UN remembers the Holocaust as it abandons the Jewish People

 

The United Nations (UN) ceremony to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day was held on January 27, 2022 - as the UN was simultaneously continuing its incessant assault on the Jewish People that is once again giving rise to increasing Jew-hatred worldwide.

UN-sponsored Jew-hatred began with the establishment of The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People under resolution 3376 (XXX) and the scurrilous “Zionism is racism” Resolution 3379 (XXX) – both passed by the General Assembly on November 10, 1975.

The following 47 years has seen three totally-fabricated statements formulated and repeatedly propagated by the UN and some of its various agencies: 

• Jews have no right to live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem 
• Jews living there are doing so illegally in flagrant violation of international law 
• Jews are the major obstacle to peace 

Secretary-General of the UN – Antonio Guterres - enunciated these false statements demonizing the Jewish People as recently as December 15, 2021:

“I call on Israel to put a stop to all settlement activities immediately. Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of international law and United Nations resolutions. They undermine the prospect of achieving a two-State solution by systematically eroding the possibility of establishing a contiguous, independent, sovereign and viable Palestinian State”

Guterres was pushing his master’s odious three-point narrative – when he should have been forcefully rejecting it for the following reasons:

• Jews have the inalienable right to live in these specifically-designated areas of former Palestine for the purpose of reconstituting the Jewish National Home (“Inalienable Right) – legally conferred on them by article 6 and article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and preserved by article 80 of the UN Charter.

• Israel’s first Prime Minister – David Ben-Gurion – then the Representative of the Jewish Agency – emphasised the importance of the insertion of Article 80 into the UN Charter in evidence before the UN Special Committee for Palestine at Lake Success, New York on 7 July 1947:

• Article 80 preserves the Jewish People’s Inalienable Right notwithstanding the demise of the League of Nations on April 19, 1946 and remains as alive and exercisable today as it was when unanimously adopted by all 51 Member States of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922 – (see image following)

The following headline appearing over a media release on January 27th by UN News – the official UN  media outlet - indicates the lengths the UN will go to to bury Article 80:

“The Holocaust “defined the United Nations”, Secretary-General António Guterres told a virtual ceremony marking Holocaust Remembrance Day on Thursday, recalling that the UN Charter was drafted in San Francisco “as the Dachau concentration camp was liberated”.

The Charter defined the UN - giving it the responsibility under Article 80 to ensure the rights of the Jewish People created by the Mandate were preserved.

Excluding any mention of Article 80 contained in that Charter and the reasons for its inclusion continues to be the fuel that enables the UN to falsely condemn 600000 Jews for illegally living in areas where they are legally entitled to do so and from where all Jews were driven out and expelled between 1948 and 1967.

Abandoning the Jewish People by failing to recognise its vested rights under the Mandate for Palestine and the UN Charter brands the UN as the world centre for disseminating and inciting Jew-hatred. 193 Member States need to evaluate their continuing membership. 

“Never again” is threatening to become “Yet again” – whilst the UN continues to act in flagrant violation of article 80 of its own Charter. 

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.

Netanyahu reaffirms that Israel is the Jewish State

[Published 12 March 2019]


It is amazing that Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu still needs to reaffirm to Israelis that Israel is the Jewish State.

Yet Netanyahu was required to do just that after fashion model, actress and TV presenter Rotem Sela instagrammed:

“When in hell will anyone in this government tell the public that Israel is a state of all its citizens, and all human beings were born equal. And the Arabs, God forbid, are human beings. As are the Druze. And the homosexuals too, by the way, and the lesbians and also … what a shock … the leftists.”

Netanyahu’s response was swift:

“Dear Rotem, important correction: Israel is not a state of all its citizens. According to the Basic Law we have passed, Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people — and only them.

As you wrote, there is no problem with the Arab citizens of Israel — they enjoy equal rights like all of us, and the Likud government invested more in the Arab sector than any other government.”

Netanyahu elaborated on his statement at last Sunday’s cabinet meeting:

“I would like to clarify a point that, apparently, is not clear to slightly confused people in the Israeli public. Israel is a Jewish, democratic state. This means that it is the national state of the Jewish people alone. Of course it respects the individual rights of all its citizens — Jews and non-Jews alike, but it is the national state, not of all its citizens, but only of the Jewish people.

Other peoples, other nationalities and other minorities — have national representation in other states. The national representation of the Jewish people is in the State of Israel. Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and of it alone.”

David Ben-Gurion and Yitzchak Rabin expressed much the same sentiments decades ago.

Ben-Gurion presciently defined the term “Jewish State” during his evidence before the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine on 7 July 1947:

“What is the meaning of a Jewish State? As I told you before, a Jewish State does not mean one has to be a Jew. It means merely a State - where the Jews are in the majority, otherwise all the citizens have the same status. If the State were called by the name “Palestine” — I said if - then all would be Palestinian citizens If the State would be given, another name — I think it would be given another name — because Palestine is neither a Jewish nor an Arab name. As far as the Arabs are concerned, and we have the evidence of the Arab historian, Jew, that there was no such a thing as “Palestine” at all: Palestine is not an Arab name.

Palestine is also not a Jewish name. When the Greeks were our enemies, in order not to annoy the Jews, they gave different names to the streets. So, maybe the name of Palestine will be changed. But whatever the name of the country, every citizen of the country will be a citizen. This is what we mean. This is what we have to mean. We cannot conceive that in a State where we are not in a minority, where we have the main responsibilities as the majority of the country, there should be the slightest discrimination between a Jew and a non-Jew.”

Rabin stated in 1992:

“I don’t want to make Israel a bi-national state. I would like to keep Israel a Jewish democratic state. By that, I mean at least 80% of its population Jewish”.

Peace will only come when the PLO, Hamas and the UN General Assembly recognize that Israel is the Jewish State.

Trump can end Israel-PLO impasse using India’s Vedanta Solution

[Published 10 July 2017]


The first state visit ever to Israel by an Indian prime minister — Narendra Modi— could generate the impetus President Trump needs to end the diplomatic void caused by the breakdown in negotiations between Israel and the PLO since 2014.

The obvious warmth, mutual admiration and friendship shared by Modi and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was clearly evident — contrasting with the hostility, acrimony and venom shown to Israel that has become the norm at the United Nations, UNESCO and UNHCR.

Israel has historically had a long love affair with India’s Vedanta Movement (also known as the Ramakrishna movement) — a worldwide spiritual movement headquartered near Kolkota in West Bengal.

Vedanta wishes and prays for the well-being, happiness and enlightenment of all the people of the world.

Writing on Modi’s visit - Khinvraj Jangid pointed out that Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion:

”... wrote, in September 1957, to Dr. Indra Sen (of the Aurobindo Ashram) praising the distinctive Indian approach to religion: “From Buddhism I have learned much about the history of religion and philosophy in India in general—and after I was enchanted by the Vedanta I began the study of the schools of Sankhya and Yoga.” In his bedroom in the Negev kibbutz of Sde Boker, there was only one leader’s portrait: Gandhi’s.”

Modi himself reportedly attended a comprehensive course studying Vedanta.

Vedanta’s views on peace in the Middle East (“the Vedanta Solution”) were published in the Times of London on 16 March 1982 by Vedanta’s British Chairman Swami Avyaktananda:

“It is generally not known that the East Bank [of the Jordan River — ed] was a part of ancient Palestine and when Britain obtained the Mandate for Palestine, the League of Nations included it in Palestine”

Swami Avyaktananda quoted as his sources:

1. Two maps in the 14th edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica (1929)

2. J.F. Horrabin’s map on page 64 of “The Life of Jesus” by Conrad Noel (1937)

3. The map of Palestine on page 18 of “A Short History of the Hebrews” by B.K. Rattey (1931)

4. 2 Sam ii

The Swami continued:

“The major portion of Jordan today is really East Palestine, the country on the other side of the Jordan being West Palestine. The handing-over of the territory east of the Jordan River to the Emir Abdullah was, to all intents and purposes, the first partition of Palestine [in 1946 — ed.]through which a large portion of Palestine [78% - ed.] went to Arab hands. This partition was not considered when the United Nations framed the Plan of partition of Palestine into Jewish Palestine and Arab Palestine [in 1947 — ed.].

If the Palestine Liberation Organisation accepts the historical facts presented here, considers sympathetically the Jewish aspirations and struggle for the National Home, National Language and National Culture for about 2000 years, and agrees to rethink the problems of the Middle East with goodwill and understanding then the problem of the Middle East will be solved without difficulty. The whole of ancient Palestine will be shared by Jews and Arabs through an amicable settlement if the Palestinian National Home is established in the East Bank of the Jordan. It can be called “New Palestine” and this naming will be quite correct.”

The PLO, Jordan and Israel can cooperatively implement the Vedanta Solution - extended to incorporate the allocation of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) between Jordan and Israel — or Jordan and Israel can so act jointly if the PLO refuses to participate.

Embracing the two-State Vedanta Solution — with Modi as a possible interlocutor — could be the Trojan Horse President Trump needs to broker a deal to end the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Unscrambling Mandates Omelette Guarantees More Egg on Obama's Face

[Published 5 October 2014]


President Obama’s mission to degrade and destroy Islamic State (ISIL) in Syria and Iraq has been seriously undermined by these poor political judgment calls:

1. Claiming that ISIL is not “Islamic”

2. Arguing that ISIL is not a State because no other Government recognises it

3. Intruding upon Syrian sovereign territory in breach of international law before first procuring the passage of a Chapter VII Security Council Resolution authorising military action

4. Threatening to use his intervention in Syria as an excuse to also remove Syria’s President Assad

5. Grossly underestimating the ISIL threat

His latest gaffe involves a dispute with Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu - who told the United Nations this week:

... everywhere we look, militant Islam is on the march. It’s not militants. It’s not Islam. It’s militant Islam.

Typically, its first victims are other Muslims, but it spares no one. Christians, Jews, Yazidis, Kurds — no creed, no faith, no ethnic group is beyond its sights. And it’s rapidly spreading in every part of the world.”

Netanyahu further warned:

“To protect the peace and security of the world, we must remove this cancer before it’s too late. Last week, many of the countries represented here rightly applauded President Obama for leading the effort to confront ISIS. And yet weeks before, some of these same countries, the same countries that now support confronting ISIS, opposed Israel for confronting Hamas. They evidently don’t understand that ISIS and Hamas are branches of the same poisonous tree. ISIS and Hamas share a fanatical creed, which they both seek to impose well beyond the territory under their control.”

State Department spokesperson - Jen Psaki - chose to take issue with Netanyahu — claiming:

“Obviously, we’ve designated both as terrorist organizations, but ISIL poses a different threat to Western interests and to the United States,”

However ISIL and Hamas — and the PLO — all pose identical threats to western interests and the United States — as they attempt to unscramble the three Mandates for Syria / Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine legally sanctioned by the League of Nations more than 90 years ago after the territories comprised in these Mandates were liberated from 400 years of Ottoman Empire rule following Turkey’s defeat in World War I.

The independent Arab and Jewish States that subsequently emerged from these Mandates are now being directly threatened with elimination.

ISIL has already declared an Islamic State in large parts of Syria and Iraq exceeding the area of Great Britain - expelling or butchering Christian and other religious communities who have lived there for centuries. ISIL has been repelled in Lebanon and also threatens Jordan.

Hamas—pursuant to Article 11 of its 1988 Charter — militarily seeks to reverse the Jewish National Home objectives of the Mandate for Palestine:

“The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day.”

The PLO — pursuant to Article 20 of its 1968 Covenant - has never accepted the legal validity of the Mandate for Palestine — nor Great Britain’s 1923 decision that ultimately created today’s independent Arab state of Jordan in 78% of Mandatory Palestine:

”The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void.”

Obama has wasted his political energy and Presidential prestige fruitlessly promoting negotiations designed to create a second Arab State in Mandatory Palestine — in addition to Jordan — for the first time ever in recorded history.

The Mandates system created the legal foundations for both Arabs and Jews to gain self-determination and political independence.

Obama needs to focus on this bigger picture - so eloquently elaborated by David Ben-Gurion to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine in July 1947:

“It is wrong to regard the problem of Jewish-Arab relations only in the framework of this little country. The statesmen who were responsible for the Balfour Declaration did not merely envisage the restoration of the Jewish nation alone. At the same time they provided for the liberation of the Arab people, and they achieved this on a much larger scale and in a more effective way. The Arabs gained their freedom in an area of 1,250,000 square miles, 125 times as large as the area of Western Palestine with a population of some 15 to 16 million Arabs; about the number of Jews living then in the world…

... This was the real twofold arrangement made with the Arabs and the Jews. The freedom of the Arab people in their countries the restoration of Palestine to the Jewish people…

Netanyahu’s address pointed Obama in Ben-Gurion’s direction:

”... a broader rapprochement between Israel and the Arab world may help facilitate an Israeli-Palestinian peace. And, therefore, to achieve that peace, we must look not only to Jerusalem and Ramallah, but also to Cairo, to Amman, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh and elsewhere.”

Allowing any unscrambling of the three Mandates omelette is assuredly going to leave Obama with even more egg on his face.

Palestine - Kerry's Credibility Crashes As Abbas's Intransigence Increases

[Published 28 March 2014]


US Secretary of State John Kerry has seen his reputation and prestige shredded to tatters over the past few weeks.

On 13 March Kerry told members of the House Foreign Relations committee that:

1. international law has already declared Israel a Jewish state, and

2. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s insistence on a public declaration of Israel’s Jewish character from the PLO was “a mistake” in the diplomatic process.

Kerry also told a Senate panel:

“‘Jewish state’ was resolved in 1947 in Resolution 181 where there are more than 40-30 mentions of ‘Jewish state’. In addition, chairman Arafat in 1988 and again in 2004 confirmed that he agreed it would be a Jewish state. And there are any other number of mentions.”

PLO Chairman and President of the State of Palestine—Mahmoud Abbas - was unimpressed with Kerry’s knowledge of international law.

On 16 March the New York Times reported:

“.. Mr. Abbas, speaking before a meeting in the Oval Office, made clear that he was no closer to uttering the words that are a litmus test for the Israelis: that he recognizes Israel as a Jewish state.

“Since 1988, we have recognized international legitimacy resolutions” on Israel, Mr. Abbas said as Mr. Obama looked on, a hand on his chin. “And in 1993, we recognized the State of Israel.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that the Palestinians go further and recognize Israel as a nation-state for the Jewish people in order to get a peace deal. Mr. Abbas has flatly refused, and his comments on Monday suggested he had gone as far as he would.”

On 19 March Associate Professor of Journalism and Political Science at The City University of New York - Peter Beinart - provided this advice to Abbas:

“I have a suggestion for Mahmoud Abbas. The next time Benjamin Netanyahu demands that you recognize Israel as a “Jewish state,” tell him that you’ll agree on one condition. The Israeli cabinet must first agree on what “Jewish state” means. That should get you off the hook for a good long while.

Israel has never been able to define the term “Jewish state.”

The good Professor was obviously unaware that the term “Jewish State” had been defined for the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine in evidence given by David Ben-Gurion on 7 July 1947:

“What is the meaning of a Jewish State? As I told you before, a Jewish State does not mean one has to be a Jew. It means merely a State-where the Jews are in the majority, otherwise all the citizens have the same status. If the State were called by the name “Palestine,” - I said if - then all would be Palestinian citizens If the State would be given, another name - I think it would be given another name - because Palestine is neither a Jewish nor an Arab name. As far as the Arabs are concerned, and we have the evidence of the Arab historian, Hitti, that there was no such a thing as “Palestine” at all: Palestine is not an Arab name. Palestine is also not a Jewish name. When the Greeks were our enemies, in order not to annoy the Jews, they gave different names to the streets. So, maybe the name of Palestine will be changed. But whatever the name of the country, every citizen of the country will be a citizen. This is what we mean. This is what we have to mean. We cannot conceive that in a State where we are not in a minority, where we have the main responsibilities as the majority of the country, there should be the slightest discrimination between a Jew and a non-Jew.”

Abbas rejected Beinart’s unsolicited advice for one simple reason—any state that contained the word “Jewish” or any suggestion of being Jewish would never be acceptable to Abbas.

As Pinhas Inbari reported:

“On March 22, 2014, Abbas spoke before the Central Committee of the Fatah Movement. According to Nabil Abu Rodena, spokesman for the Palestinian Authority presidency, the Fatah body supported Abbas’ position of “non-recognition of Israel being a Jewish state.” The Palestinians did not release a complete text of Abbas’ Fatah speech.

At the Arab League summit in Kuwait on March 25, Abbas took this a step further. The official Arabic transcript of his speech before reveals how he has moved toward a more uncompromising diplomatic posture, opposing Israel’s stand that it be recognized as the nation-state of the Jewish people, just as it recognizes the Palestinian state as the nation-state of the Palestinian people:

“Israel has invented new conditions that it did not raise before, like recognizing it as a Jewish state. This we oppose as well as even holding a discussion on this matter.”

The Arab League was more than happy to oblige Abbas and rebuff Kerry - its final communiqué at the summit’s close stating:

“We express our absolute and decisive rejection to recognizing Israel as a Jewish state.”

Kerry - left high and dry by this united show of Arab opposition to accepting what Kerry had trumpeted just 12 days earlier - was suddenly forced to fly to Amman on 26 March to meet with Jordan’s King Abdullah in the afternoon and Abbas in the evening.

As Kerry’s credibility crashes - Abbas’s intransigence in refusing to recognize Israel as the Jewish State increases—a certain recipe for diplomatic disaster.

Palestine - Sarkozy Makes Monumental Mistake

[Published 10 October 2011]


France’s President - Nicolas Sarkozy - has made a mistake of historic proportions - possibly dashing any hope of the two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs coming to fruition - after he told the French magazine Le Canard Enchaîne:

“It is silly to talk about a Jewish state,”

President Sarkozy made this comment while referring to the Israeli demand that the Palestinian Arabs recognize Israel as the Jewish state in any peace agreement.

He compounded this act of gross political ineptness by continuing:

“It would be like saying that this table is Catholic. There are two million Arabs in Israel.”

On the figures alone - President Sarkozy is demonstrably wrong.

Latest statistics show the Arab population of Israel is 1,610,000 (20.5%). The President also fails to mention that the Jewish population numbers 5,874,300 (75.3%) and there are 323000 not identified as Jews or Arabs (4.2%).

Tables cannot be offended - but people certainly can.

President Sarkozy’s statement is extremely offensive to the overwhelming majority of Jews wherever they live - but no doubt will be met with resounding applause by Jew-haters world wide.

His statement will offend those tens of millions of Christians who support the right of the Jewish people to establish their own independent state in their ancient ancestral and legally recognized homeland.

President Sarkozy in this one brief comment has abandoned French foreign policy pursued over the last 90 years - whilst also rejecting international law principles formulated during that period - which France was instrumental in establishing.

In so doing, President Sarkozy has caused great damage to France’s reputation and honor,

It was France - together with Britain, - that laid down the legal framework for the Jewish people’s right of return to Palestine pursuant to the Treaty of Sevres signed on 10 August 1920 - which allocated 99.999% of the captured Ottoman Empire to the Arabs and provided for the remaining 0.001% be set aside as a national home for the Jewish people.

Article 95 of the Treaty specifically provided:

“The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

France endorsed this decision together with all other 50 other countries in the League of Nations by unanimously approving the creation of the Mandate for Palestine in 1922 - which recognized:

“the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country”

France signed the UN Charter on 26 June 1945 and subsequently ratified its coming into operation on 24 October 1945.

The Charter contains article 80 - which preserved the rights vested in the Jewish people under the Mandate - to ensure they did not disappear with the pending demise of the League of Nations - which finally occurred on 12 April 1946..

France was among the 33 countries that voted in favor of the UN Partition Plan on 29 November 1947 calling for the partition of Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State.

President Sarkozy is apparently unsympathetic to Israel’s demand to be recognized as the Jewish State - despite the fact that Article 20 of the Charter of the Palestine Liberation Organization denies the Jews any such right in the following dismissive and highly offensive terms:

“Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.”

The Chairman of the PLO - Mahmoud Abbas - is a frequent visitor to Paris and is received with full honors by President Sarkozy who can now only be seen to be openly endorsing this despicable and racist viewpoint - which Chairman Abbas resolutely refuses to change.

Hamas is as equally strident in wanting to destroy the Jewish State.

How can a peace agreement between Jews and Arabs be successfully concluded whilst such attitudes are maintained by the PLO and Hamas? What effect will President Sarkozy’s viewpoint have in encouraging the PLO and Hamas to maintain their rejectionist stances? Should President Sarkozy not be urging the Palestinian Arabs to accede to Israel’s request if they ever hope to attain their own independent State?

President Sarkozy needs to read and digest what David Ben-Gurion told the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine on 7 July 1947:

“What is the meaning of a Jewish State? As I told you before, a Jewish State does not mean one has to be a Jew. It means merely a State-where the Jews are in the majority, otherwise all the citizens have the same status. If the State were called by the name “Palestine,” - I said if, - then all would be Palestinian citizens. If the State would be given, another name - I think it would be given another name, because Palestine is neither a Jewish nor an Arab name. As far as the Arabs are concerned, and we have the evidence of the Arab historian, Hitti, that there was no such a thing as “Palestine” at all: Palestine is not an Arab name. Palestine is also not a Jewish name. When the Greeks were our enemies, in order not to annoy the Jews, they gave different names to the streets. So, maybe the name of Palestine will be changed. But whatever the name of the country, every citizen of the country will be a citizen. This is what we mean. This is what we have to mean. We cannot conceive that in a State where we are not in a minority, where we have the main responsibilities as the majority of the country, there should be the slightest discrimination between a Jew and a non-Jew.”

Until President Sarkozy unequivocally retracts his comment and embraces Ben-Gurion’s statement - he will surely be tarred with uttering one of the most damaging comments ever made by a head of state on the Jewish-Arab conflict - effectively prolonging the dispute rather than helping to resolve it.

Palestine - Change Israel's Name And Change The Game

[Published 13 October 2011]

Israel’s plea to be recognised as the Jewish State in return for the implementation of a new building freeze in the West Bank very quickly got the thumbs down from the Palestinian Authority.

Israel’s Prime Minister - Benjamin Netanyahu - was surely clutching at straws in expecting a positive response when he told Israel’s Parliament on 10 October:

“If the Palestinian leadership will say unequivocally to its people that it recognizes Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, I will be ready to convene my government and request a further suspension,”

Palestinian Authority chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said that such a demand could never be accepted. He was only repeating what he has said over and over again for many years. Erekat has been consistent during this period in his unrelenting objection to the Jews having a country where they will always constitute the majority.

America - however - made it perfectly clear that Israel’s request to be recognized by the Palestinian Authority as the homeland of the Jewish people was non-negotiable when State Department spokesman P J Crowley declared:

“I’m not making any news here, We have recognized the special nature of the Israeli state. It is a state for the Jewish people. It is a state for other citizens of other faiths as well. But this is the aspiration of the – what Prime Minister [Binyamin] Netanyahu said yesterday is, in essence, the – a core demand of the Israeli government, which we support, is a recognition that Israel is a part of the region, acceptance by the region of the existence of the State of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish People and that is what they want to see through this negotiation.”

What then is the purpose of continuing the façade of negotiations in the face of this irreconcilable impasse between Jewish expectations and a continuing Arab state of denial?

Israel needs to introduce a circuit breaker - one that places the ball firmly in the Arab court. The Arabs can then decide whether to negotiate with the Jews or not on the final allocation of sovereignty in the West Bank and the acceptance of each other‘s right to exist.

Such a result can be swiftly and effectively achieved by Israel renaming itself officially as “THE DEMOCRATIC JEWISH REPUBLIC OF ISRAEL" - or some other suitable name.

This would in one fell swoop create the appropriate description of what the Jewish State actually is and what it actually represents in the eyes of the world and its own citizens.

Ironically Israel’s bitterest Arab enemies and some of its Arab treaty partners have no problems in so describing the character of their own States in their official titles.

Some examples of those countries and their official names are:

1. Libya - “The Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya”

2. Jordan - “The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”

3 Syria - “The Syrian Arab Republic”

4. Egypt - “The Arab Republic of Egypt”

5. Iran - “The Islamic Republic of Iran”

6. Emirates - “The United Arab Emirates”

Had Israel’s founding fathers been influenced to go beyond the bland title of “The State of Israel” perhaps the political situation would have been entirely different today.

David Ben Gurion - then the representative of the Jewish Agency - had made an impassioned appeal to the United Nations Special Committee On Palestine on 4 July 1947 when he stated:

“And here we are, not only we the Jews of Palestine, but the Jews throughout the world the small remnant of European Jewry and Jews in other countries. We claim our rightful place under the sun as human beings and as a people, the same right as other human beings and peoples possess, the right to security, freedom, equality, statehood and membership in the United Nations. No individual Jew can be really free, secure and equal anywhere in the world as long as the Jewish people as a people is not again rooted in its own country as an equal and independent nation.

An international undertaking was given to the Jewish people some thirty years ago in the Balfour Declaration and in the Mandate for Palestine, to reconstitute our national home in our ancient homeland. This undertaking originated with the British people and the British Government. It was supported and confirmed by 52 nations and embodied in an international instrument known as the Mandate for Palestine. The Charter of the United Nations seeks to maintain “justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law.” Is it too presumptuous on our part to expect that the United Nations will see that obligations to the Jewish people too are respected and faithfully carried out in the spirit and the letter? “

The United Nations indeed heeded this appeal when recommending the partition of western Palestine into an “Arab” state and a “Jewish” state. The Arabs rejected Ben Gurion’s plea and their view still remains unchanged in 2010.

Rejection of the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate for Palestine is writ large in the Covenant of the Palestine Liberation Organization whose current Chairman is Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

However, the same Mr. Abbas also gave his blessing to Israel changing its name when he said on 27 April 2009 in Ramallah - in response to Mr Netanyahu then calling on the Palestinian Authority to recognize Israel as the Jewish State:

“I do not accept it. It is not my job to give a description of the state. Name yourself the Hebrew Socialist Republic — it is none of my business,”

Israel should now take up Mr Abbas’s suggestion and gauge the Palestinian Authority’s reaction to such a re-branding.

Playing the name game - or the shame game - will surely end the current standoff in the stalled negotiations.

The Palestinian Authority can continue to negotiate with Israel - but in the knowledge that in signing any agreements it will be doing so with the Democratic Jewish State of Israel.

Abbas has said he can live with such a proposal. He should now be asked to rise to the challenge or be put out to pasture if he fails to do so.

United Nations Vote Presages State Sponsored Global Anti-Semitism

[Published September 2004]

The United Nations has embarked on a dangerous path that could unleash an unprecedented campaign of state-sponsored global antisemitism which needs to be swiftly denounced and halted in its tracks.

This threatening prospect follows member States voting by 150-6 to endorse the opinion of the International Court of Justice [ICJ] requiring the immediate demolition of Israel’s Security Fence in Judea and Samaria and declaring Israeli settlements there (including East Jerusalem) to be in breach of international law.

The ICJ has effectively branded 300,000 Jews living in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem as land robbers illegally occupying someone else’s land.

150 out of the 191 member States of the U.N. have unquestioningly accepted that opinion in the knowledge that it was given by 15 Judges drawn from 15 countries, all supposedly appointed for their outstanding legal qualifications as pre-eminent jurists and experts in international law.

U.N. Resolutions based on this ICJ opinion will now come thick and fast calling for the demolition of the Security Fence, the forced removal of all Jews from Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem and reparations followed by sanctions on Israel if these demands are not carried out.

The Observer for Palestine at the U.N. has already stated it was time now for implementation, compliance and, at a later stage, additional measures, which ominously he failed to specify.

Not only Israel will suffer the fall-out from this barrage of righteous condemnation at future meetings of the U.N.

Jews living in many of those 150 member States endorsing the ICJ opinion such as France, United Kingdom, Argentina, Italy, Russia, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and Holland will be exposed to far greater dangers to their personal safety and their institutions than they experienced prior to the ICJ opinion.

Even the large Jewish populations of the United States and Australia, whose countries both courageously voted to reject the ICJ opinion, or Canada who abstained, will not be immune from the forthcoming campaign of vilification of Jews designed to capitalize on this ICJ opinion.

The groundwork for this heinous campaign has been carefully planned over a number of years. Countless resolutions declaring Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem to be “Occupied Palestinian Territory” and Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem to be “illegal in international law” have been passed by automatic majorities of Arab and Third World countries in the General Assembly and various Committees of the United Nations.

Now these Arab and Third World countries have had their resolutions anointed with judicial respectability.

But that ICJ opinion is fundamentally flawed and no reliance can be placed on it.

The ICJ incredibly failed to consider a comprehensive body of international law that specifically establishes that Jews have every right to live in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem and to protect themselves from the murderous attacks of their Arab neighbors.

The only obstacle now standing between the anticipated diplomatic onslaught at the U.N. based on this flawed opinion and the projected threat to Jews worldwide is Article 80 of the United Nations Charter, which binds all member States.

Article 80 was completely ignored by the United Nations in all resolutions passed on Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem in the build-up to the ICJ case. It was not mentioned by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in the voluminous dossier of documents furnished by him to the ICJ. It was never discussed or considered in the 64-page judgment of the ICJ or the separate decisions issued by the judges.

Article 80 preserves the right of the Jewish people to live in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem pursuant to rights first vested in them in international law in 1920 and codified in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922.

Jews indeed had lived in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem until 1948 when they were driven out by invading Arab armies. Jews returned to live there again after those same Arab armies were defeated in the Six-Day War in 1967.

United Nations records attest to the critical importance of Article 80.

On 8 May 1947, Rabbi Abba Silver representing the Jewish Agency addressed the First (Political) Committee of the United Nations and he had this to say about Article 80:

“The Balfour Declaration, which was issued by His Majesty’s Government as a ‘declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations’, declares: ‘His Majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.’ The mandate, in its preamble, recognizes ‘the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine’ and ‘the grounds for reconstituting’ - I call your attention to the word ‘reconstituting’ –‘their national home in that country’.”

“These international commitments of a quarter of a century ago, which flowed from the recognition of historic rights and present needs, and upon which so much has already been built in Palestine by the Jewish people, cannot now be erased. You cannot turn back the hands of the clock of history.”

“Certainly, the United Nations, guided by the great principle proclaimed in its Charter, ‘to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained’, can never sanction the violation of treaties and of international law.”

“With this situation and similar situations in mind, a specific provision, you will recall, was written into the chapter of the Charter of the United Nations which deals with territories which might become trusteeship territories, and which is therefore especially applicable to territories now under mandate. This is Article 80 of the Charter …”

In evidence given to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine on 7 July 1947, David Ben-Gurion as a representative of the Jewish Agency said of Article 80:

“This is the special Article of the Charter which applies to Palestine. It was introduced only because of Palestine.”

There you have it in black and white - a specific article dealing with Palestine inserted in the United Nations Charter having a crucial bearing on the Court’s opinion is not given the light of day by the U.N. or the ICJ. This could not possibly be due to ignorance or oversight. Answers need to be given to explain this scandalous behavior.

For this reason the ICJ opinion should not be granted any further recognition or credibility and should be condemned for what it really is – a decision of a biased and politicized court that deliberately failed to look at a critical area of law legitimizing Jewish rights to settle in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem.

The failure of the ICJ to consider Article 80 has now set the stage for a possible outburst of antisemitism worldwide.

Jews were denied their right to live in 77% of Palestine in 1923. This area is today called Jordan and not one Jew lives there.

Jews also offered to surrender their right to live in the whole or parts of Judea and Samaria [5% of Palestine] in return for peace and an end to violence in 1937, 1948, 1967, 1979, 1993 and 2000 and still hold out hope that this might be possible. Until now there has been outright Arab rejection of any proposal. This Arab mindset will only harden in the light of the ICJ decision and the votes of those 150 member States.

Some soul searching is urgently required by the large number of those 150 States who believe justice must be dispensed in a fair and impartial manner and without fear or favor. They need to urgently review their initial endorsement of the ICJ opinion and repudiate it rather than give it any further credence.

They cannot possibly continue to endorse the ICJ opinion in future votes at the U.N. knowing it is so fatally flawed and then claim to have been unaware of what they were unleashing in their own countries and worldwide by adopting such a voting pattern.

Let them evaluate Article 80 and the words of David Ben-Gurion and Rabbi Silver and then make up their minds on their future voting intentions. Let their representatives demand that the ICJ and Mr. Annan explain why they ignored the ramifications of Article 80. Let those nations whose agenda is demonizing Jews stand alone in further support of the ICJ decision and be exposed for what they truly represent.

Those 150 countries must have the decency and humanity to have a second think about their earlier decision and not continue to be a partner in the ongoing attempt to use the discredited ICJ opinion as a battering ram against Jewish people wherever they happen to live.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------