United Nations Rebuked For Promoting Palestinian Ethnic Cleansing Of Jews

[Published 15 September 2016]


United Nations member States need to examine their own consciences and policies following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu castigating them for promoting a Jew-free Palestinian Arab State in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem.

In a video presentation last week — Netanyahu declared:

“Israel’s diversity shows its openness and readiness for peace.

Yet the Palestinian leadership actually demands a Palestinian state with one pre-condition: No Jews.

There’s a phrase for that: It’s called ethnic cleansing.

And this demand is outrageous. It’s even more outrageous that the world doesn’t find this outrageous.

Some otherwise enlightened countries even promote this outrage.”

The Oxford Dictionary defines “enlightened” to mean “having or showing a rational, modern, and well-informed outlook”

Enlightened United Nations member States lost their moral and humanitarian compasses when supporting United Nations Resolution A/67/L.28 passed on 29 November 2012 (“the Resolution”) which reaffirmed:

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

Among the 138 countries voting for the Resolution were enlightened States such as:

Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Russian Federation, Serbia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Uruguay and Venezuela

Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, and the United States voted against the Resolution whilst 41 others — including Australia - abstained.

800000 Jews currently live in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem under rights vested in them by:

1. Article 6 of the 1922 Mandate for Palestine,
2. Article 80 of the 1945 United Nations Charter,
3. Israel’s 1967 annexation of East Jerusalem
4. The 1993 Oslo Accords.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas declared in 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,”

Like Hitler — Abbas made no secret of his racist plan to create a Jew-free State.

Member States of the United Nations remained silent. In voting for the Resolution they chose to march to the same tune.

Abbas repeated his evil message in 2013:

“But when a Palestinian state is established, it would have no Israeli presence in it.”

Enlightened States still said nothing.

They had said nothing after every single Jew had been ethnically cleansed from Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem following Jordan’s conquest of these areas between 1948 and 1967 when the following events happened:

“After the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem was captured, the destruction, desecration and systematic looting of Jewish sites began and continued. 57 ancient synagogues (the oldest dated to the 13th century), libraries and centers of religious study were ransacked and 12 were totally and deliberately destroyed. Those that remained standing were defaced, used for housing of both people and animals. The city’s foremost Jewish shrine, the Western Wall, became a slum. Appeals were made to the United Nations and in the international community to declare the Old City to be an ‘open city’ and stop this destruction, but there was no response.”

The independent Jew-free Palestinian State promoted by the United Nations in 2012 could have been created between 1948 and 1967 with the stroke of an Arab League pen when not one Jew lived in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. That 19 year window of opportunity will not return.

Netanyahu’s rebuke was certainly justified.

Enlightened — and unenlightened - States need to affirm their total opposition to any settlement of the Jewish-Arab conflict involving the ethnic cleansing of any Jews from Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem.

Islamic State - Pope Calls For International Consensus

[Published 28 November 2014]


Pope Francis has made public his thoughts on the action necessary to counter Islamic State.

Speaking to Vatican Radio after his return from a visit to the EU parliament in Strasburg, he said:

“I never say all is lost, never. Maybe there cannot be a dialogue but you can never shut a door. It is difficult, one could say almost impossible, but the door is always open.”

Responding to a question about whether or not it would be possible to communicate with rather than fight the militants, the Pope said:

“I repeat what I have said: when you want to stop an unjust oppressor, you must do so with international consensus.”

Since dialogue is realistically impossible — only an international consensus expressed in a Security Council resolution under Chapter V11 of the United Nations Charter can achieve the Pope’s clearly enunciated position.

So far two Security Council Resolutions have been passed — Resolution 2170 adopted on 15 August and Resolution 2178 adopted on 24 September

These two Resolutions were passed under the provisions of Article 41 of the UN Charter:

"The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

Neither Resolution has acted as a brake to stop Islamic State in its tracks — let alone bring about its downfall.

An American led coalition has undertaken military intervention in Syria and Iraq to degrade and destroy Islamic State but its objectives have not succeeded by any stretch of the imagination.

The State Department has announced that over 60 coalition partners have committed themselves to the goals of eliminating the threat posed by Islamic State and had already contributed in various capacities to the effort to combat Islamic State in Iraq, the region and beyond.

The State Department outlined five areas of possible involvement by coalition members as formulated by Secretary of State John Kerry and recently resigned Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel:

1. Providing military support ;
2. Impeding the flow of foreign fighters;
3. Stopping Islamic State financing and funding;
4. Addressing humanitarian crises in the region; and
5. Exposing Islamic State’s true nature.

Not all coalition partners have participated in the countless aerial bombing attacks on Islamic State forces.

As at 6 November Australian fighter jets had flown 144 missions against Islamic State and dropped twenty-five 500-pound laser and GPS-guided bombs on 14 ISIL targets, with 11 destroyed and three damaged.

Belgium, France, Netherlands, Canada and the United Kingdom have also been involved in aerial strikes against Islamic State fighters.

However the two notable omissions from this international coalition ranged against Islamic State are China and Russia — both members of the Security Council holding the power to veto any stronger action by the Security Council up to now.

Such action is becoming increasingly urgent as an unknown number of foreign fighters flock to join Islamic State and a pledge of allegiance has been made by Ansar Beit Al-Maqdis— a Jihadi based organisation based in the Sinai Peninsula.

Islamic State head Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared on November 10:

“We announce to you the expansion of the Islamic State to new countries, to the countries of the Haramayn [Saudi Arabia], Yemen, Egypt, Libya and Algeria,”

Baghdadi claimed them as new provinces under Islamic State.

This may indeed be all propaganda — but the Pope has clearly shown his concern.

The only real basis for international consensus rests on the Security Council passing a resolution under Article 42 of the UN Charter:

"Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations."

A Papal plea made directly to China and Russia to join in drafting a resolution under Section 42 could just prove to be the catalyst to persuade these two recalcitrant nations into authorizing military action under the United Nations Charter against Islamic State.

Having supported Security Council Resolutions 2170 and 2178 — China and Russia now need to go that extra mile to defeat what they have already declared to be a grave threat to international peace and security.

Russia’s President Putin has a chance to come in out of the cold caused by his growing international isolation over Crimea, Ukraine and Syria. China would enhance its international reputation enormously by acceding to the Pope’s request.

A Papal miracle is within reach.

Palestine - Billions In International Donors Funds Go Missing

[Published 20 October 2013]


Billions of euros in European aid to the PLO and Hamas between 2008 and 2012 may have been misspent, squandered or lost to corruption - according to an unpublished report by the European Court of Auditors - a Luxembourg-based watchdog - disclosed in an article appearing in The Sunday Times on 14 October.

Brussels reportedly transferred more than US$2.64 billion to the West Bank and Gaza in that four year period - but had little control over how it was spent - the auditors said in the damning report seen by The Sunday Times.

EU investigators who visited sites in Jerusalem, Gaza and the West Bank noted “significant shortcomings” in the management of funds sent to Gaza and the West Bank.

These disturbing revelations followed closely on the heels of a report in Ma’an News on 10 October claiming that the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) anti-corruption commission - established in 2010 - was working to retrieve PLO-owned land registered to individual PLO leaders - according to commission chief Rafiq al-Natsheh.

The commission had recovered around 400 dunums of PLO-owned land in 2012 - al-Natsheh told Ma’an.

Natsheh’s remarks were made after comments by him in in the Jordanian newspaper al-Dustour the previous week that PA officials were moving deposits from Jordanian banks to foreign accounts.

“If suspects accused of stealing public money (are moving funds abroad), that falls within our jurisdiction, We will ask these countries to help us restore the stolen public money, Transferring money anywhere (abroad) will not prevent us from calling suspects to account and restoring that money,”

In rare comments on the location of assets belonging to the PLO - al-Natsheh admitted that bank deposits and real estate collected by the PLO dating back to its inception in 1964 had been entrusted to “trustworthy individuals” and had yet to be recovered.

According to al-Natsheh, some of the money and property - which was supposed to be have been deposited into public accounts when the PA government was established in 1994 - still remains in private hands.

Any possibility of an embedded culture of corruption on a grand scale within the PLO and Hamas - as alleged in these news reports - could well be influencing any reconciliation between the PLO and Hamas who themselves have been locked in an internecine power struggle since 2007 creating two separate fiefdoms where corruption easily flourishes - ensuring that the continuing plunder of large injections of international donor funds will always trump any efforts at reconciliation.

Systemic corruption in the PLO could also be a powerful driver in influencing the continuation of the current status quo with Israel - enabling unjust enrichment of PLO officials to continue at the expense of the West Bank Arabs for whose welfare and advancement such funds received from international donors were to be ostensibly applied.

According to Mona Chalabi on Guardian Datablog:

“The Palestinian economy is dependent on international aid and around 4 in 5 Gazans rely on donations for their survival…

... In 2011, the single biggest donor to Palestine was the United States followed by the EU who gave $281m and $206m respectively.”

Other large donors in 2011 (in US dollars) included the UK (82.8 million), Sweden (76.4 million), Germany (57.5 million), France (43 million), Norway (39.6 million), Spain (34.9 million) Canada (34.3 million) and Italy (31.9 million).

In 2012 the Palestinian Authority only received 80% of the promised US$1 billion - well down from the $1.8 billion in 2008.

Continued mismanagement of dwindling international funds spells increasing economic hardship for West Bank and Gazan Arabs.

These donor countries must certainly be concerned at the allegations aired in The Sunday Times.

If the European Court of Auditors Report is confirmed - these countries will have no option but to call for an independent and transparent investigation into the possible misappropriation of foreign donor funds by the PLO and Hamas.

Transparency International - a Berlin-based watchdog monitoring corporate and political corruption - confirms that the state of paralysis afflicting the Palestinian parliament since 2007 as a result of the split between the PLO and Hamas has “given the executive unlimited management over public funds.”

A Palestinian opinion poll conducted in July 2012 found that 71 percent of respondents believed that corruption existed in PA institutions under the control of President Mahmoud Abbas. Some 57% of respondents said the same of Hamas-controlled institutions in the Gaza Strip.

Similarly, a hearing held at the US House of Representative’s Committee on Foreign Affairs in July 2012 heard evidence accusing the Palestinian political establishment of “chronic kleptocracy”

Transparency International seems to have pinpointed the crux of these monetary and financial woes affecting Palestinian Arab politics and policies with these few well chosen words:

“Presidential, legislative, and local elections are needed to restore the legitimacy of government institutions. This will also reinforce citizens’ interests, political accountability and the rule of law.”

Whilst the PLO and Hamas continue to deny West Bank and Gazan Arabs the right to vote on who should govern them - any prospects of investigating claims of misappropriation of international donor funds remains a distant dream.

The soon to be released report of the European Council of Auditors could prove to be the catalyst for ending the six year election drought in the West Bank and Gaza - resulting in the appointment of freely elected leaders implementing fully transparent and independent financial structures.

Such imperatives have become all the more urgent following these latest allegations.

Australia Can Rescue UNESCO From Palestine Decision

[Published 30 March 2012]


Australia’s new Foreign Minister - Bob Carr - needs to urgently review the decision adopted by the Australian National Commission for UNESCO (ANCUNESCO) - that the admission of Palestine as UNESCO’s 195th member State was consistent with UNESCO‘s Constitution and its Rules of Procedure.

Only 107 of UNESCO’s 194 member states voted in favour of the resolution to admit Palestine on 31 October 2011. Australia was one of 14 countries that voted against - whilst 52 abstained and another 21 were absent from the vote including some who were ineligible to vote due to unpaid membership fees.

The consequences of that vote have been catastrophic for UNESCO - and for scores of millions of people around the world dependent on UNESCO’s planned programs during 2012-2013.

22% of UNESCO’s budget has been lost as a result of America immediately suspending payment of membership dues totalling $260 million to the end of 2013 - because of a 20 years old American domestic law mandating such action.

Staff retrenchments are growing and global programs over the next two years - such as literacy, gender equality, water purification, AIDS and HIV prevention - will have to be abandoned or curtailed - unless America resumes its payments or alternative sources of funding are found,

An Emergency Donor Fund set up by UNESCO has not been very successful - with only about $42 million being raised or pledged in the last four months - much of it to be used to alleviate suffering among the populations in the donor or adjacent countries - rather than universally.

In its latest move to get the American funding back - UNESCO will soon be opening an office in Washington to lobby Congress to amend the law so as to enable the American tap to be turned on again.

Such lobbying is extremely unlikely to succeed - since the chances of Congress backing away from the law mandating the suspension of funds to any United Nations Agency that accepts the PLO as a full member - outside of negotiations with Israel - is doomed to failure.

Those 107 states who voted to admit Palestine were warned by UNESCO Director-General Irina Bukova of the risk of losing the American funding before they cast their votes. Defiantly ignoring her unambiguous message was both irresponsible and reckless and has caused UNESCO to create its own self induced financial and humanitarian crisis.

Australia’s Head of Mission - Ms Gita Kamath - gave the assembled delegates the following reasons for Australia‘s negative vote:

“Our decision to vote against reflects Australia’s strong concern that consideration of Palestinian membership in UNESCO is premature. The matter of Palestinian membership of the UN has recently been placed before the UN Security Council for its consideration. We should allow the United Nations Security Council process to run its course rather than seek first to address this question in different UN fora.

Our decision also reflects our concerns with the possible implications of a successful vote on UNESCO funding.”

The decision to admit Palestine is open to possible legal challenge for two reasons:

1. Only states can be admitted to UNESCO and Palestine is not a state,

2. The number of votes required to admit Palestine is 129 - not the 107 received

After initially receiving an irrelevant response from UNESCO and no answer to a detailed submission made by me on the voting requirements of the Constitution - I then wrote to Ms Kamath on 15 January - urging her to press UNESCO to review the adequacy of the vote to admit Palestine to UNESCO - and to approach other member States to do likewise.

Ms Kamath’s initial response was identical to UNESCO’s first response to me..

Undeterred - I then sent Ms Kamath the detailed submission I had given UNESCO. Like UNESCO - neither she nor ANCUNESCO has been prepared to discuss the merits of that submission.

Australia’s former Foreign Minister and Prime Minister - Kevin Rudd - had been actively seeking support for Australia to gain a seat on the UN Security Council. Perhaps he believed that taking a lead role to get UNESCO out of its current woes by promoting Court action that could see Palestine being possibly removed from UNESCO - could have seriously dealt a fatal blow to Australia’s chances of securing that Security Council seat.

There seems to be no other explanation for ANCUNESCO refusing to even consider my submission.

Hopefully Bob Carr will place the looming global humanitarian crisis above the quest for a seat on the UN Security Council. He should take a lead role in getting UNESCO to approach the International Court - as the quickest and best means of restoring the lost American funding.

Australia is perfectly positioned to lobby UNESCO member states to grab this legal lifebelt.

Australia’s support for the creation of a Palestinian State has been long standing - as Ms Kamath pointed out at the time of the Palestine vote:

“Australia strongly supports the aspirations of the Palestinian people for their own state and believes a negotiated peace process between the parties is the way to achieve this….

Australia has been a consistent supporter of the peace process. We have provided extensive support and committed to over $300 million in humanitarian and development assistance in the next five years building up the institutions of a future Palestinian state.”

Had the delegates from the 107 pro-Palestine voting states followed Australia’s lead - UNESCO would not be in the sorry position it is today.

If Australia continues to sit pat on its heels - it will be just as responsible for UNESCO’s ongoing problems as those whose votes have put UNESCO in this bind,

Those 87 countries that declined to vote for Palestine’s admission - for whatever reason - should be readily amenable to an approach by Australia to join in urging UNESCO to seek an advisory opinion from the International Court on the legality of its decision to admit Palestine.

Whilst these countries can rightly claim to not be blamed for the black hole UNESCO has fallen into because of the intemperate action of 107 of their fellow member states - they cannot also afford to sit back and do nothing to rectify a decision which could be in breach of UNESCO’s Constitution - especially given the global humanitarian problems it has created.

Bob Carr - the former Premier of New South Wales - was parachuted into the role of Australia’s Foreign Minister from political retirement in the space of a few days.

He seems the perfect choice to lobby member States to get UNESCO to beat a path to the International Court.

If Australia is too timid to act - other naysayer countries like Canada, America, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway or Germany should take up the lead role to save UNESCO from itself.

Someone needs to act quickly as the global humanitarian crisis adds more victims every day.

Palestine - Flag Flies, UNESCO Cries, Legality Dies

[Published 22 December 2011]


UNESCO has paid a high price for hoisting the flag of “Palestine” among the 194 other flags flying at UNESCO’s Paris headquarters this week.

So far the price tag has been about $65 million in annual contributions outstanding by the United States and Israel to the end of December following UNESCO admitting “Palestine” as a member State on 31 October.

Worse is yet to come for UNESCO with the loss of at least $120 million in 2012-2013 - about 22% of its annual budget - and ongoing repetition of at least the same shortfall in subsequent years.

The United States ceased its annual contribution to UNESCO in compliance with American domestic law. The suspension was automatic—a 1990’s law blacklists funding to any UN agency that admits Palestine.

Israel withheld the balance of this year’s contribution to show its displeasure at the PLO’s action in taking unilateral action to recognize any Palestinian State outside the face to face negotiations prescribed by the Oslo Accords and the Bush Road Map.

Are any other UNESCO member states liable to follow suit or help to make up the shortfall?

Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - John Baird - has made it crystal clear that Canada - one of UNESCO’s larger donors to the tune of $10 million per annum - will not be helping to make up the shortfall - stating.

"Under no circumstances will Canada cover the budgeting shortfall as a result of this decision and Canada’s decided to freeze all further voluntary contributions to UNESCO. The bottom line is there’s going to be a large hole in UNESCO’s budget because of the American law which withdraws funding, and people at UNESCO should not look to Canada to fill that budget hole. They’ll have to go to the countries who supported this resolution, that caused this budget loophole. And if they want to appeal to Canada to make even more contributions to voluntary UNESCO initiatives, we will not be looking at entertaining new ones.”

UNESCO only has itself to blame for finding itself in this predicament - since the decision to admit Palestine as a member of UNESCO on the affirmative votes of 107 of its members could be in clear breach of its Constitution which appears to require a majority of 129 votes for any such resolution to have been passed.

A strange silence has descended over UNESCO since I first raised this question with the Director UNESCO Liason Office in New York on 1 November. Three more emails were required before I received any response - when I was eventually advised on 28 November that my inquiry was being referred to the press and media senior officer for UNESCO in New York.

I thought this a strange referral. The nature of my inquiry surely should have been better dealt with by UNESCO’s legal advisors.

A reply was received on 30 November from UNESCO’s media officer. It still failed to satisfactorily answer what was a very simple query which should have elicited an immediate and definitive response from UNESCO - did Palestine’s admission to UNESCO require 107 or 129 affirmative votes?

I put that question again to the Media Officer on 1 December. On 11 December I received a formal response that she would be consulting her colleagues. She added a strange rider to her email - wanting to know for which media I was reporting. Why this would have any relevance to my request was very puzzling.

Nevertheless I readily provided her with an answer on 12 December and requested an early response to my 1 December email. I am still waiting to hear from UNESCO.

The longer UNESCO dithers - the more convinced I am that UNESCO has made a monumental mistake in admitting Palestine in apparent breach of the provisions of its own Constitution.

Should UNESCO be entitled to act in breach of its own Constitution and choose to studiously ignore investigating any alleged breach when drawn to its attention?

Does the speed of UNESCO’s response to media enquiries depend on the source of the particular media outlet making the enquiry? Does UNESCO believe the legality of its decision will be swept under the carpet if not too many people read an article on a particular web site which does not have the circulation of the New York Times or the Guardian?

87 of the 194 members of UNESCO did not vote for the admission of Palestine to UNESCO. Like Canada - UNESCO will probably find little sympathy to any request for them to donate any money to make up this massive shortfall.

UNESCO programs will undoubtedly be affected or cut. It has warned that 20 of its 60 field offices may have to close.

UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova has gone on record stating:

"UNESCO is facing a difficult situation. It’s a test for our organization."

That is understating what surely is a monumental and ongoing problem.

A review of the legality of the decision to admit Palestine may be the answer to UNESCO’s cries for member states to make up the shortfall.

I have waited patiently for seven weeks for a definitive response from UNESCO indicating this would occur. None has been forthcoming.

There are at least a hundred and twenty million reasons - accumulating annually - for reviewing that decision.

The financial turmoil which now surrounds UNESCO surely justifies an urgent approach to the International Court of Justice for its advisory opinion on whether Palestine’s admission as a member of UNESCO has been legally made in accordance with the UNESCO Constitution.

Constitutional certainty or the begging bowl?

That is what UNESCO should be seriously considering without further posturing or delay.

Gaza - The Solution Ain't Rocket Science

[Published January2009]


Gazan Arabs have no one but themselves to blame for voting Hamas into power and allowing Hamas to destroy their lives in the traumatic manner that has suddenly befallen them in the past week.

This inevitability was on the cards from the day Gazans freely - and overwhelmingly - elected Hamas to power in Gaza’s municipal council elections on 28 January 2005 giving Hamas a solid power base and stranglehold in 77 out of the 118 seats contested.

Emboldened by Israel’s total - and unilateral – withdrawal from Gaza on 12 September 2005, Gaza’s population immediately went on a rampage burning synagogues and communal centres left behind in Gaza by the 8000 Jews who had built them over the previous four decades whilst also destroying the productive green houses and agricultural lands created out of desert by the departing Jewish farmers.

Gaza’s exclusively Arab population had by then come to regard Hamas as the party that could really deliver Israel into Islamic hands and wipe the Jewish state off the map as the Hamas Charter so clearly declared. Hamas claimed the credit for Israel’s withdrawal and promised more to the crowds that thronged the Hamas rallies to celebrate Israel’s retreat.

Hamas had by then already carried out thousands of terror attacks killing 425 Israelis and wounding 2,233 others since 2000. Between 1993-2005 Hamas had been responsible for sending 113 suicide bombers into Israel to deliberately target, murder and maim civilians in places like restaurants, buses and shopping centers.

Hamas certainly practised what they preached and Gaza’s civilian population were now prepared to vest Hamas with even greater political power in Gaza.

193,000 Gazans gave Hamas that green light on 25 January 2006 in the Palestinian Legislative Council elections whilst 174,000 Gazans supported the incumbent ruling party - Fatah. Hamas ended up winning 74 seats overall whilst Fatah could only win 45 seats.

Gazans had made their choice undeterred by the fact that Hamas had been declared a terrorist organization by America, the European Union, Australia, Canada and Israel.

Fatah certainly only had itself to blame for its 2006 stunning electoral defeat having allowed Hamas to contest those elections in breach of the Oslo Accords that Fatah had signed in 1995 which stated:

“The nomination of any candidates, parties or coalitions will be refused, and such nomination or registration will be cancelled, if such candidates, parties or coalitions 1) commit or advocate racism, or 2) pursue the implementation of their aims by unlawful non-democratic means.”

The ensuing havoc and political schism between Hamas and Fatah following Hamas’ huge win saw Gaza being effectively taken over by Hamas whilst a large number of the 174000 Fatah supporters and their families fled to the relative safety of the West Bank to escape the purge of Fatah members occupying positions of power within Gaza’s political echelons. Others were not so lucky and died in the internecine strife that followed.

Entrenched in power in Gaza, Hamas did not embark on nation building. Instead it engaged in a massive build up of rockets smuggled through an extensive network of tunnels running under Egypt and into Gaza whilst continuing to manufacture its own home grown versions for indiscriminate dispatch into Israeli population centres.

Gazans were willing partners to this murderous enterprise making their homes the exit points for newly constructed tunnels whilst actively assisting in the assembling and manufacturing of an arsenal of rockets and mortars that seemed infinite in the number available to be fired at Israel.

Israel absorbed many attacks and responded to others by blockades, embargoes and limited incursions into Gaza which had little effect in stemming the almost daily barrages. Each retaliatory action by Israel was met with huge protests and demonstrations by tens of thousands of Gazans.

No voices of protest or warning were heard or raised in Gaza at its Government’s precipitate action. Some may argue this was caused by fear and that the population had become captive and hostage to its new rulers whose dreams of driving Israel into the sea had overwhelmed its primary responsibility to advance the well being and development of its own constituency.

Suffering became the norm as electricity, water and fuel supplies were cut by Israel.

“Humanitarian crisis”, “collective punishment” and “breaches of international humanitarian law” became the international chants to comfort Gazans as their leaders – duly emboldened by this limp response - persisted with their sworn declaration to kill as many Jews as they could.

Renewal of an uneasy six months’ truce mediated by Egypt in June 2008 was spurned by Hamas. The truce period had enabled a build up of rockets with a far greater range than had been previously been employed. It was time for the rocket game to begin in earnest once again.

Israel however had had enough and has now responded like never before. The destruction visited on Gaza’s institutions of power, its Hamas foot soldiers, rocket launchers, network of tunnels and rocket and mortar arsenal are yet to be publicly revealed. Hamas has not been bowed and has indicated its intention of continuing its suicidal program by firing more rockets far deeper into Israel than previously thought possible.

Gazan Arabs are now having their electoral decisions sheeted home to them in no uncertain fashion. Whilst the Palestine Liberation Organisation may have been foisted on them in an undemocratic fashion in 1964, the embrace of Hamas in 2005 and 2006 was decidedly the opposite.

Rescuing the Gazans from the disastrous consequences of their political choices involves the removal of Hamas. Replacing Hamas with Fatah is not really a viable alternative. Fatah has shown itself to be totally incapable of reaching a peaceful accommodation with Israel after 15 years of fruitless negotiations. Both organizations are total political write-offs.

The only possible solution involves Egypt reassuming control over Gaza as it did between 1948-1967. This time there will have to be one fundamental difference – Gaza and its citizens must embark on the road to peace with – not seek the destruction of – Israel.

Redrawing the boundary between Israel and Egypt to incorporate all of Gaza and its citizens in Egypt’s sovereign territory is a commonsense approach that now urgently requires the support of the Arab League, the other Islamic States and the remainder of the international community to make it work.

It can - and must – happen if the suffering and despair of the Gazan Arabs are to be ended.

This solution does not –thankfully – involve rocket science although first removing Hamas probably will.