishment of a Palestinian state.  It has always been about the existence of the Jewish state.

Sixty seven years ago this week, on November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted to partition the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state. Simple. The Jews said yes.  The Arabs said no. But they didn’t just say no.  Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon launched a war of annihilation against our newborn state.

This is the historical truth that the Arabs are trying to distort. The Arabs’ historic mistake continues to be felt – in lives lost in war, lives lost to terrorism, and lives scarred by the Arab’s narrow political interests.

According to the United Nations, about 700,000 Palestinians were displaced in the war initiated by the Arabs themselves.  At the same time, some 850,000 Jews were forced to flee from Arab countries.

Why is it, that 67 years later, the displacement of the Jews has been completely forgotten by this institution while the displacement of the Palestinians is the subject of an annual debate?

The difference is that Israel did its utmost to integrate the Jewish refugees into society. The Arabs did just the opposite.

The worst oppression of the Palestinian people takes place in Arab nations.  In most of the Arab world, Palestinians are denied citizenship and are aggressively discriminated against.  They are barred from owning land and prevented from entering certain professions.

And yet none – not one – of these crimes are mentioned in the resolutions before you.

If you were truly concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people there would be one, just one, resolution to address the thousands of Palestinians killed in Syria.  And if you were so truly concerned about the Palestinians there would be at least one resolution to denounce the treatment of Palestinians in Lebanese refugee camps.

But there isn’t.  The reason is that today’s debate is not about speaking for peace or speaking for the Palestinian people – it is about speaking against Israel.  It is nothing but a hate and bashing festival against Israel....

The European nations claim to stand for Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité – freedom, equality, and brotherhood – but nothing could be farther from the truth.

I often hear European leaders proclaim that Israel has the right to exist in secure borders.   That’s very nice.  But I have to say – it makes about as much sense as me standing here and proclaiming Sweden’s right to exist in secure borders.

When it comes to matters of security, Israel learned the hard way that we cannot rely on others – certainly not Europe.

In 1973, on Yom Kippur – the holiest day on the Jewish calendar – the surrounding Arab nations launched an attack against Israel. In the hours before the war began, Golda Meir, our Prime Minister then, made the difficult decision not to launch a preemptive strike.   The Israeli Government understood that if we launched a preemptive strike, we would lose the support of the international community.

As the Arab armies advanced on every front, the situation in Israel grew dire. Our casualty count was growing and we were running dangerously low on weapons and ammunition.  In this, our hour of need, President Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, agreed to send Galaxy planes loaded with tanks and ammunition to resupply our troops.  The only problem was that the Galaxy planes needed to refuel on route to Israel.

The Arab States were closing in and our very existence was threatened – and yet, Europe was not even willing to let the planes refuel.  The U.S. stepped in once again and negotiated that the planes be allowed to refuel in the Azores.

The government and people of Israel will never forget that when our very existence was at stake, only one country came to our aid – the United States of America.

Israel is tired of hollow promises from European leaders.  The Jewish people have a long memory.  We will never ever forget that you failed us in the 1940s.  You failed us in 1973.  And you are failing us again today.

Every European parliament that voted to prematurely and unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state is giving the Palestinians exactly what they want - statehood without peace.  By handing them a state on a silver platter, you are rewarding unilateral actions and taking away any incentive for the Palestinians to negotiate or compromise or renounce violence.  You are sending the message that the Palestinian Authority can sit in a government with terrorists and incite violence against Israel without paying any price.

The first E.U. member to officially recognize a Palestinian state was Sweden. One has to wonder why the Swedish Government was so anxious to take this step.  When it comes to other conflicts in our region, the Swedish Government calls for direct negotiations between the parties – but for the Palestinians, surprise, surprise, they roll out the red carpet.

State Secretary Söder may think she is here to celebrate her government’s so-called historic recognition, when in reality it’s nothing more than an historic mistake.

The Swedish Government may host the Nobel Prize ceremony, but there is nothing noble about their cynical political campaign to appease the Arabs in order to get a seat on the Security Council.  Nations on the Security Council should have sense, sensitivity, and sensibility.  Well, the Swedish Government has shown no sense, no sensitivity and no sensibility.  Just nonsense.

Israel learned the hard way that listening to the international community can bring about devastating consequences.  In 2005, we unilaterally dismantled every settlement and removed every citizen from the Gaza Strip. Did this bring us any closer to peace?  Not at all. It paved the way for Iran to send its terrorist proxies to establish a terror stronghold on our doorstep.

I can assure you that we won’t make the same mistake again.  When it comes to our security, we cannot and will not rely on others – Israel must be able to defend itself by itself....

The State of Israel is the land of our forefathers – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  It is the land where Moses led the Jewish people, where David built his palace, where Solomon built the Jewish Temple, and where Isaiah saw a vision of eternal peace.

For thousands of years, Jews have lived continuously in the land of Israel.  We endured through the rise and fall of the Assyrian, Babylonian, Greek and Roman Empires.  And we endured through thousands of years of persecution, expulsions and crusades.  The bond between the Jewish people and the Jewish land is unbreakable.

Nothing can change one simple truth –Israel is our home and Jerusalem is our eternal capital.

At the same time, we recognize that Jerusalem has special meaning for other faiths.  Under Israeli sovereignty, all people – and I will repeat that, all people - regardless of religion and nationality can visit the city’s holy sites.  And we intend to keep it this way.  The only ones trying to change the status quo on the Temple Mount are Palestinian leaders. 

President Abbas is telling his people that Jews are contaminating the Temple Mount.  He has called for days of rage and urged Palestinians to prevent Jews from visiting the Temple Mount using (quote) “all means” necessary.  These words are as irresponsible as they are unacceptable.

You don’t have to be Catholic to visit the Vatican, you don’t have to be Jewish to visit the Western Wall, but some Palestinians would like to see the day when only Muslims can visit the Temple Mount.

You, the international community, are lending a hand to extremists and fanatics. You, who preach tolerance and religious freedom, should be ashamed.  Israel will never let this happen.  We will make sure that the holy places remain open to all people of all faiths for all time....

No one wants peace more than Israel.  No one needs to explain the importance of peace to parents who have sent their child to defend our homeland.  No one knows the stakes of success or failure better than we Israelis do. The people of Israel have shed too many tears and buried too many sons and daughters.

We are ready for peace, but we are not naïve. Israel’s security is paramount. Only a strong and secure Israel can achieve a comprehensive peace.

The past month should make it clear to anyone that Israel has immediate and pressing security needs. In recent weeks, Palestinian terrorists have shot and stabbed our citizens and twice driven their cars into crowds of pedestrians.  Just a few days ago, terrorists armed with axes and a gun savagely attacked Jewish worshipers during morning prayers.  We have reached the point when Israelis can’t even find sanctuary from terrorism in the sanctuary of a synagogue.

These attacks didn’t emerge out of a vacuum.  They are the results of years of indoctrination and incitement.  A Jewish proverb teaches: “The instruments of both death and life are in the power of the tongue.”

As a Jew and as an Israeli, I know with utter certainly that when our enemies say they want to attack us, they mean it.

Hamas’s genocidal charter calls for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews worldwide.  For years, Hamas and other terrorist groups have sent suicide bombers into our cities, launched rockets into our towns, and sent terrorists to kidnap and murder our citizens.

And what about the Palestinian Authority?  It is leading a systemic campaign of incitement.  In schools, children are being taught that ‘Palestine’ will stretch from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.  In mosques, religious leaders are spreading vicious libels accusing Jews of destroying Muslim holy sites.  In sports stadiums, teams are named after terrorists.  And in newspapers, cartoons urge Palestinians to commit terror attacks against Israelis.

Children in most of the world grow up watching cartoons of Mickey Mouse singing and dancing.  Palestinian children also grow up watching Mickey Mouse, but on Palestinians national television, a twisted figure dressed as Mickey Mouse dances in an explosive belt and chants “Death to America and death to the Jews.”

I challenge you to stand up here today and do something constructive for a change.  Publicly denounce the violence, denounce the incitement, and denounce the culture of hate.

Most people believe that at its core, the conflict is a battle between Jews and Arabs or Israelis and Palestinians.  They are wrong.  The battle that we are witnessing is a battle between those who sanctify life and those who celebrate death.
Following the savage attack in a Jerusalem synagogue, celebrations erupted in Palestinian towns and villages.  People were dancing in the street and distributing candy.  Young men posed with axes, loudspeakers at mosques called out congratulations, and the terrorists were hailed as “martyrs” and “heroes.”

This isn’t the first time that we saw the Palestinians celebrate the murder of innocent civilians.  We saw them rejoice after every terrorist attack on Israeli civilians and they even took to the streets to celebrate the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center right here in New York City.

Imagine the type of state this society would produce.  Does the Middle East really need another terror-ocracy?  Some members of the international community are aiding and abetting its creation....
As we came into the United Nations, we passed the flags of all 193 member States. If you take the time to count, you will discover that there are 15 flags with a crescent and 25 flags with a cross.  And then there is one flag with a Jewish Star of David.  Amidst all the nations of the world there is one state – just one small nation state for the Jewish people.

And for some people, that is one too many.

As I stand before you today I am reminded of all the years when Jewish People paid for the world’s ignorance and indifference in blood.  Those days are no more.

We will never apologize for being a free and independent people in our sovereign state. And we will never apologize for defending ourselves.
 
o the nations that continue to allow prejudice to prevail over truth, I say “J’accuse.”

I accuse you of hypocrisy. I accuse you of duplicity.

I accuse you of lending legitimacy to those who seek to destroy our State.

I accuse you of speaking about Israel’s right of self-defense in theory, but denying it in practice.

And I accuse you of demanding concessions from Israel, but asking nothing of the Palestinians.

In the face of these offenses, the verdict is clear.  You are not for peace and you are not for the Palestinian people.  You are simply against Israel.

Members of the international community have a choice to make.

You can recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, or permit the Palestinian leadership to deny our history without consequence.

You can publicly proclaim that the so-called “claim of return” is a non-starter, or you can allow this claim to remain the major obstacle to any peace agreement.

You can work to end Palestinian incitement, or stand by as hatred and extremism take root for generations to come.

You can prematurely recognize a Palestinian state, or you can encourage the Palestinian Authority to break its pact with Hamas and return to direct negotiations.

The choice is yours. You can continue to steer the Palestinians off course or pave the way to real and lasting peace."

(Transcript from here)

CANCELLED: “People, Book, Land – The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel”

This article, by Australian pro-Israel activist Shirlee Finn (who is no stranger to regular readers of my blog) is cross-posted, with her permission,  from News and Views from Jews Down Under here

 

Yet another organisation that is part of the ineffective, racist, antisemitic organisation known as the ‘United Nations’  has bowed down to Arab demands.

This time UNESCO – United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, it appears, is trying to hide the 3,500 or so history of Israel from the world, as if it never existed.

With no advance warning UNESCO pulled the Jewish exhibit two years in the planning and making, entitled “People, Book, Land – The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel,” after a last minute protest from the Arab League.

The exhibit, was created by the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) together with UNESCO and  was scheduled to open on January 20th, 2014, at UNESCO’s Paris headquarters. The invitations had been sent out and exhibition was already in place. The display was co-sponsored by Israel, Canada and Montenegro.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, told The Algemeiner that the move was an “absolute outrage.”

“The Arabs,” he said, “don’t want the world to know that the Jews have a 3,500-year relationship to the Land of Israel.”

Hier said that his organization, which is accredited by UNESCO as an NGO, worked in intimate co-operation with the international body on the project, which his center initiated after the Palestinian Authority was unilaterally accepted as a UNESCO member state in 2011.

“We made a clear attempt to work with them and the system, they can’t say they were blindsided, they commented on every sentence (in the exhibit’s materials) and still, in the end, the Arabs protested and they kicked us out.”

“It is not supposed to be a place of censorship,” Hier said, “It is not supposed to deny one nation the right to their history.”
“The Arab world doesn’t know that Isaiah didn’t live in Portugal, Jeremiah didn’t roam France and Ezekiel wasn’t from Germany.”

UNESCO informed the SWC of the change on January 14th in a letter to the Center’s Shimon Samuels, asserting the Arab League’s claim that going ahead with the show

“could create potential obstacles related to the peace process in the Middle East.”

 In a letter to Irina Bokova, president of UNESCO, President of the Arab group within UNESCO, Abdulla al Neaimi, from the United Arab Emirates, expressed “deep worry and great disapproval” over the program showing the age-old connection between Israel and the Jewish people.

“The subject of this exhibition is highly political though the appearance of the title seems to be  trivial. Most serious is the defense of this theme which is one of the reasons used by the opponents of peace within Israel,”

the Arab League wrote.

“The publicity that will accompany… the exhibit can only cause damage to the peace negotiations presently occurring, and the constant effort of Secretary of State John Kerry, and the neutrality and objectivity of UNESCO.”

“For all these reasons, for the major worry not to damage UNESCO in its… mission of support for peace, the Arab group within UNESCO is asking you to make the decision to cancel this exhibition,” Al Neaimi concluded.

 Why isn’t it surprising that the Arab League is opposed to anything that suggests that Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East has any legitimacy. However,  the surprising part is that prior to the Arab League’s objection, the State Department withdrew the US as a sponsor of the exhibition, using language almost identical to that of the Arab League! Here is the US position:

“At this sensitive juncture in the ongoing Middle East peace process, and after thoughtful consideration with review at the highest levels, we have made the decision that the United States will not be able to co-sponsor the current exhibit during its display at UNESCO headquarters,”

wrote Kelly O. Siekman, Director at the Office of UNESCO Affairs of the State Department, in an email seen by The Algemeiner.

Hillel Neuer, the Executive Director from the tireless organisation UN Watch writes:

Days before the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization was to launch a landmark exhibit at its Paris headquarters this Monday on “The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel,” curated together with the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the world body reneged.

The surprise here isn’t that UNESCO chief Irina Bokova surrendered to the Arab League’s protest,
rudely cancelling an event for which invitations were already sent out, and which involved painstaking work over two years by renowned Hebrew University scholar Robert Wistrich.
                                                                                 
 The surprise is the fact that Bokova ever gave her approval in the first place; and that it took this long for the Arab states to wake up, given that the Wiesenthal Center for over two years had been loud and clear that the exhibit was designed to counteract

“malicious lies being spread, particularly in the Arab world,” and would be shown
“not in a synagogue or Jewish community center, but rather at UNESCO headquarters in Paris and the United Nations where this historic truth [the Jewish connection to Israel] is too often buried under an avalanche of lies.”

UNESCO  was the first UN body, in November 2011, to deem “Palestine” a state — surrender to Arab pressure on this matter was inevitable.

Despite the repeated claims of the Obama Administration that UNESCO is God’s gift to the Jews, and to humanity, the opposite is true: it is arguably the most anti-Jewish body in the entire United Nations.

If the notorious UN Human Rights Council dedicates a full 50 percent of its resolutions to demonizing the Jewish state, at UNESCO the numbers are 100 percent.
That’s right: all of UNESCO’s condemnatory resolutions are against Israel.

• In 2009, the UNESCO Executive Board adopted eight resolutions against the Jewish state at its 181st session and 182nd session, and then another two resolutions against Israel at the 35th session of the General Conference.
• In 2010, the UNESCO Executive Board adopted 10 decisions against Israel at its 184th session and 185th session.
• In 2011, the UNESCO Executive Board again adopted 10 decisions against Israel at its 186th session and 187th session, and another two resolutions against Israel at the 36th session of the General Conference.

Bokova justified her cancellation of Monday’s Jewish exhibit by invoking UNESCO’s alleged concern not to endanger the fragile Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. Yet somehow this noble principle of caution for peace never stopped UNESCO from excoriating Israel incessantly.

Finally, consider the tragedy: founded after World War II with the express purpose of combating the doctrine of the inequality of men and races, UNESCO today has sadly become a serial perpetrator of inequality.

In conclusion:  In its formal response to UNESCO’s Bokova after the suspension of the program, the SWC said,

“we insist that you live up to your responsibilities and commitments as the co-organizer of this exhibition by overturning this naked political move that has no place in an institution whose mandate is defined by education, science, and culture — not politics.”
“Let’s be clear, the Arab Group’s protest is not over any particular content in the exhibition, but rather the very idea of it – that the Jewish people did not come to the Holy Land only after the Nazi Holocaust, but trace their historical and cultural roots in that land for three and a half millennia,” SWC wrote. “If anything will derail hopes for peace and reconciliation among the people of the Middle East, it will be by surrendering to the forces of extremism and torpedoing the opening of this exhibition — jointly vetted and co-organized by UNESCO and the Simon Wiesenthal Center.”
“Madame Director General, we hope you have the courage to do the right thing and we are still looking forward to cutting the ribbon on the exhibition with you next Monday night, January 20, at UNESCO headquarters,” SWC concluded.

In a letter seen by The Algemeiner written in response to the decision, Nimrod Barkan, Ambassador of Israel to International Organizations, recounted the degree to which the SWC co-operated with UNESCO on the project over two years, and blasted the decision.

“This unjust and outrageously last moment decision is biased and discriminative towards Israel. In the past UNESCO hosted numerous events and exhibitions accentuating the relations between Muslim and Christian religions with the Holy Land, and of course it holds and annual ‘Palestine Day,’” he wrote.

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/simonwiesenthalcenter?ref=ts
Twitter: https://twitter.com/simonwiesenthal
Web site: http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=6212365#.UtnBhbR9Kcw

David Singer On Abbas, Attitude, & Annexation

The latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer is entitled "Palestine: Abbas, Attitude and Annexation".

Writes David Singer:

'Annexation of large areas of the West Bank by Israel has now become a distinct possibility with the unilateral decision this week to scrap any trace of the existence of the Palestinian Authority by its President Mahmoud Abbas.

In a "presidential decree" Abbas has called for all official documents – including passports, drivers' licenses, postage stamps and car number plates – to now bear the name 'State of Palestine', instead of the generally used 'Palestinian National Authority'.

Abbas has also ordered foreign ministries and embassies around the world to start using the title.

Abbas's decree comes just a few days after he had reportedly told an Israeli politician that if there was no progress in the peace talks:

“I will take the phone and call Netanyahu and tell him: ‘Sit in the chair instead of me; take the keys and you will be responsible for the Palestinian Authority."

His remark prompted this angry response from senior Hamas official Abu Marzouk, in a posting on Facebook: 

“Why does Abbas want to hand the keys over to Netanyahu? Why not hand it over to Hamas?” 

Abu Marzouk – who turned 62 on 9 January and is slated to replace Khaled Mashaal as head of Hamas – said it would have been:

 “better and more effective had Abbas threatened to hand the West Bank to Hamas.”

In a fearless riposte, Jamal Muheisen, a member of the Fatah Central Council, said the Palestinians should first hold presidential and legislative elections to choose their leaders

“Whoever wins in the elections will be handed the keys of the entire Palestinian Authority, be it Hamas or Fatah or any other Palestinian faction”

Now it seems the keys to control of the entire Palestinian Authority have been thrown down the drain by its own president just days later – as have any hopes of negotiating a two-state solution as prescribed by the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap.

This solution has simply vanished into thin air after being flavour of the month for the last twenty years – with one of the two principal negotiating parties having gone missing in action.

We are now being subjected to the following delusional garbage being spouted on Al-Jazzera on 8 January by the now defunct chief negotiator of the now defunct Palestinian Authority – Saeb Erekat: 

"Palestine is a country under occupation. What were Norway, Finland, Holland, France, Korea, Philippines between 1939 and 1945? – nation states under occupation. Today, the state of Palestine is officially a state under occupation. It has 192 member countries that recognise this and a nation state, Israel, which is the occupying power; these are the new realities."

The comparison is totally fictitious and Erekat's arrogance is unbounded.

Comparing States that had existed for centuries to a State that has never existed in recorded history whilst claiming statehood in an area it has never controlled is mind blowing.

Certainly 192 "member countries" – presumably in the United Nations – do not recognise Erekat's outrageous statement.

Purporting to draw many of these countries into what is increasingly appearing to be a continuation of the Fatah-Hamas rivalry for control of the hearts and minds of the long suffering Palestinian Arabs is political madness.

Certainly 50 of those countries did nothing of the sort – 9 rejecting and 41 abstaining from supporting the General Assembly resolution on 29 November last granting Palestine the status of a non-member observer State at its meetings.

Abbas and Erekat should have heeded the explanations given by Singapore and Germany for abstaining - before embarking on their new flight into unreality

A summary of these two countries views was issued in a release from the United Nations Department of  Public Information News and Media Division; Germany's vote against the Resolution was summarised as follows:

"The delegate of Germany said his nation firmed believed in “two States for two peoples” and shared the goal of a Palestinian State.  However, such status must be achieved only through direct negotiations.  There was doubt that today’s action would be helpful for the peace process at this point in time.  “It might lead to further hardening of positions instead of improving chances of a two-State solution through direct negotiations,” he said.  He explicitly welcomed that today’s resolution called for a two-State solution and, hence, recognized the right of Israel to exist in peace.  However, Israel’s legitimate security concern had to be addressed in a credible manner."

To say Germany was spot on in its predictions would be an understatement.

Singapore was even more circumspect in its sober assessment made against the baying cries from those 138 states who could not see the wood for the trees.

"The representative of Singapore said that his delegation supported the right of the Palestinian people to a homeland and had, in the past, supported relevant Assembly resolutions.  However, his country had abstained from today’s vote because only a negotiated settlement, consistent with Security Council resolution 242 (1967), could provide the basis for a viable, long-term solution.  Both sides had legitimate rights and shared responsibilities and must be prepared to make compromises to achieve the larger good of a lasting peace.  Because of those interlinked rights and responsibilities, no unilateral move could result in a just and durable outcome."

The preparadness of especially the democratic states to vote for the General Assembly Resolution on 29 November and abandon Security Council Resolution 242 – the only internationally accepted United Nations resolution binding both Jews and Arabs to ending their conflict – was shameful.

Those democracies must now rue the day that their votes could be interpreted as giving aid and comfort to the state of utter confusion that now exists following Abbas's presidential decree and Erekat's involvement of them in his latest statement.

Israel will hold elections on 22 January.

A new political party, Bayit Hayehudi – the Jewish homeland party – could possibly end up exercising a controlling vote in the next Parliament.

Its leader Naftali Bennett has already made clear that he will be calling for Israel to annex at least 60 per cent of the West Bank – adding in an interview in Haaretz on 28 December:

"And in the end, Jordan will be Palestine. There is no chance that, between the river and the sea, a Palestinian state will arise. The two-state solution is dead. There is no need to bury the two-state solution because it is already buried."

Abbas has helped advance this possible outcome because of his inane presidential decree consigning the Palestinian Authority to the dustbin of history.

Ave atque vale, Palestinian Authority.

Others less charitable might say – "good riddance".

Palestine: A Score Of Foreign Ministers With Egg On Their Faces?

The Jerusalem Post reported yesterday:

"A new poll shows growing support for the Islamist Hamas movement in both the West Bank and Gaza. If the elections were held today, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh would beat Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.The poll, by veteran pollster Khalil Shikaki of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, found that 48 percent of the electorate in both the West Bank and Gaza would vote for Haniyeh, and 45 percent for Abbas. Just three months ago, a similar poll predicted a victory for Abbas, with 51 percent support over Haniyeh’s 40 percent. The poll showed Haniyeh as the most popular he has been since 2008."

 And here's a video of the newly-formed so-called National Unity Brigade made up of youths from various Palestinian factions who aim at a third intifada; read all about it here

Meanwhile Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer, in his most recent article ("Palestine: Democracies in Diplomatic Disarray"), written at the end of last week, observes:

'It has only taken 10 days for 22 of the top 25 leading democratic nations listed in the Democracy Index 2011 to fall into abject diplomatic disarray.

Their acute discomfort follows the rush by 17 of them to vote to admit Palestine as a non-observer state at the UN General Assembly on November 29 – whilst the other five abstained.

Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, Switzerland, Finland, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Ireland, Austria, Germany, Malta, United Kingdom, Costa Rica, Japan, South Korea, Belgium, Mauritius and Spain – should have all joined the remaining three – Canada, United States and the Czech Republic – who cast a "NO" vote.

Instead they swallowed the following assuring statement by PLO Chairman and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas prior to the vote:

"We did not come here seeking to delegitimize a State established years ago, and that is Israel; rather we came to affirm the legitimacy of the State that must now achieve its independence, and that is Palestine."

It mattered not to their democratic sensitivities that President Abbas was a lapsed president whose term of office had expired in January 2009 – a situation that would never be tolerated in their countries.

It mattered even less that Abbas was purporting to speak on behalf of a territorial entity he did not control – even as a tyrannical despot.

It was of no consequence that Abbas claimed to represent a population that was hopelessly split in its allegiances between the PLO and its arch rival Hamas.

It was irrelevant that no elections had been held for the last six years to give the people any say on which one of these protagonists – or anyone else who might want to throw his hat into the ring – should represent them.

Foolishly they gave Abbas their vote, supporting

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

Their votes were cast in the full knowledge that they were adding their voices to those who saw nothing dishonourable in jettisoning the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap to the political scrap heap by endorsing the PLO’s unilateral approach to the United Nations in breach of those internationally negotiated agreements.

These democracies were happy to undermine any need for further negotiations to determine the future sovereignty of the territory in dispute between Israel and the Palestinian Authority – effectively limiting any negotiations to when and on what terms 600000 Jews would leave their homes in which they had lived for the last 40 years.

Indignation and shock horror greeted the news that Israel should have the temerity – just three days after their vote – to announce its intention to revive its stalled plans to build 3000 housing units in part of the disputed territory bearing the amorphous title E1 – which these democracies had just determined should be vested in the Palestinian Authority.

This was the catalyst for all diplomatic hell to burst forth.

These democracies did what all good democracies do to show their displeasure at those who treat their decisions with contempt.

Britain, Spain, Sweden and Denmark called in Israel’s Ambassadors and gave them a diplomatic dressing down.

The British Foreign Office issued a statement that the E1 project was a  serious violation that threatened the two-state solution.

Speaking from Papua New Guinea, Australia’s Foreign Minister Senator Carr said the Australian Government had made clear its call to all sides not to exploit or overreact to the vote and called in Israel’s Ambassador to deliver the message.

Senator Carr had reportedly railroaded the wishes of Australia’s Prime Minister who had wanted to cast a "No" vote – forcing its replacement with an abstention after threatening the Cabinet might  demand  a "Yes" vote if his recommendation was not accepted.

"I am extremely disappointed with these reported Israeli decisions.

Australia has long opposed all settlement activity. Such activity threatens the viability of a two-state solution without which there will never be security in Israel. Israel’s reported decision to unfreeze planning of the area known as E1 is especially counter-productive. Australia has also conveyed these concerns to the Israeli authorities in Jerusalem. The Australian Government urges both sides to return urgently to the negotiation table in good faith"

Good faith? Surely the prospect of any such negotiations had already gone out the window when most of  the world’s 104 democracies had voted as they did.

Three days later these democracies received their come uppance when Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal made a triumphant first visit to Gaza.

Addressing a crowd estimated at hundreds of thousands who braved the rain to hear him – Meshaal declared:

"We will never recognize Israel’s occupation of legitimate Palestinian lands, and we will not recognize Israel… Palestine is our land from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan, and we will never give away an inch of it… As long as Palestine is ours and Palestine is the land of Arabism and Islam, we can never recognise the legitimacy of Israel’s occupation of it ....There is no legitimacy for occupation. Hence, there is no legitimacy for Israel, however long time lasts."

The centrepiece of the rally was a huge replica of a type of rocket terrorists from Gaza fired indiscriminately into Israel’s civilian population reaching as far as  Jerusalem and Tel Aviv just a few weeks before the General Assembly vote.

The crowd responded enthusiastically:

“We swear by the name of almighty God and his great Prophet to renew our pledge of allegiance and loyalty to Hamas.”

Have any Palestinian diplomats been called into any foreign capitals and given a dressing down? There are plenty of them working in democratic states representing this Mickey Mouse United Nations “state”.

Has there been any revulsion expressed at the statements made during this rally or any indication that the the flow of billions of dollars into Gaza to assist its baying-for -blood population will cease?

Has Mahmoud Abbas been asked to express his disgust at the rejection by Meshall of the two-state solution laid out by Abbas at the General Assembly just eight days earlier?

These 22 democracies and the other democracies who joined them in voting as they did have done untold harm to resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict. Their subsequent inability to take concerted action following Meshaal’s visit to Gaza is appalling.

And that is just 10 days into the life of this infamous Resolution.

Foreign Minister Carr and the other 21 foreign ministers – where are you hiding, when will you wake up and wipe the egg off your collective faces?'

"The Jew-hating Genie Has Been Spectacularly Unleashed Onto The World Stage Once Again"

Writing from Jerusalem about the Netanyahu government's defiant settlements policy, Jewish Chronicle editor Stephen Pollard notes the "white-hot fury"  there regarding the UN General Assembly  vote to give the Palestinians "non-observer state" status and potential access to the International Criminal Court:

"The  feeling in Jerusalem is that, no matter what agreements are signed between Israel and the Palestinians, the international community refuses to acknowledge Palestinian infractions.

Instead, the argument goes, no sooner has Israel thwarted attempts to perpetrate a third intifada mounted by the Palestinians, than the United Nations rewards the Palestinian president ....

[E]ven those in Israel who are unhappy about their government's settlement policy feel that the entire nation is being punished by the international community — over breaches of agreements perpetrated by the Palestinians..."

That feeling of betrayal is also seen in the latest article, entitled  "Palestine – Hands Up Those Who Hate Jews," by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.


He writes:

'The Jew-hating genie has been spectacularly unleashed onto the world stage once again following the decision by 138 of the 193 member states of the United Nations General Assembly to accord non-member observer State status to the non-existent state of Palestine.

That vote also ominously endorsed another paragraph contained in the Resolution reaffirming

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

Such majority consensus supporting the view that all of this territory – not just some part of it  - should comprise the State of Palestine – is destined to cause untold suffering among Jews, Arabs and other states caught up in the ensuing turmoil and conflict that is set to follow the passing of this insidious resolution - unless it is quickly reversed.

There are several reasons to justify this gloomy prediction.

First: these 138 States were effectively signing the eviction notices for 600,000 Jews who have been legally living in these areas for up to 40 years pursuant to the rights conferred on the Jewish People under Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

Jews had been living in these same areas for many decades and in some cases centuries until they were driven out by six invading Arab armies in 1948.

Jews  had returned there to settle after the Six Day War in 1967 – ending 19 years of uninterrupted occupation by Jordan and Egypt.

8000 Jews moved or were forcibly removed from Gaza in 2005 in a fruitless effort to advance the peace process.

Now all Jews in these territories will once again have to voluntarily pack up and get out or be forcibly removed by the Government of Palestine.

Palestinian President and PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has made this Judenrein (Jew-free) objective  and its successful implementation very clear – telling reporters in Ramallah on 25 December 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,”

Supporting the current Resolution without seeking a specific retraction has effectively given Abbas the green light to pursue his racist policy.

Secondly: there is no mention in the Resolution of the recognition of the right of the Jewish people to self-determination and independence in their own State - and for good reason – since President Abbas is not prepared to countenance a Jewish State alongside the State of Palestine.
He has made this position manifestly clear on many occasions.

On 1 December 2007 he declared:

 "Historically there are two states, Israel and Palestine. Israel is inhabited by Jews and others. We are willing to recognize that and nothing else."

His view was supported by his prime minister, Salam Fayad, who said in an interview at the time with Al-Arabiya TV, that:

 "Israel can call itself whatever it wants, but the Palestinians will not recognize it as a Jewish state."

On 28 August 2011 during a speech to Islamic clerics in Ramallah Abbas defiantly stated:

 "The international community cannot force us to recognize the nature of the Israeli state. Do not force us to recognize a Jewish state. We will not accept it."

His statement provoked Israel's Foreign Minister Lieberman to declare:

 "Countries around the world must make it clear to Abbas that the only way the Palestinians will be able to have a state is by stopping their attempt to destroy the only Jewish state in the world,"

Those countries around the world had their opportunity force Abbas to recognise  the Jewish State before casting their votes – yet failed to do so.

Thirdly: this infamous Resolution negates the decision of the very same General Assembly in 1947 recommending the creation of one Arab State and one Jewish State in Palestine.

Indeed the refusal to recognize Israel as the Jewish State has been one of the principal stumbling blocks to the successful conclusion of negotiations under the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap.

The majority vote has – deliberately or unwittingly  –given oxygen to those who continue to deny the right of the Jews to have their own State – 65 years after the United Nations had first recommended it.

Fourthly: this Resolution makes a mockery of the United Nations Charter which aims:

 "To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;"

How any member State can believe these objectives can be advanced by supporting a resolution that will result in Jews being denied any right to live in the State of Palestine as equal citizens in that State and the Jewish People being denied the right to independence and self-determination in their own State alongside the State of Palestine is totally beyond comprehension.

The passing of this Resolution is bound to set in train acts of aggression and breaches of the peace as the State of Palestine and its supporters - armed with the text of this Resolution - flex their collective muscles to undo decisions and actions undertaken pursuant to:

    ·    the San Remo Conference and the Treaty of Sevres in 1920,
    ·    the Mandate for Palestine in 1922,
    ·    The granting of independence to Transjordan by Great Britain in 1946
    ·    Article 80 of the United Nations Charter
    ·    The United Nations decision to partition Palestine in 1947
    ·    Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338
    ·    The Oslo Accords1993
    ·    The Bush Road Map 2004

Abbas says he now wants to resume negotiations with Israel after his unilateral and ill-advised foray into the United Nations.

What is there to negotiate about but the terms on which those 600,000 Jews must leave the State of Palestine and their possible relocation to a State where the Jewish people has no right to independence and self determination.

That is the political and diplomatic nightmare that 138 countries have foisted on the world.

Hopefully those 55 nations that failed to swallow this poisoned pill will take steps to have the General Assembly negate this Resolution - as happened when a Resolution equating Zionism with Racism was rescinded.

The sooner this latest Resolution endorsing policies of hatred against Jews is reversed – the better.'

[Emphasis added]

"If You Just Keep The Pressure On, The United States Will Deliver Israel For You" (video)

That in effect characterises, argues America's former ambassador to the UN John Bolton, the message that the Obama administration's policy, expressed at the start of this video by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, sends to the Palestinian Authority and especially to Hamas.  And, he adds, the Obama-Clinton advice to Israel "Just appease the Palestinian Authority a little bit more and everything will be fine" is "a very dangerous game"...

Out With The Old, In With The New?

Before:

And afterwards:

Read more here

Incidentally, BBCWatch has a fine post today showing how the Biased Broadcasting Corporation projects its view of how the solution to the Middle East conflict should be onto its reportage.

On the subject of Israel's relations with the media, Trevor Asserson has an excellent article here

A Beautiful Voice Against A Palestinian State (video)

Just as I confess to being uneasy about the Netanyahu government's decision to permit 3000 new homes on disputed territory, I confess I'm by no means sure that the song (written by her father) that Israeli singer Yedida Freilich performs feelingly is justified in all it alleges, but here it is (more information here):

If the solution to the conflict lies in making peace with "moderate Palestinians,"  Mr Abbas's man in Australia, Mr Izzat Abdulhadi (shown below speaking at the University of Canberra in August) would appear to fit the bill.  I wish he hadn't produced images of the Yishuv newspaper the Palestine Post to further his claim of Palestine's former existence though, and I wish he hadn't produced that well-known set of four (in part duplicitous) maps ...

Hat tip for map link: reader deegee

"A Bad Day For Peace & A Bad Day For Reconciliation": Mark Regev On The UN Palestine Vote (video)

Here's Mark Regev telling AlJazeera's domineering anchorwoman that the UN's upgrading of Palestine to "non-member observer state" status doesn't solve any of "the core issues" and won't bring peace any closer.

"A Brilliant Move Or A Tactical Disaster?": David Singer On The Legacy Of Israel's Unilateral Disengagement From Gaza

Coming in the immediate wake of Operation Pillar of Cloud [aka Pillar of Defence], this is the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.  It's entitled "Palestine:  Sharon's Gaza Gambit - Brilliant Move or Tactical Disaster?"

Writes David Singer:

'"Gambit - an act that is calculated to gain an advantage, especially at the outset of a situation" -  Oxford Dictionary

The end of the eight day bombardment of Israel's civilian population by hundreds of rockets indiscriminately fired from the Gaza Strip has caused many respected commentators such as Caroline Glick to roundly criticise former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon  for having unilaterally disengaged from the Gaza Strip in 2005 by withdrawing its army and 8000 Israeli citizens,  many of whom had lived there for almost 40 years.

Writing in the Jerusalem Post on 22 November Ms Glick stated:

"As for that withdrawal from Gaza, just like the phony peace process with the PLO and the strategically demented withdrawal from south Lebanon, the withdrawal from Gaza was a self-evidently insane policy. It was obvious that it would lead to the strengthening of Palestinian terrorist groups and so put Israel’s population centers in striking range of their missiles...

... To force this mad initiative through, Sharon had to explicitly disavow the platform he was elected to implement. Sharon won the 2003 elections by pledging never to surrender Gaza.

After he betrayed his voters, Sharon demonized and, when possible, fired everyone in positions of power and influence who opposed him.

He called a referendum of Likud members to vote on his plan, and when his opponents won the vote overwhelmingly, he ignored it. He fired Lt.-Gen. Moshe Ya’alon, then IDF chief of General Staff. He fired his cabinet ministers. He castigated as “rebels” his party members who opposed his plan."

Was Sharon's decision indeed an "insane policy" or rather a brilliant gambit by Sharon with Israel's long term national interests uppermost in Sharon's mind?

Israel has certainly paid an enormous price in deaths, injuries and ongoing trauma  resulting from more than 8000 rockets being indiscriminately lobbed from Gaza into a target area covering one million of  Israel's civilian population since Sharon's fateful decision eight years ago. The civilian population of Gaza has also suffered as Israel has responded to protect its civilian population against such attacks.

A bewildering number of terrorist groups has since sprung up in Gaza like mushrooms – all hell-bent on indiscriminately terrorising Israeli Jews and Arabs as well as foreign workers in pursuit of their heinous objective of wiping the Jewish State off the map.

The Hamas Government has done nothing to prevent such rocket attacks against the civilian population of Israel – initiated in many instances from schools,mosques, homes and hospitals located within Gaza's civilian community – all of which actions constitute war crimes under international law.

However, Caroline Glick and those other commentators joining her on the Sharon blame game bandwagon all fail to acknowledge the written commitment Sharon obtained from American President George W Bush on 14 April 2004 to enable such Israeli evacuation from Gaza to occur.

President Bush was well aware of the risks Israel's unilateral disengagement would involve – and yet at the same time he recognized the opportunity such disengagement would offer to progress his Roadmap when he told Prime Minister Sharon:

"We welcome the disengagement plan you have prepared, under which Israel would withdraw certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and withdraw certain military installations and settlements in the West Bank.

These steps described in the plan will mark real progress toward realizing my June 24, 2002 vision, and make a real contribution toward peace. ...The United States appreciates the risks such an undertaking represents. I therefore want to reassure you on several points."

President Bush’s letter then clearly – and unambiguously – pledged American support for the following positions:

1.    The borders of the new Arab State would not encompass the entire West Bank

2.    Jewish towns and villages in the West Bank would be incorporated into the borders of Israel in the light of new realities on the ground including existing major Israeli population centres.

3.    The Palestinian refugees would have to be resettled in the new Palestinian State rather than in Israel

4.    Israel’s security and well being as a Jewish State would be a strong American commitment

5.    The United States would do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any plan other than the Roadmap

6.    As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338.

The Bush letter was overwhelmingly endorsed by the United States House of Representatives and Senate on 23 June 2004 when the following Resolution was passed by a vote of 407:9:

"Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress--

(1) strongly endorses the principles articulated by President Bush in his letter datedApril 14, 2004, to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon which will strengthen the security and well-being of the State of Israel; and

(2) supports continuing efforts with others in the international community to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat to the security of Israel."

The Bush commitment now takes on added importance as the PLO seeks to commit political suicide by embarking on its third unilateral action outside of and in breach of the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap within the past thirteen months – this time to secure recognition of the State of Palestine as a non-member observer state at the United Nations.

It seems to matter little – as was also evidenced at UNESCO – that there is no Palestinian entity meeting the requirements prescribed by international law for statehood - specifically the Montevideo Convention 1933. 

The fictitious State of Palestine will be admitted as an observer non-member State at the UN - notwithstanding that such a decision can lead to withdrawal of US financial contributions as happened at UNESCO and risk Israel taking unilateral action of its own in the face of the PLO repudiation of the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap

President Obama has yet to definitively declare that he remains bound by President Bush's 2004 commitments to Israel.

Congress needs to demand that President Obama honour America's above assurances. Disavowing the commitments of one president and Congress by another president and Congress would be the height of diplomatic treachery.

Honouring the Bush commitments is crucial in ensuring that the sacrifices made by Israel's population following Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaza in the pursuit of peace have not been in vain.

President Obama and the Congress hold the keys to determining whether Sharon's decision to disengage from Gaza was a indeed a brilliant move or a tactical disaster.'

Aussie Foreign Minister Carr Cools Prime Minister Gillard's Ardour For Israel

Here's Senator Bob Carr talking before the ceasefire was confirmed about Operation Pillar of Cloud [Defence] and also about the demos against the Israeli-owned Max Brenner outlets that occur from time to time in Australia.

But as today's Australian newspaper reports, Carr, riding roughshod over the stance of prime minister Julia Gillard, has argued strenuously for Australia to offer no opposition to the Palestinian Authority's bid later this week for observer status at the United Nations.

Some who agree with him point to demographic changes in certain constituencies, which have led politicians representing them to pay heed to Muslim opinion on the issue.  Accordingly, Australia, rather than vote against the bid along with the United States and Israel, will abstain:

'.... Several ministers and backbenchers had been warning Gillard for weeks that the position on the UN vote, slated for Friday, needed to be finalised in order to instruct the ambassador to the UN, Gary Quinlan, on what to do.

They were seized by the dramatic change in the caucus on the Israel-Palestine issue, with several factors that have been slowly building within Labor -- Israel's settlement policy, increasing violence by settlers against Palestinians and a right-wing Israeli prime minister who backed Mitt Romney over Barack Obama.

There is concern both Israel and the Palestinian Authority are stalling on a two-state solution and that the outcome of the UN vote could positively energise those discussions.

And, critically, there is the growing Muslim and Christian make-up of several key western Sydney Labor seats, which have exposed MPs to different points of view on the Middle East.

Some sections of the party suggest Victorian Labor is too close to the Israel lobby and does not fully understand the underlying changes in Sydney's outer suburbs.

However, one Victorian minister said: "How are we going to solve Labor's challenges in western Sydney by the way we vote at the UN?"

Before the cabinet meeting late on Monday, Gillard met with senior ministers for two hours to discuss the UN vote. Carr sketched out the foreign policy argument for not opposing the Palestinian motion that he believed was in Australia's interests.

Environment Minister Tony Burke, holding a seat in southwest Sydney, explained the shift in the community he had been feeling on this issue for a long time...

Before this meeting, Gillard made an extraordinary request to the NSW Right faction convenor and chief government whip, Joel Fitzgibbon. She wanted him to bind the Right behind her position. Fitzgibbon refused.Meanwhile, former prime minister Bob Hawke, a long-time ardent supporter of Israel, was arguing behind the scenes for Australia not to oppose the motion on Palestine. So had his foreign minister, Gareth Evans, who warned Labor MPs and senators not to be "on the wrong side of history"....'

Reacting to the abstention decision, the shadow Foreign Minister, Senator Julie Bishop, said:

"The Coalition is disappointed that the Government has decided to abstain from voting at the United Nations on the matter of Palestinian Observer Status.

The Coalition believes Australia should vote against this bid as we do not believe that this is the path to peace and reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples.

Our concern is that the drive for greater recognition at the United Nations is an attempt by Palestinian leaders to enable them to bring action against Israel through the international courts.

It also risks conferring increased international status on the militant group Hamas which governs Gaza.

This action is likely to escalate and prolong the conflict, rather than lead to a resolution of disputes.

The path to peace is for the Palestinian leadership to officially recognise the right of Israel to exist and to halt the firing of rockets and mortars as part of a campaign by militants to terrorise and kill Israeli civilians.Australia has long supported the two-state solution and the right of the Israeli and Palestinian peoples to live peacefully and in safety within internationally recognised borders. We urge both sides to resume negotiations towards a lasting peace in the region."

Further details on this issue are available here 

Hat tip to reader Shirlee for this link to an ABC feature about young Aussie Jews proudly preparing to make aliyah.