David Singer: Trump’s Thinking Hints at One-State Solution to the Jewish-Arab Conflict

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

He writes:

United States Secretary of Defense James Mattis remarkably failed to mention “the two-state solution”, or even the “Palestinian-Israeli conflict” in his keynote address,“US Policy in a Changing Middle East”–  delivered at the International Institute for Strategic Affairs 14^thRegional Security Summit in Manama, Bahrein held between 26-28 October.

Mattis’ pointed omissions can only fuel speculation that a “one-state solution”– possibly involving the creation of a Jordan enclave in the West Bank – could now be uppermost in President Trump’s thinking.

Billed as “The Middle East’s premier security summit” – the attendees included some of the most powerful policymakers from the Middle East and beyond to address the region’s most pressing governance challenges.

Jordan’s King Abdullah in the opening address at the Summit – delivered by his Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Ayman Safadi – had warned:

“There have been many attempts to delay and subvert the hope the two-state solution offers. Today, these negative efforts include the fallacy of a single, bi-national state. Any such solution, based on unilateral acts and unequal rights, would be a moral disaster and a recipe for continued conflict.”

Safadi reinforced Abdullah’s message in his own speech the following day:

“As His Majesty said yesterday, the fallacy of one-state solution is something that we all need to keep our eyes wide open as it is being put on the table. If there is no two-state solution then a one-state solution, then Israel is going to have to do determine whether it is going to be apartheid South Africa or a democratic Israel where Palestinians within Israel are going to have to exercise their political rights. So, this is the kind of situation that we are looking at.”

The King and his Foreign Minister’s gloomy prognostications would disappear in their entirety if that “one-state solution” did not comprise Israel and the entire West Bank – but comprised Jordan united with a Jordan enclave in part of the West Bank.
A Jordan enclave would:

• Contain possibly 95% of the existing West Bank Arab population – once again being reunified in a single territorial entity with Jordan as existed between 1950 and 1967
• Enable Jordanian citizenship to be restored to the enclave’s population – as previously existed between 1950 and 1988.
• Remove apartheid fears – since the Jordan/enclave  population would be entirely Arab with family ties extending over the two banks of the Jordan River
• Be as democratic or undemocratic as the re-united populations wished – as occurred between 1950 and 1988
• Complete the original two-state solution first contemplated by the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine:
• an Arab State – Jordan – sovereign in about 80% of the territory of the Mandate -and
• a Jewish State – Israel – sovereign in about the remaining 20% of the Mandate

Interestingly, Safadi – in answering a question on resolving the seven-year-old Syrian conflict – remarked:

“I think if we all look in the mirror and ask ourselves the question, have we been following the right approach to solving the problem, I think facts on the ground will tell us no. We need not double down on positions that have gotten us where we are now. We need to be more realistic. We need to follow new approaches that will bring about a political solution to that crisis.”

The single bi-national state is neither a fallacy nor a disaster – if both national entities are Arab.

A Jordan enclave in the West Bank – negotiated between Israel and Jordan under President Trump’s auspices – could indeed prove to be the new approach and realistic political solution to ending the 100-year-old 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)

Israel-Haters March in Sydney (video)

Shouting familiar chants, the Left-Islamist alliance demonstrating on Sunday against any attempt by the Australian government to move the country's embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to, er, 'Al Quds'.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0D4jDTKaxM

(Video by Peter Boyle for Green Left TV)

"Truly Shameful": Stench from the pits

For the victims see here

The loathsome Jenny Tonge has since attempted to tone down her remarks, made in reaction to the Pittsburgh synagogue tragedy, but her stench remains:

Meanwhile:

And

If you haven't yet read the article, by Colin Appleby, recommended by J.K. Rowling, please do so! 

'I’ve fallen out of love with Labour.

I’ve been called a Zionazi.

I’ve been asked if I was a Zionist.

I’ve been called a Tory Jew.

I’ve been told I’m good with money.

I’ve been told that I’m “obviously” rich.

I’ve been accused of being more loyal to Israel than the U.K.

I’ve been called a child killer.

I’ve been barred from attending a JVL [Jewish Voice for Labour] meeting.

I’ve been told “to shut the fuck up Jew”.

I’ve been screamed at in the street because I wanted JLM [Jewish Labour Movement] to address a local party meeting.

I’ve been told I only ever care about Jewish stuff.

I’ve been called Zio scum.

I’ve been told I’m worthless.

I’ve been told I’m a disgrace.

I’ve been told Hitler was right.

I’ve been told “it’s a pity all of your lot weren’t gassed”.

I’ve been spat at.

I’ve been threatened with physical violence.

I’ve reported every single incident.

I’ve been told it’s all lies.

I’ve been told I’m part of a conspiracy to get Corbyn.

I’ve been told I don’t belong in Labour.

They’re right about that, I’m a Jew and I don’t belong in Labour. I’m done. I resign my membership.'

Shaming The "Apartheid" Smear

Outside the Curzon Cinema in London's Soho on Friday night, a little squad of Israel-haters from the Islamic group Inminds protests the cinema's hosting of an Israeli film show held under the auspices of  the Israeli Embassy.  

There's no Sandra Watfa this time to lead the demonisation of the little Jewish State; instead, there's some chap with a suspicion of a Scottish accent.

Nor are there any flag-waving Zionist activists on hand, although things suddenly get noisy when raucous chants of "Free Palestine!" are met by booming cries of "Shame on you!" from a pro-Israel couple who proceed (with what aim in view is unclear) to summon a waiting Mr Plod.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igKdsKH3O2Y

(A MrAlexSeymour video)

Allegations that Israel is an apartheid state, like those comparisons to South Africa under white minority rule recently made by former Foreign Office diplomat  Craig Murray, have been ably dissected by Israeli journalist and commentatorYisrael Medad, who writes in a brand-new article that can be read in its entirety here:

'Quite plainly, language in the discourse is being corrupted and definitions are being eviscerated. Moreover, the object of this exercise is to demonize Israel and Zionism, poison minds and attempt to disenable any defender of Israel and Jewish nationalism from responding by literally dictating the conversation to the total disadvantage of a pro-Israel stance. And tax-exempt donations to the New Israel Fund monetize this language.

In essence, we need acknowledge that nothing has really changed from the beginning of the attacks on Zionism in the mass media led by Lords Northcliffe, Rothermere and Beaverbrook in the early 1920s and the targeting of Jews as Jews, which allows anti-Semitism a free ride. As [British historian]David Cesarani put it in 1989, is anti-Zionism motivated by principled objections to Zionism and sympathy for the Palestinian Arabs, or more due to hostility to the Jews or that their antipathy to Zionism is based on prejudices regarding Jewish behavior?

Zionism’s opponents elasticize language. They stretch terms that properly belong in one sphere of activity or thought and seek to apply it, unfairly and incorrectly, to what is happening in Israel. There’s even the trick called “Holocaust inversion,” for example. When I first became involved in hasbara efforts in 1964, one of the favorite ploys was “we can’t be anti-Semitic for we are Arabs and Arabs are Semitic.”

Today, from Carter on down, “apartheid,” which indicates a complete separation based on race is now applied to Israel, as if there are two sets of toilets and water fountains. Or that T’rua handout I quoted from above reads “Green Line: Israel’s internationally recognized border” when the actual ceasefire agreement states

Article VI 9. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.

Or in other words, the Green Line was quite definitely not Israel’s internationally recognized border. In fact, the word “border” appears but once and as a future issue Israel could raise, an issue of “border rectification.” The exact term used in the agreement is “Armistice Demarcation Lines.” Language is artificially stretched, elasticized and the intent of the newly defined term becomes a weaponized semantic.

As for “colonialism,” what is it that Arabs did in the seventh century if not conquer a country not theirs, occupy it and then colonize it? Who “occupied Palestine,” or rather, the area the international community set aside for the establishment of an Arab Palestine state, if not Jordan, an act the international community basically ignored because Jews were not involved? Where is the actual apartheid practiced, if not within the confines of the Haram A-Sharif on the Temple Mount, where Jews cannot even drink water from the fountains there—not to mention pray or even just read from the Bible?

For all these examples and many more, there are no words to describe the deviousness in subverting historical truth and current events. Opponents of Israel and Zionism abscond with the rhetoric, and not only fashion a made-up narrative but create a new language in which to argue the Arab conflict with Israel. Their elasticizing of semantics is stretching the truth.'  [Emphasis added]

Meanwhile, in America the Sojourners organisation's magazine staff gets a dose of anti-Israel propaganda from "apartheid state" demoniser Stephen Sizer during his recent visit stateside:

David Singer: Jordan and Israel – Trump’s only viable two-state solution

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

He writes:

Four major developments in the past week have heightened expectations that President Trump will have no option but to call on Jordan and Israel to negotiate the allocation of sovereignty between their two respective States in the West Bank and Gaza – 5% of the territory comprised in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (Mandate) .

Jordan and Israel are the two successor States to the Mandate currently exercising sovereignty in the other 95% of the Mandate territory – Jordan 78%, Israel 17%.

Jordan-Israel negotiations – if successfully concluded – would complete the two-state solution first contemplated under article 25 of the Mandate. Arab and Jewish claims to the Mandate territory would be finally resolved.

These four developments were:

1. The G77 and China – comprising 135 of the 193 United Nations member states – appointed the non-existing “State of Palestine” as Chairman of the G77 for 2019 and procured the passage of a United Nations General Assembly Resolution giving this phantom “State of Palestine” the right to:

(a) Make statements on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, including among representatives of major groups;

(b) Submit proposals and amendments and introduce them on behalf of the Group of 77 and China;

(c) Co-sponsor proposals and amendments;

(d) Make explanations of vote on behalf of the States Members of the United Nations that are members of the Group of 77 and China;

(e) Reply regarding positions of the Group of 77 and China;

(f) Raise procedural motions, including points of order and requests to put proposals to the vote, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

US Ambassador to the UN – Nikki Haley – re-iterated America’s long-standing position:

“The United States does not recognize a Palestinian state, notes that no such state has been admitted as a UN Member State, and does not believe that the Palestinians are eligible to be admitted as a UN Member State.”

The PLO has chosen the United Nations fantasyland to push its agenda in preference to negotiating with Israel under Trump’s proposed plan – simultaneously rejecting the Montevideo Convention requirements necessary for statehood in international law.

11 other UN member states embraced this nonsensical resolution, whilst the remaining 47 voted: Against (3), Abstained (15), or Did Not Vote (29). 

2. US Secretary of State – Mike Pompeo – announced that the U.S. Embassy Jerusalem and U.S. Consulate General Jerusalem would be merged into a single diplomatic mission.

 This was Trump’s response to the UN’s embrace of the “State of Palestine”.

3. President Trump sent World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder as his personal envoy to Jordan.

Lauder's visit reportedly occurred without the knowledge of Israel or Trump’s Special Middle East Negotiators – Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt.

Jordan received $690 million in US aid in 2018 – to be boosted by a 27% increase for each of the next five years. Lauder would have reminded Jordan’s King Abdullah that Trump’s policy could see this aid reduced if Jordan refuses to negotiate with Israel.

4. King Abdullah gave Israel twelve months’ notice of Jordan’s intention to not renew twenty-five year leases of two areas denoted as “Special Regimes” in the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty.

Israel is entitled to request that consultations be entered into – as Israel undoubtedly will – since Israeli private land ownership rights and property interests are affected in one area and Israeli private land use rights in the other.

 These Special Regimes would become important bargaining chips in Jordan – Israel negotiations on the West Bank and Gaza over the next 12 months.

 Any Trump peace proposal not requiring direct Jordan –Israel negotiations will be dead in the water from the get-go.


(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)

A French-Algerian Talking Shiite

Here's Yahia Gouasmi from Algeria, described by Memri TV as "the founder of the Shiite Zahra Center and head of the Anti-Zionist Party of France" warning all those dastardly Zionists in a message posted to his YouTube channel in June that in less than five years "your smell will no longer be on this Earth".

He takes a more charitable line towards the likes of Neturei Karta, though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=HBAcl3na9vo

(Here, by the way, are vile Islamic anti-Jewish sentiments.)

"The Police Don't Help Us. The Police Want an Easy Life" (Jewish Londoner)

With, at times, an unfortunate background of noise that almost obscures her remarks, a Jewish lady shares with a Daily Express journalist her views regarding the antisemitism stirred by Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=VEyDtdnUIv8