Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine key to ending Jew-bashing at UN

 

The United Nations favourite sport - Jew bashing - was on full display this past week at the 77th Session of the United Nations Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) - which approved six draft resolutions - all highly critical of Israel. 

One of these draft resolutions - approved by 98 voting in favour to 17 against, - with 52 abstentions--was titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem" (document A/C.4/77/L.12/Rev.1).

By its terms, the UN General Assembly would demand that Israel cease: 

"all measures that violate the human rights of the Palestinian people, including the killing and injuring of civilians, the arbitrary detention and imprisonment of civilians, the forced displacement of civilians, the transfer of its own population into the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem" 

and that:

"the General Assembly should request the International Court of Justice to render urgently an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967"

Vituperative verbal attacks on the Jewish State made by Bangladesh, Venezuela, South Africa, Iran, Libya, Niger, Türkiye, Algeria, Brunei Darussalam, Namibia, Indonesia, Kuwait, Japan, Qatar, Lebanon, Sudan, Malaysia and Yemen ensured Jew-bashing would continue at the United Nations whilst the 100 years-old Arab-Jewish conflict remains unresolved. 

Yet the implementation of a recently-published proposal that could end that conflict and similar future acrimonious debates was never raised or discussed. 

That proposal - published on June 8, 2022 in the Saudi Government-controlled Al Arabiya News by Ali Shihabi - a confidant of Crown Prince and Saudi Arabian Prime Minister - Mohammed Bin Salman (Saudi Solution):

• Recognises Israel is a reality firmly implanted on the ground that has to be accepted, however grudgingly, by the region around it.
• Calls for the merger of Jordan, Gaza and part of the West Bank into one territorial entity to be called The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine - with its capital in Amman - not Jerusalem - to be governed by the current Hashemite dynasty ruling in Jordan
• Supersedes the 2002 Saudi-inspired Arab Peace Initiative
• Ends the 74 years old Palestinian Arab claim to the right of return to live in Israel.
• Grants citizenship and passports to all Arab residents living within the new entity's borders 
• Does not require any of the entity's population to pack up and move elsewhere. 
• Offers Palestinian Arab refugees the right to resettle there and acquire citizenship
• Recognises sole Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem
• Affirms Jordan's custodianship of the Islamic Holy Sites in Jerusalem

Successful implementation of this Saudi Solution would immeasurably free up the UN's time to deal with other unresolved and emerging world conflicts. 

The fact that this ground-breaking and - indeed revolutionary - Saudi Solution has never been discussed by the UN General Assembly, Security Council or any of its Committees - its very existence not even being acknowledged by any of them - is a damning indictment on UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Torr Wennesland. 

The UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People - whose 2022 Annual Report fails to mention the Saudi Solution - is also expressly complicit. 

The UN has become hopelessly conflicted - burying the Saudi Solution rather than considering it to replace its owned failed two-state solution to create an independent Palestinian Arab state between Israel and Jordan that has gone nowhere in the last 20 years. 

Failure to examine and evaluate the Saudi Solution threatens the UN's relevance and continued existence. 

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.

Internet - Fertile Field Promoting Jew-hatred And Jew-bashing.

[Published 3 November 2013]


The Internet has become one of the major contributors to the growing spread of Jew-hatred and assaults on Jews world wide.

The senseless attack by eight hooligans in Bondi, Sydney last week bashing five Jewish people - one a 62 years old woman - as they were walking home after enjoying a Sabbath meal with friends - has resulted in an outpouring of world-wide condemnation by politicians, the media, the public and other religious groups.

Yet it is only one of an increasing number of such similar assaults on Jews world-wide.

Jewish communities have for decades been required to place their synagogues, communal schools and organizations under 24 hour security surveillance.

The propensity of the Internet to become an uncontrolled vehicle for racial incitement has been allowed to escape under the radar. It is time that its capacity to so influence the minds of its readers was diminished.

What has become particularly disturbing is the ability of people to make whatever comments they like on the Internet without disclosing their full names and addresses to web editors when submitting their comments.

Newspapers require such details to be supplied – and only in exceptional circumstances will anonymous letters be published.

Why do Internet sites not demand the same standard of compliance?

Failure to do so has seen the publication of anonymous comments such as the following:

“The Jews will still occupy the West Bank and blockade Gaza and continue with their brutal, genocidal occupation. If the world were to be rid of the U.S. and Israel, there would be a chance of peace in our chaotic, conflicted world. Surely, anyone with half a brain can see that!"

Freedom of speech should not mean that people should enjoy freedom from prosecution or legal action for comments they make that defame people or groups of people or incite or are capable of inciting violence.

Should the following comment have been allowed to be anonymously posted?

“Racist Israel is more than an abomination in the Middle East, it is a threat to the 7bn people it considers not to be racially “special”. Us. All the more reason to stop keeping it alive, and to target it with overwhelming nuclear might if it retaliates against civilisation for refusing to back its play. The Zionists may be blinded by their belief that God will protect them. Nobody and nothing will.”

No doubt apologists will argue that objections can be lodged to delete offending comments – but its implementation inevitably leads to strident cries claiming censorship.

Securing the deletion of an objectionable comment also ignores the damage caused during the time that such comment has remained online before its removal.

These vile viewpoints – if authoritatively sourced – should be exposed to public gaze so that readers can understand the level and intensity of the hatred that exists – as exemplified in the following comment:

“Why should we [love Jews] given what they do to the Palestinians and have done since 1948? I don’t think that Jews are capable of love. Their religion gets in the road. Their god is loveless and punitive and so are they!”

Jews are not on their own in being singled out for such incessant abuse and vilification on the Internet.

Protecting free speech – no matter how denigrating or defamatory – can be safeguarded on the Internet - if web sites make it clear that no comments will be considered for publication unless they are accompanied by the writer’s full name and address - and a phone number supplied for verification purposes that would allow the site administrator to confirm the identity and address of the person seeking to have his comments published on that web site.

The writer’s name and general area location should accompany the comment when published.

Compliance with these requirements should become the minimum norm demanded by the administrators of every web site.

It surely is time for such a voluntary code of conduct to be introduced to end comments being made under the cover of anonymity on the Internet by using false names or pseudonyms to conceal the writer’s true identity.

If such standards were applied – the following comments would not have appeared on “Citizen Pilgrimage” – the blog page of Emeritus Professor Richard Falk – “UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights on Palestinian territories occupied since 1967”:

1. “If Israel and the Jews hope to avoid the next shoah, they had better start learning a little empathy, because, while you are laughing now, things can change very rapidly, as we have seen in the last century (and the one before that, and the one before that….). Do you really want to be on the side that takes down our fragile civilization?”

2. “We can’t afford any more wars, especially ones to rescue Jews who have acted recklessly again and gotten themselves in trouble again with their big mouths and by flaunting their wealth in an unseemly manner.”

3. “The truth is that Jews have a terrible track record, and they seem to be obsessed with the (false) notion that people hate them for no reason. There are very good reasons for hating jews today, and that makes me sad. How can jews be acting this way so soon after the last catastrophe?"

Ending anonymous and unverified comments on the Internet is long overdue.

Paraphrasing Neil Armstrong’s immortal words – doing so would represent one small step for a man - but one giant leap for mankind.