UN should start focusing on the Jordan-Israel two-state solution

 

United Nations Secretary General – Antonio Guterres – was at it again this week repeating the failed decades-old UN mantra supposed to end the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict: 

“I remain committed to supporting Palestinians and Israelis to resolve the conflict and end the occupation in line with relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements in pursuit of achieving the vision of two States – Israel and an independent, democratic, contiguous, viable and sovereign Palestinian State — living side by side in peace and security within secure and recognized borders, on the basis of the pre-1967 lines, with Jerusalem as the capital of both States.”

The Secretary-General’s “vision of two States” — the creation of a new Arab State between Israel and Jordan for the first time in recorded history – is nothing but a mirage.

This UN backed solution is not based on historic, geographic or demographic foundations — but on a fiction invented in 1964 with the creation of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).

Article 24 of the PLO’s founding Charter expressly denied any claims to such an independent state:

“This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area”

The PLO clearly had no interest in establishing an independent state in any area that had been occupied by another Arab state since 1948 which then included east Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

It was only after the 1967 Six Day War that the concept of an additional Arab State — with Jerusalem as its capital - was dreamt up by the PLO – and promoted at the UN with the formation in 1975 of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People - spewing out a fictitious narrative on the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Even worse — the United Nations seeks to deny the Jewish People’s right to reconstitute their National Home in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) — legally granted to them by article 6 and article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - and preserved by article 80 of the United Nations Charter until today.

The Secretary-General looks on without uttering one word in protest at this continuing flagrant breach by the United Nations of its own Charter and international law.

In referring to the “pre-existing 1967 lines” — the Secretary-General glosses over the fact that they are in fact the “the 1949 Armistice Demarcation Lines” — designated in agreements between:

• The Government of Egypt and the Government of Israel dated February 24, 1949
• The Government of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and the Government of Israel dated April 3, 1949

Those lines were not set in concrete but were agreed on without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines.

Secretary-General Guterres would do well to start focusing on the realistically-attainable Jordan-Israel two-state solution – so eloquently expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir in the New York Times on August 27, 1972:

The Secretary-General should digest what former Israeli Ambassador to the UN Chaim Herzog wrote in the Wall Street Journal on November 26, 1980 [Ed: my underlining]:



The UN’s continuing pursuit of a third-state solution has reached a dead end.

The Jordan-Israel two-state solution requires two sets of negotiators — armed only with pencils and rubbers — to redraw the existing internationally-recognised boundary between Israel and Jordan to enable the allocation of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza between those two States.

Not one Jew or Arab would need to move from his present home. Jordanian citizenship would be restored to West Bank Arab residents — as existed between 1950 and 1988.

The UN’s continuing pursuit of a third-state solution has reached a dead end and should be consigned to the diplomatic graveyard.


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.

Bennett set to shake-up global consensus on two-state solution

 

Israeli Prime Minister — Naftali Bennett — seems set to challenge the decades-long failure by the international community to achieve its called-for two-state solution: Creating a second Palestinian Arab state, in addition to Jordan, for the first time in recorded history.

Bennett made his intention very clear when introducing Israel’s next Government — presumably with his new coalition partners’ unanimous approval:

“We will ensure Israel’s national interests in Area C — and we will increase standards to that end after much neglect in this area.”

Bennett — anointed as “Prime Minister and Minister for Settlement Affairs” — is now uniquely placed to promote his “Israel Stability Initiative — February 2012” (Stability Plan)  —  summarised by him in 2017:

“The main idea of The Stability Plan is to provide full civilian self-governance to the Palestinians so they can elect themselves, pay their taxes, and control those areas that are theirs. We should apply sovereignty in Israeli-controlled areas—known as Area C—and Palestinians living there will become part and parcel of the State of Israel. And since within the State of Israel you cannot have two levels of people, those Palestinians living in Area C—approximately 80,000 people—will be offered full Israeli citizenship, including voting rights. I think most will opt for residency rather than citizenship (like in East Jerusalem) but it’s up to them. They can be Israeli citizens, Israeli residents or Palestinian citizens.

Those living in the Palestinian-controlled areas (Areas A and B) will govern themselves in all aspects barring two elements: overall security responsibility and not being able to allow the return of decedents [sic] of Palestinians refugees. We can’t have an inflow of millions of great grandchildren of 1948 refugees coming across the Jordan River because in one swoop that would distort the demography of the area, and within a few weeks of their arrival, the local Palestinians in Judea and Samaria would tell them to ‘go back to Jaffa’ which would subsequently create pressure on Israel that could lead to a third intifada inside ‘Smaller Israel’.

My option is that Palestinians have an ‘autonomy on steroids,’ and I’m open to ideas about how this materialises; it could be a confederation with Jordan, or local municipalities, or a central government. It would encompass full freedom of movement, massive infrastructure investment, the creation of a tourism zone so Christians can enter Haifa, Nazareth, Nablus, Ramallah, Jerusalem and Hebron without going through road blocks. We would have joint industrial centres, and we’d be able to create a land port governed by the Palestinians in Jenin that would be connected to Haifa.”

Bennett continued:

“I understand there is global consensus around the two-state solution, but what the world thinks is no proof for the correctness of a plan. The world gets it wrong a lot.

I’d say to those in the international community who are so entrenched in the idea of a Palestinian state that (a) the Palestinians have a state in Gaza and they blew it, and (b) after 50 years, at what time do we need to rethink? In the high tech world where I come from, if my employees tried the same solution and failed again and again I’d fire them as I’d expect them to have tried to tackle the challenge from a different angle by now! There is an industry around this topic—think-tanks, journals, professionals and academics who keep on chewing on the same old failed solution. We’re not in Europe, we live in a region with very few democracies, and when we tried this idea out it blew up in our faces and no one showed us any sympathy.”

Global consensus needs to positively respond to Bennett’s challenge.

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.

Israel's dysfunctional Government cannot survive

 

An amalgam of eight leaders trading insults and denigrating each other — whilst their parties have adopted policies that are totally irreconcilable on critical issues — is not the foundation for any stable Government — especially in Israel — whose enemies will become increasingly emboldened following the announcement of a cobbled-together Israeli Government comprising very different bedfellows.

A vote of confidence first needed from 61 members of the Knesset before this dysfunctional Government even begins operating is certainly not a foregone conclusion.

Either an Islamic-Arab party — Ra’am (4 seats) — or an extreme left wing party — Meretz (6 seats) which includes two Israeli Arabs — possess the ability to drag Israelis to a fifth election in 3 years.

This Government could implode in making decisions involving such issues as:

• Hauling Israel before the International Criminal Court (ICC)
• Authorising future building in Judea and Samaria (West Bank)
• Extending Israeli sovereignty into Judea and Samaria
• Preventing the renewal of violent protests by Israel’s Arab population that saw synagogues burnt and attacks on Jews and their property during last month’s Israel- Gaza conflict

Fractured relations and policy differences abound: 

• Meretz leader — Nitzan Horowitz — has adopted the position that the ICC has grounds for investigating Israel for suspected war crimes. 

Gideon Sa’ar — leader of the New Hope party — said that he would not include Meretz in any coalition he led for holding that viewpoint. 

“Horowitz can’t join the government with positions like that,”

Yamina MK Ayelet Shaked — echoed Sa’ar’s sentiments:

“Anyone who talks like that will not be with us in a coalition,”

Yet Sa’ar and Shaked — and supposedly 10 other members of New Hope and Yamina parties — are ready to sit with Horowitz in coalition as the ICC probe continues and Israel’s Government has to formulate its responses.

 

• Prime Minister-elect Bennett repeatedly called Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas a “terror supporter” before the elections — but now opines

“Mansour Abbas isn’t a terror supporter. I met an honest man and a brave leader who is reaching out and seeking to help Israeli citizens.”

An amazing epiphany indeed for an Arab leader whose party’s 4 seats could bring down this Government at any time.

• During the election campaign — Bennett signed a pledge on TV (pictured below) — making the following commitments:

“I won’t allow Yair Lapid to be prime minister, including in a rotation (agreement.)” and “I will not establish a government based on the support of Mansour Abbas from the Islamic Movement.”

Bennett’s credibility has been shot to pieces.

• Bennett has long held the following views:

“The central problem is the failure of the Israeli leadership to simply state that the land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel. We have to say this to ourselves on Channel 2 and on CNN that Israel belongs to the Jews”

“We have to tell ourselves and the whole world that his land has belonged to us for 3,000 years. The most certain path to defeat is for Israel to forget its sense of justice. This is true historically and legally. There has never been a Palestinian state here.” 

 Can Bennett utter one word about these historic and modern-day legal claims without the leaders of Meretz and Ra’am threatening to pack their bags and bring down the Government?

• Bennett has argued since 2012 in his detailed “Israel Stability Initiative” that Israel needs to extend its sovereignty into Area C of Judea and Samaria and that Gaza should be separated from Judea and Samaria. Advancing Bennett’s plan could see the Government’s downfall.

Israelis deserve a Government united in policy and possessing the firm resolve to combat their sworn enemies. This rancour-ridden Government — infected by deep political differences — is not the answer.


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.