UN Security Council incites Jew-hatred thanks to Obama & Biden

The Obama-Biden administration’s failure to veto UN Security Council Resolution 2334 on December 23, 2016 — as President Obama was vacating the White House to hand over the reins of power to President-elect Donald Trump — has seen that Resolution being weaponized for the last five years to incite Jew-hatred worldwide — with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres firing the bullets.

Guterres is required to report to the Security Council every three months on the implementation of Resolution 2334 and recently issued his 20th such report covering the period September 29 — December 9, 2021.

Guterres states:

“In its resolution 2334 (2016), the Security Council reaffirmed that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity and constituted a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace. In the same resolution, the Council reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in that regard. No such steps were taken during the reporting period.”

This Security Council Resolution falsely accuses Jews of:

• Illegally settling in “the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967 including East Jerusalem” (“Territories”): 

These Territories have been designated for 3000 years as “Judea and Samaria” and “Jerusalem” — the ancient and biblical heartlands of the Jewish People — and were so designated in 1947 by the UN Special Commission Report on Palestine and UNGA Resolution 181 (II). 

• Having no right to live in these Territories: 

All Jews living there were ethnically cleansed in 1948 by six invading Arab armies and prevented from returning until 1967. 

• Acting in flagrant violation of international law

The right of Jews to live in these Territories is expressly authorized by articles 6 and 25 of the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and preserved until today by article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

Resolution 2334 institutionalized Jew-hatred in the Security Council. 

Jew-hatred is now being preached and practiced under the cover of United Nations respectability.

Guterres further points out:

“In its resolution 2334 (2016), the Security Council called upon all States to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967.”

Dealing with Jews living in Israel differently from Jews living in the Territories:

• Violates anti-discrimination international humanitarian law 
• Disregards the UN Charter’s call “to practice tolerance”.
• Constitutes racial apartheid

An Obama-Biden veto would have consigned Resolution 2334 to the dustbin of history — like so many other similar Resolutions reeking of Jew-hatred vetoed by them. 

Then US Secretary of State—John Kerry—explained why America allowed this pernicious Resolution to pass:

”...the two-state solution is the only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians… the vote in the United Nations was about preserving the two-state solution”

Really?

A different solution worked successfully between 1948 and 1967: Unifying the two banks of the Jordan River to create one State replacing “Transjordan”  — re-named “Jordan” in 1950.

Why couldn’t a similar solution work again?

Obama and Biden’s abstention-decision on Resolution 2234 — as they were leaving office — to preserve the two-state solution by creating a second Arab state in former Palestine in addition to Jordan – has seen Jews paying the price — being increasingly exposed to targeted attacks worldwide fuelled by UN Secretary-General quarterly reports on the implementation of a Security Council Resolution that falsely demonises the Jewish People.

Jew-hatred has become firmly entrenched in the UN Security Council to its eternal shame.

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.

Biden backs UN racist plan to exclude Jews from East Jerusalem

Israel has a real fight on its hands in resisting President Biden’s push to re-open the US consulate in Jerusalem.

The consulate was closed on March 4, 2019 — after former President – Donald Trump—had issued a Presidential Proclamation on 6 December 2017 that saw the US Embassy moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on 14 May 2018.

Trump’s Secretary of State – Mike Pompeo – has slammed Biden’s decision:

“I think it’s illegal. We don’t have consulates in the same city we have embassies anywhere in the world… It’s unnecessary and counterproductive, and I think, frankly, sends the wrong signal to the Palestinians as well. It signals to them back to business as usual, back to the kleptocracy, and ‘pay to slay’ and all the horrors that the Palestinian leadership and the West Bank imposed on its own people as well” 

Biden’s decision will certainly give added impetus to United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 – passed on 23 December 2016 as then Vice President Biden was vacating his office in the White House prior to the handover of power from President Obama to President-elect Trump.

Security Council Resolution 2334:

1. Reaffirmed that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity and constituted a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace; 

2. Reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard; 

3. Underlined that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

This racist resolution: 

• Ignored that all Jews living in East Jerusalem before 1948 had been ethnically cleansed from there following Jerusalem’s invasion and partial conquest by Transjordan in 1948.
• Denied Jews had any right to return or take up residence there after 1967
• Failed to acknowledge that Jews had lived there for 3000 years

The Obama-Biden administration failed to veto this overtly anti-Jewish Resolution to ensure it could never be weaponised to attack Israeli policies. 

The departing administration shamefully chose instead to only abstain — as then Secretary of State John Kerry — now currently serving as Biden’s United States Special Presidential Envoy for Climate — explained:

“.. . the vote in the United Nations was about preserving the two-state solution.  That’s what we were standing up for: Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living side by side in peace and security with its neighbors.  That’s what we are trying to preserve for our sake and for theirs.”

Preserving the two-state solution was more important for the Obama-Biden administration than denouncing the UN for denying Jews the right to live in East Jerusalem

President Trump’s closure of the US Consulate in Jerusalem helped neutralise this anti-Jewish parting shot fired by Obama and Biden.

Biden’s current Secretary of State – Antony Blinken – has announced that re-opening the US Consulate in Jerusalem will serve: 

“to underscore the commitment of the United States to rebuilding the relationship with the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people”

Why does rebuilding this relationship justify consular offices separate from the US Embassy in Jerusalem for those seeking to deny Jews the right to live in East Jerusalem alongside them? 

The US House of Representatives rejected Resolution 2334 by a vote of 342-80 on January 5, 2017. So should Biden – by keeping the former US Consulate doors in Jerusalem firmly and permanently closed.

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.

 

Trashing Trump’s two-state solution would be the height of folly

 [Published 23 December 2020]

A departing President’s ability to make decisions seeking to impact his successor’s future actions —even as he is vacating the White House in the last weeks of his Presidency — was dramatically illustrated on December 23, 2016 when America failed to veto Security Council Resolution 2334.

Then Secretary of State — John Kerry —  explained why the Obama-Biden administration had taken that decision on the eve of handing over to the Trump-Pence administration:

“In the end, we could not in good conscience protect the most extreme elements of the settler movement as it tries to destroy the two-state solution. We could not in good conscience turn a blind eye to Palestinian actions that fan hatred and violence. It is not in U.S. interest to help anyone on either side create a unitary state. And we may not be able to stop them, but we cannot be expected to defend them. And it is certainly not the role of any country to vote against its own policies.

That is why we decided not to block the UN resolution that makes clear both sides have to take steps to save the two-state solution while there is still time. And we did not take this decision lightly.”

Kerry painstakingly pointed out that America had nothing to do with drafting Resolution 2334:

"The United States did not draft or originate this resolution, nor did we put it forward. It was drafted by Egypt—it was drafted and I think introduced by Egypt, which is one of Israel’s closest friends in the region, in coordination with the Palestinians and others… In the end, we did not agree with every word in this resolution. There are important issues that are not sufficiently addressed or even addressed at all. But we could not in good conscience veto a resolution that condemns violence and incitement and reiterates what has been for a long time the overwhelming consensus and international view on settlements and calls for the parties to start taking constructive steps to advance the two-state solution on the ground."

Abstaining on — rather than vetoing — Resolution 2334 — when it did not address or sufficiently address important issues — was irresponsible.

Kerry showed how out of touch the outgoing Obama-Biden administration was with President-elect Trump’s intentions:

“President Obama and I know that the incoming administration has signaled that they may take a different path, and even suggested breaking from the longstanding U.S. policies on settlements, Jerusalem, and the possibility of a two-state solution. That is for them to decide. That’s how we work. But we cannot—in good conscience—do nothing, and say nothing, when we see the hope of peace slipping away… This is a time to stand up for what is right. We have long known what two states living side by side in peace and security looks like. We should not be afraid to say so.”

Kerry specifically recounted Israel’s former Prime Minister Peres telling him:

“The original mandate gave the Palestinians 48 percent, now it’s down to 22 percent. I think 78 percent is enough for us.”

Revisionist rubbish: The original mandate gave the Arabs 78% — now Jordan. The Jews were promised a national home in the remaining 22% — now down to 17% — now Israel. The remaining 5% comprises Gaza, Judea and Samaria.

Trump’s Peace Plan provides a detailed and comprehensive two-state solution:

• Israel: with its current borders extended to include 30% of Judea and Samaria
• A demilitarised Palestinian Arab State: comprising Gaza and 70% of Judea and Samaria.

Trashing Trump’s Plan going forward would be the height of folly.


Author’s note: The cartoon—commissioned exclusively for this article—is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators – whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Trump election win needed to keep up Arab-Jewish peace momentum

 [Published 28 October 2020]

President Trump’s re-election on November 3 will ensure the continuation of his momentum to end the Arab-Jewish conflict as set out in his Peace Plan — whilst a Biden win will see that momentum lost.

Trump has made it clear there are other Arab states readying to follow the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Sudan in normalising their relations with Israel.

“Yeah, we have at least five that want to come in. And we’ll have many more than that very soon.”

Kosovo — a Muslim majority nation — has recognized Israel and is locating its Embassy in Jerusalem.

Saudi Arabia is allowing Israeli commercial flights to fly in Saudi air space.

Israel has signed an aviation agreement with Jordan that allows commercial airlines to fly through the Israel-Jordan corridor - significantly shortening flight times from the Gulf States and Asia to destinations in Europe and North America.

These resounding Trump successes in 2020 resulted from an approach differing substantially from that of the Obama-Biden administration between 2008 and 2016:

“Three months ago, no one thought this would be possible. Even Bibi didn’t know if this was going to be possible. Bibi, right? But now multiple Arab countries across co- — continents have made peace with Israel. And again, we have many lined up. They want to come in. They want to get the deal done. They all see it.
No blood in the sand. I say, “No blood.” This is one where’s there’s been no blood in the sand. It was common sense. It should have been done this way a long time ago. It’s a very special deal….
And it’s the way it should have been done a long time ago. We did it the opposite way — exactly the opposite way. And we took a lot of abuse from the people that were unable to make a deal for 40 years. And this has gone very quickly, very nicely, very inexpensively, and with no blood. So we’re very happy about that.”

Trump’s “opposite way” trashed Obama and Biden’s policy being pursued by Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry - who told the Saban Forum on December 4, 2016:

“And let me tell you—let me tell you a few things that I’ve learned for sure in the last few years. There will be no separate peace between Israel and the Arab world. I want to make that very clear to all of you. I’ve heard several prominent politicians in Israel sometimes saying, well, the Arab world is in a different place now, we just have to reach out to them and we can work some things with the Arab world and we’ll deal with the Palestinians. No, no, no, and no.
I can tell you that reaffirmed even in the last week as I have talked to leaders of the Arab community. There will be no advance and separate peace with the Arab world without the Palestinian process and Palestinian peace. Everybody needs to understand that. That is a hard reality.”

Kerry, his equally-failed predecessor Hillary Clinton, President Obama and Vice President Biden were wrong.

Trump showed them the 100 years-old Arab-Jewish conflict can be ended without first resolving the 53 years-old Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict.

Biden’s election will see:

• Trump’s Peace Plan shredded and
• The Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict returned to the United Nations for determination in accordance with the anti-Israel Security Council Resolution 2334 — on which the Obama-Biden administration shamefully abstained without consulting President-elect Trump as Obama readied to vacate the White House on December 23, 2016

Believed an impossible dream - Trump’s re-election will see peace between Jews and Arabs finally realised.


Author’s note: The cartoon—commissioned exclusively for this article—is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators – whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Israel's next election must focus on Judea and Samaria – not Bibi

[Published 8 January 2020]

Israel’s next election due on March 2, 2020 must focus on the future of Judea and Samaria – not the future of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Bibi).

A window of opportunity has been granted to allow Israel to extend its sovereignty into Judea and Samaria following US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s statement on November 19, 2019:

“Turning now to Israel, the Trump administration is reversing the Obama administration’s approach towards Israeli settlements.

US public statements on settlement activities in the West Bank have been inconsistent over decades. In 1978, the Carter administration categorically concluded that Israel’s establishment of civilian settlements was inconsistent with international law. However, in 1981, President Reagan disagreed with that conclusion and stated that he didn’t believe that the settlements were inherently illegal.

Subsequent administrations recognized that unrestrained settlement activity could be an obstacle to peace, but they wisely and prudently recognized that dwelling on legal positions didn’t advance peace. However, in December 2016, at the very end of the previous administration, Secretary Kerry changed decades of this careful, bipartisan approach by publicly reaffirming the supposed illegality of settlements.

After carefully studying all sides of the legal debate, this administration agrees with President Reagan. The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.”

The United Nations General Assembly will object to any such unilateral extension of Israel’s sovereignty. However it will unequivocally delineate the minimum area in Judea and Samaria which Israel will be claiming in any future negotiations with Arab interlocutors to end the 100 years old Arab-Jewish conflict.

For these outcomes to occur — all political parties contesting Israel’s next election need to bring before the electorate their respective parties detailed proposals on the extension of Israeli sovereignty into:

1. the whole,

2. part or

3.none

of Judea and Samaria — accompanied by a map designating the areas in which Israeli sovereignty will be extended if they form part of Israel’s next Government.

For far too long Israelis have been at loggerheads with each other as to the extension of Israeli sovereignty into Judea and Samaria. The opportunity to resolve this political logjam during Donald Trump’s Presidency must not be lost.

Should another election deadlock occur for the third time in twelve months — the proposals presented by the respective parties for Judea and Samaria can be the basis for negotiations to form a Government of National Unity.

There will be critics who claim that Israel should not reveal its cards before negotiations actually begin with Arab interlocutors — that by doing so Israel will stymie itself from demanding more of Judea and Samaria.

All proposals should therefore include a rider that the area proposed is the minimum area of Judea and Samaria willing to be accepted in future negotiations and may be increased should changed circumstances to those now prevailing exist when negotiations are undertaken.

Political parties not prepared to inform voters of their proposals can expect to be given the thumbs down by the Israeli electorate. Those who are open and frank in presenting their proposals should find themselves rewarded by the electorate.

Politicians need to resist the temptation to focus their major attention on targeting Bibi — Israel’s longest serving Prime Minister — from becoming Israel’s next Prime Minister as he personally grapples with three indictments laid against him by Attorney General Mandelblit.

Israel’s national interest must incontrovertibly prevail.

Crunch time for Judea and Samaria has arrived — 100 years after reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Palestine was first proposed internationally at the 1920 San Remo Conference.

Realising that 100 year old dream should be Israel’s paramount objective.


Author’s note: The cartoon – commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators – whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog.

Israel, Jordan and Egypt must hop on Trump bandwagon to peace

[Published 21 November 2019]

President Trump has now delivered the missing piece in his plan to end the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict - providing the incentive necessary for Israel’s warring political parties to bury their hatchets and form a new Israeli Government within the next 21 days.

This unique opportunity for peace trumps the domestic differences that have prevented Israel’s political parties forming that new Government following the elections in April and September 2019.

Trump has been progressively signposting his roadmap for the last two years:

1. Moving the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem

2. Declaring Jerusalem as the capital of Israel

3. Closing down the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Offices in Washington

4. Withdrawing American funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA)

5. Giving a substantial aid package to Jordan

6. Recognising Israeli sovereignty in the Golan Heights

7. Having Bahrain host the “Peace to Prosperity” workshop to discuss the economic part of Trump’s “deal of the century”

8. Flagging Israel’s right to retain at least some - but “unlikely all” - of the West Bank

Now Trump has made the end goal of his “deal of the century” very clear with the following statement issued by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo:

“Turning now to Israel, the Trump administration is reversing the Obama administration’s approach towards Israeli settlements.

US public statements on settlement activities in the West Bank have been inconsistent over decades. In 1978, the Carter administration categorically concluded that Israel’s establishment of civilian settlements was inconsistent with international law. However, in 1981, President Reagan disagreed with that conclusion and stated that he didn’t believe that the settlements were inherently illegal.

Subsequent administrations recognized that unrestrained settlement activity could be an obstacle to peace, but they wisely and prudently recognized that dwelling on legal positions didn’t advance peace. However, in December 2016, at the very end of the previous administration, Secretary Kerry changed decades of this careful, bipartisan approach by publicly reaffirming the supposed illegality of settlements.

After carefully studying all sides of the legal debate, this administration agrees with President Reagan. The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.”

The right of Jews to live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) for the purposes of reconstituting the Jewish National Home there has been enshrined in international law under article 6 of the 1922 Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the 1945 United Nations Charter.

The United Nations, the European Union and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation have denied the legitimacy of these Jewish claims — emboldening the Arabs to claim 100% of these territories. Pompeo’s statement has quashed the Arabs’ claims.

One roadblock still remaining requires Trump to identify the Arab interlocutors prepared to stand up and negotiate with Israel on Trump’s plan.

Pompeo has given the PLO one last opportunity to join the negotiations with Israel.

“The United States encourages the Israelis and the Palestinians to resolve the status of Israeli settlements in the West Bank in any final status negotiations.”

The PLO had already unequivocally refused to negotiate on Trump’s plan and will continue to do so.

Trump should focus on Jordan and Egypt — the last two Arab States to have occupied Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza respectively between 1948 and 1967 — to fill the void.

Israel needs a new Government within the next 21 days or face another expensive and debilitating election in March 2020 — just as Trump is bidding for re-election — when he might consider it inopportune to release his plan.

Israel, Jordan and Egypt must hop on the Trump bandwagon now.

Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Trump writes off West Bank and Gaza as separate country

[Published 4 September 2019]

The US State Department web site has removed the West Bank and Gaza (“disputed territories”) from its list of “Countries and Areas” — signalling that it no longer regards these disputed territories as potentially comprising a separate country — in addition to Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

This is the clearest indication yet that President Trump’s soon to be released deal of the century will abandon the “two-state solution” — the creation of another Arab State in the disputed territories for the first time ever in recorded history — propagated by President Obama and his former Secretary of State John Kerry.

The US State Department web site under Kerry had included the “Palestinian Territories” in the “List of Countries and Other Areas” between 2009 and 2017.

Kerry had declared as he prepared to vacate the State Department on 28 December 2016:

“Throughout his Administration, President Obama has been deeply committed to Israel and its security, and that commitment has guided his pursuit of peace in the Middle East. This is an issue which, all of you know, I have worked on intensively during my time as Secretary of State for one simple reason: because the two-state solution is the only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It is the only way to ensure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living in peace and security with its neighbors. It is the only way to ensure a future of freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people. And it is an important way of advancing United States interests in the region.”

Kerry frankly admitted that America’s decision to abstain on United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 on 23 December 2016:

“was about preserving the two-state solution. That’s what we were standing up for: Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living side by side in peace and security with its neighbors. That’s what we are trying to preserve for our sake and for theirs.”

Kerry was consumed by his own ignorance and arrogance when proclaiming:

“Today, there are a number — there are a similar number of Jews and Palestinians living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. They have a choice. They can choose to live together in one state, or they can separate into two states. But here is a fundamental reality: if the choice is one state, Israel can either be Jewish or democratic — it cannot be both — and it won’t ever really be at peace. Moreover, the Palestinians will never fully realize their vast potential in a homeland of their own with a one-state solution.”

It obviously did not dawn on Kerry that there was another alternative to his “one state or two states” mantra:

The division of the West Bank and Gaza between Israel, Jordan and Egypt in direct face to face negotiations to complete the allocation of sovereignty in former Palestine between Arabs and Jews first contemplated by the 1917 Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Conference and the Treaty of Sevres in 1920, and the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Obama and Kerry’s treacherous act of abstaining on Resolution 2334 was swiftly repudiated by the House passing H-Res 11 by 342 votes to 80 on 5 January 2017.

The PLO has committed political hara-kiri since — refusing to negotiate with Israel on Trump’s yet-to-be-released peace plan — vacating the field to other Arab states including Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to fill the negotiating void.

The State Department’s recently re-designed website sends a clear message to Arab states wanting to end the Jewish-Arab conflict to come to the negotiating table.

Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators—whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Trump reverses Obama-UN treachery on West Bank and East Jerusalem

[Published 19 June 2019]

President Trump’s decision to back Israel’s claims to sovereignty in the West Bank and Jerusalem has resurrected America’s commitment to the Jewish people made by President Bush and Congress in 2004 after that commitment had been subsequently repudiated by President Obama in the last month of his Presidency in December 2016.

Bush’s Congress-endorsed commitment was given to Israel in a letter from President Bush to then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on 14 April 2004. Bush confirmed that America regarded it as unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority would see Israel withdraw from all of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

President Bush’s commitment was overwhelmingly endorsed by Congress by 502 votes to 12.

Bush’s commitment procured Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza and part of the West Bank in 2005 involving the forcible removal of 8000 Jews living there — a decision which has had disastrous consequences for both Israel's and Gaza's civilian populations after Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 from the Palestine Liberation Organization.

President Obama shredded this Bush Congress-endorsed commitment when he abstained - rather than vetoed Security Council Resolution 2334 on 23 December 2016 - which declared:

“the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;”

Secretary of State John Kerry offered this pathetic explanation on 28 December 2016 for Obama’ failure to veto Resolution 2234:

“the vote in the United Nations was about preserving the two-state solution. That’s what we were standing up for: Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living side by side in peace and security with its neighbors. That’s what we are trying to preserve for our sake and for theirs.”

Resolution 2334 however was asserting:

1. The West Bank and East Jerusalem were “Palestinian territory”and

2. 600,000 Jews currently living there had no legal entitlement to do so despite the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations own Charter legally vesting that right in the Jewish people.

Obama and Kerry were knowingly complicit in America not vetoing this overtly-hostile anti-Jewish Security Council resolution. Obama invariably had vetoed similar Security Council resolutions during his eight years as President.

Obama’s then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had misleadingly denied on 6 June 2009 that any such Bush-era commitment existed. Yet she had voted in the Senate to endorse Bush’s commitment on 24 June 2004 when a Senator.

Obama’s refusal to veto Resolution 2334 as he was exiting the White House - leaving this poisoned chalice behind for President Trump - was shameful.

Trump's recognition of Israel’s right to retain portions of the West Bank and East Jerusalem has restored America’s reputation for honouring commitments made by its President and endorsed by its Congress.

Trump’s decision sends a clear message to the United Nations that it needs to act in accordance with its Charter if it is to have any influence or relevance in ending the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Trump has also put the Arab States on notice that America stands strong in its continuing support for Israel and its claims to sovereignty in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The sooner the Arab States understand this change in America’s position post-Obama — the sooner Trump’s yet to be released “deal of the century”has a chance of succeeding.

Obama and the United Nations’ treacherous attempt to entrap Trump has spectacularly failed.

Author’ note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones” - one of Israel’ foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Trump plan for Israel-Jordan-Egypt negotiations hits brick wall

[Published 16 January 2019]

President Trump’s self-styled deal of the century aimed at resolving the 100 years-old Arab-Jewish conflict has now been postponed beyond February for a further unspecified period of months - signalling Jordan and Egypt are still refusing to step up and negotiate with Israel on Trump’s plan.

Jordan and Egypt — having respectively signed peace agreements with Israel in 1994 and 1979 - were the last two Arab states to occupy Judea and Samaria (West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza (“the disputed territories”) between 1948 and 1967. Both are eminently qualified to replace the Palestine Liberation Organisation which has flatly refused —sight unseen — to negotiate with Israel on Trump’s proposals to resolve the allocation of sovereignty in the disputed territories.

Trump’s plan will be stillborn unless Arab interlocutors indicate in advance that they stand ready to take up the challenge presented by Trump’s ideas and agree to meet with Israel to try and reach a deal acceptable to both Arabs and Jews.

America’s ambassador to Israel — David Friedman — revealed that the upcoming Israeli elections in April were a factor - but not the only factor — that led to the latest postponement of Trump’s long-awaited peace plan.

Friedman said the White House wanted to release the plan in a way that gave it the best chance of getting a good reception. Friedman noted additional “wordsmithing and smoothing” was still required before it was publicized.

Friedman added:

“The challenge to a peace plan is making the case for a much more sober assessment of the realities in this region. The last time there was a meaningful agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians was 1993 [Ed—The Oslo Accords]. A lot has happened since 1993”

Friedman’s comments came during a joint media conference held in Jerusalem alongside US National Security Adviser John Bolton.

Bolton had seen General Jim Mattis resign as Secretary of Defence in December. Since 2013 Mattis had strongly supported the two-state solution — the creation of an additional Arab state between Israel and Jordan — contemplated by both the Oslo Accords and President Bush’s 2003 Roadmap, and unsuccessfully pushed for eight years by President Obama and his Secretaries for State — Hilary Clinton and John Kerry.

Bolton’s opposing opinion held since 2009 was reconfirmed to Eric Shawn on 21 January 2018:

“I hope at some point the Administration recognizes and perhaps it is already quietly — that the two-state solution isn’t going anywhere. If anything I would say to King Abdullah of Jordan — “Be prepared to reassert Jordanian sovereignty over part of the West Bank—negotiate with Israel”. I think that’s a far better outcome than the continued pursuit of a mythical — I believe — unattainable viable Palestinian state”

Twelve months down the track Bolton’s Jordan approach has seemingly prevailed - especially after Friedman’s assertion last September:

“Since 1994, the United States has thrown more than $10 billion in humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. Without minimizing the importance of medical treatment and quality education for children — and we don’t minimize that, not even for a minute — we found that these expenditures were bringing the region no closer to peace or stability, not even by a millimetre. To spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars to fund stipends to terrorists and their families, to expend funds to perpetuate rather than to mitigate refugee status, and to finance hate-filled textbooks — I ask you, how does that provide value to the United States or the region?"

Friedman’s “wordsmithing and smoothing” comment indicates that Jordan and Egypt could be holding out for further American financial and security guarantees before agreeing to negotiate with Israel.

Trump’s legendary negotiating skills — and patience - are being seriously tested.

Author’s note: The cartoon—commissioned exclusively for this article—is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators—whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Mattis-Bolton accord can sway Trump to dump PLO for Jordan

[Published 2 April 2018]

President Trump’s possible call for Jordan to replace the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) as Israel’s negotiating partner under Trump’s soon-to-be-released “ultimate deal” will be considerably strengthened if Trump’s newly-appointed National Security Adviser - John Bolton - and Secretary of Defense - James “Mad Dog” Mattis - concur on such a move.

Bolton has supported this strategy since 2009– telling Eric Shawn on 21 January 2018:

“I hope at some point the Administration recognizes and perhaps it is already quietly – that the two-state solution isn’t going anywhere. If anything I would say to King Abdullah of Jordan – “Be prepared to reassert Jordanian sovereignty over part of the West Bank – negotiate with Israel”. I think that’s a far better outcome than the continued pursuit of a mythical – I believe – unattainable viable Palestinian state”

Mattis has favoured the Obama-Kerry strategy – pointing out to the Aspen Security Forum in July 2013:

“We have got to find a way to make the two-state solution that Democrat and Republican administrations have supported, we’ve got to get there. And the chances for it, as the king of Jordan has pointed out, are starting to ebb because of the settlements and where they’re at, are going to make it impossible to maintain the two-state option.”

Mattis further reasoned:

“I paid a military security price every day as the commander of CentCom because the Americans were seen as biased in support of Israel and that moderates all the moderate Arabs who want to be with us, because they can’t come out publicly in support of people who don’t show respect for the Arab Palestinians. So he [Secretary of State John Kerry] is right on target with what he’s doing. And I just hope the protagonists want peace and a two-state solution as much as he does.”

Kerry however failed miserably – being unable to get the PLO back to the negotiating table after a PLO walk-out in April 2014 following nine months of unsuccessful negotiations on proposals specifically formulated by Kerry to resolve the long-running conflict.

Today:

1. Moderate Arabs – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Oman - have come out publicly - joining Jordan and Egypt in meeting with Israel in the White House – without PLO participation - to discuss Gaza’s deteriorating situation.

2. The PLO refuses to resume negotiations with Israel on the two-state solution: creating a second Arab State – in addition to Jordan – in the territory covered by the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

3. The PLO will no longer accept America as sole mediator and is demanding an international conference be convened by mid-2018

The media have castigated Trump for appointing Bolton – typified by highly-credentialled columnist George Will claiming:

“Bolton will soon be the second-most dangerous American.”

Yet Will himself had written in the Washington Post on 17 April 1987:

“May 14 will be the 30th Anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel, June 6 will be the 20th anniversary of the Six Day War. The West Bank has been held by Israel longer than it had been held by Jordan, the 1967 aggressor, which ever since has presented itself as the aggrieved party. Today, as every day since 1948, the key to peace is direct negotiations between Jordan and Israel, not a committee”

Mattis’s jocular remarks on meeting Bolton at the Pentagon - caught in an off-microphone exchange – signals Mattis could have already changed his thinking:

"I heard you're actually the devil incarnate and I wanted to meet you"

A Mattis-Bolton accord on Jordan replacing the PLO in future negotiations with Israel will undoubtedly reinforce Trump’s preparedness to make this long-overdue call.

Clinton Will Continue Obama Policy Confronting Russia In Syria And UN

[Published 10 October 2016]


Hillary Clinton has made it very clear in the second Presidential Debate that if elected next President of the United States she will continue President Obama’s confrontation with Russia both in Syria and at the United Nations.

Clinton told 66.5 million viewers:

“Well, the situation in Syria is catastrophic. And every day that goes by, we see the results of the regime by Assad in partnership with the Iranians on the ground, the Russians in the air, bombarding places, in particular Aleppo, where there are hundreds of thousands of people, probably about 250,000 still left. And there is a determined effort by the Russian air force to destroy Aleppo in order to eliminate the last of the Syrian rebels who are really holding out against the Assad regime.
Russia hasn’t paid any attention to ISIS. They’re interested in keeping Assad in power. So I, when I was secretary of state, advocated and I advocate today a no-fly zone and safe zones. We need some leverage with the Russians, because they are not going to come to the negotiating table for a diplomatic resolution, unless there is some leverage over them. And we have to work more closely with our partners and allies on the ground.

But I want to emphasize that what is at stake here is the ambitions and the aggressiveness of Russia. Russia has decided that it’s all in, in Syria. And they’ve also decided who they want to see become president of the United States, too, and it’s not me.”

Clinton’s no-fly zone over Libya proved disastrous and has already been rejected by Russia over Syria.

She left unexplained what leverage she could put on Putin to get him to the negotiating table.

Her assessment that Russia wanted Trump elected as President of the United States was probably correct for the following reasons enunciated by Trump during the debate.

“I don’t like Assad at all, but Assad is killing ISIS. Russia is killing ISIS. And Iran is killing ISIS..

... I think you have to knock out ISIS. Right now, Syria is fighting ISIS. We have people that want to fight both at the same time. But Syria is no longer Syria. Syria is Russia and it’s Iran, who she [Clinton] made strong and Kerry and Obama made into a very powerful nation and a very rich nation, very, very quickly, very, very quickly.

I believe we have to get ISIS. We have to worry about ISIS before we can get too much more involved. She had a chance to do something with Syria. They had a chance. And that was the line. And she didn’t.”

The choice for America’s voters could not be clearer:

1. co-operation with Russia to first get rid of ISIS and - unmentioned during the debate - al-Nusra threats to world peace and security already declared by the UN Security Council or

2. continuing confrontation with Russia seeking to resolve the Syrian civil conflict which has raged since 2011.

Obama has spurned Russia’s offer - Clinton is adopting Obama’s position

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov extended the following olive branch to America on 18 November 2015:

“The Security Council needs to give preferential attention to the task of creating a solid legal foundation for the fight against this evil [Islamic State] and for the mobilization of an actual global coalition in response to this common uncompromising challenge for us all”.

Obama has spurned Russia’s offer - Clinton is adopting Obama’s position.

Trump seems ready to take up Russia’s offer of defeating ISIS first.

American voters have been presented with a stark choice between Clinton and Trump on America’s future involvement in Syria.

Deceiving Trump and Tillerson has consequences for Abbas

[Published 19 June 2017]

President Trump and Secretary of State Tillerson are quickly learning that tough talk is needed to rein in Mahmoud Abbas — who has deceived Trump and Tillerson twice in the last month.

Abbas sweet-talked Trump at the White House on 3 May claiming:

“we are raising our youth, our children, our grandchildren on a culture of peace.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly responded on 4 May:

“I heard President Abbas yesterday say that Palestinians teach their children peace. That’s unfortunately not true. They name their schools after mass murders of Israelis and they pay terrorists,”

Trump blasted Abbas in Bethlehem on 23 May:

“You tricked me in D.C.! You talked there about your commitment to peace, but the Israelis showed me your involvement in incitement”

Tillerson too was made to look stupid after he had told a Senate hearing on 13 June that he had been informed that Abbas intended ceasing the policy of payments to terrorists.

Tillerson’s claim was immediately repudiated by Issa Qaraqe, the head of the PA prisoners affairs department:

“This is not true and this statement is an aggression against the Palestinian people,”

Such duplicity does not augur well for creating an environment hoping to end the Jewish-Arab conflict.

Straight talking from Trump is needed to:

1. Bury the negotiating process between Abbas and Netanyahu that torpedoed the attempts by President Obama and Secretaries of State Clinton and Kerry to end the conflict between 2009 and 2016.

2. Terminate the artificially contrived framework misnamed “the two-state solution” within which previous negotiations have been conducted between Abbas and Netanyahu with total disregard for the origins of the conflict between Jews and Arabs.

That conflict began with the creation by the League of Nations of the Mandate for Palestine on 24 July 1922 following decisions taken by the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference and the Treaty of Sevres in 1920 following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I.

The League of Nations by unanimous resolution of all member States — including Iran — laid down a formula that would see the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home being restricted to an area comprising no more than 23% of the territory covered by the Mandate

In 1946 an Arab State was created in the remaining 77% of Mandatory Palestine and was renamed “the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan”.

In 1948 Israel was created in 17% of the territory of the Mandate whilst the remaining 6% - Judea and Samaria, Gaza — was conquered and occupied by Transjordan (renamed Jordan in 1950) and Egypt respectively until their loss to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War.

Arab propaganda has repeatedly and misleadingly claimed that the conflict only began in 1948.

Abbas is but the latest in a long line of failed leaders of the Palestinian Arabs who have rejected all attempts to resolve the conflict based on what was internationally agreed 95 years ago.

Jordan has been exculpated from playing any role in resolving this conflict it was part of from the very inception of the Mandate and which it substantially aggravated between 1948 and 1967.

Trump and Tillerson belong to the old school that uses language whose meaning cannot be misinterpreted.

Trifling with the truth in conversations with Trump and Tillerson must have political consequences for Abbas.

Hopefully the days of diplomatic doublespeak and ambiguous language are nearing their end.

Bringing Jordan into any new negotiations to finally determine the allocation of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) — an area smaller than Delaware — is the key to Trump pulling off the deal of the century.

Trump must honour Bush-Congress deal with Israel

[Published 18 May 2017]

President Trump’s historic visit to Israel on 22 May presents the perfect opportunity for him to deliver on the promises he made to Israel during last year’s Presidential election campaign.

Trump’s broad-ranging foreign policy speech on 27 April 2016 highlighted the disgraceful way Israel had been treated by the Obama Administration:

“Israel, our great friend and the one true democracy in the Middle East has been snubbed and criticized by an administration that lacks moral clarity.

President Obama has not been a friend to Israel.”

Trump’s claim was certainly justified.

Obama — aided and abetted by his two Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry — had deliberately undermined the written commitments made to Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon by President Bush on 14 April 2004 and subsequently endorsed overwhelmingly by the Congress by 502 votes to 12 (“Bush/Congress Commitments”).

Trump promised:

“To our friends and allies, I say America is going to be strong again. America is going to be reliable again. It’s going to be a great and reliable ally again. It’s going to be a friend again. We’re going to finally have a coherent foreign policy based upon American interests and the shared interests of our allies.”

The shared interests of Israel and America became inextricably entwined after the Bush/Congress Commitments had:

1. secured Israel’s total disengagement from Gaza and a part of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) in 2005

2. promised President Bush’s stalled 2003 Roadmap proposing the two-state solution a real chance of coming to fruition.

The Bush/Congress Commitments were also crucial to Israel’s agreement to resume negotiations with the Palestinian Authority as publicly declared by Israel’s then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at the international conference called by President Bush in Annapolis in 2007:

“In the course of the negotiations, we will use previous agreements as a point of departure. U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the road map, and the letter of President Bush to the prime minister of Israel dated April 14, 2004.”

Obama’s treachery in derogating from the Bush/Congress Commitments was compounded when he refused to veto Security Council Resolution 2334 passed during the dying days of Obama’s Presidency on 23 December 2016.

Trump needs to repeat this part of his 2016 message loudly and clearly in Israel:

”... your friends need to know that you will stick by the agreements that you have with them. You’ve made that agreement, you have to stand by it and the world will be a better place. “

Sticking by the Bush/Congress commitments will sound a clear warning to the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and the Arab League that PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas will become irrelevant if he continues to:

1. press for a complete withdrawal by Israel from Judea and Samaria (West Bank)

2. refuse to accept Israel as the nation State of the Jewish people

3. maintain a claimed right of return to Israel for millions of refugees and their descendants contradicting the unequivocal terms of the Bush/Congress Commitments.

Trump - as only he can — has put Abbas on notice this could well happen:

“We have to look to new people because many of the old people frankly don’t know what they’re doing, even though they may look awfully good writing in The New York Times or being watched on television.”

Bipartisan Congressional support will welcome Trump honouring the Bush/Congress Commitments - confirming Trump’s bold vision:

“We need a new rational American foreign policy, informed by the best minds and supported by both parties, and it will be by both parties—Democrats, Republicans, independents, everybody, as well as by our close allies.”

Integrity always trumps betrayal.

Bush, Obama, Russia, EU and UN Buried Under Trump Landslide

[Published 16 February 2017]


President Trump has buried the Bush Roadmap and any lingering hope for the creation of a second Arab State (“the two-state solution”) — in addition to Jordan — in the territory designated under the 1922 Mandate for Palestine.

This inevitability follows Trump’s failure at a White House joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on 15 February to reaffirm the written commitments made by President Bush to Israel in his letter dated 14 April 2004 - overwhelmingly endorsed by the Congress by 502 votes to 12 (“Bush Congress-Endorsed Commitments”).

President Bush had been urged to do so just the day before by veteran US peace negotiator - Dennis Ross — who stated it would have:

“significant implications, both because it was recognizing settlement blocs referred to in the letter as major population centers, but also because it said that no agreement can involve going back to the 1949 Armistice lines or the equivalent of June 4, 1967.”

Similar calls had also been made by:

1. Michael Oren - Israel’s former Ambassador to Washington and currently Deputy Minister in Netanyahu’s Prime Minister’s office
2. Tzipi Livni — former Israeli Foreign Minister who had led negotiations for Israel with the Palestinian Authority in the peace talks brokered by U.S. Secretary of StateJohn Kerry from July 2013 until April 2014.
3. Danny Ayalon - Former Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister

Former Israeli United Nations ambassador and until recently the Director General of Israel’s Foreign Ministry - Dore Gold - had been concerned as far back as 9 June 2009 that President Obama was not going to reaffirm the Bush Congress-Endorsed Commitments:

“For example, it still needs to be clarified whether the Obama administration feels bound by the April 14, 2004, Bush letter to Sharon on defensible borders and settlement blocs, which was subsequently ratified by large bipartisan majorities in both the US Senate (95-3) and the House of Representatives (407-9) on June 23-24, 2004. Disturbingly, on June 1, 2009, the State Department spokesman, Robert Wood, refused to answer repeated questions about whether the Obama administration viewed itself as legally bound by the Bush letter. It would be better to obtain earlier clarification of that point, rather than having both countries expend their energies over an issue that may not be the real underlying source of their dispute.”

Obama’s clarification never came.

Even Netanyahu — just before boarding a plane to see Obama in the White House in May 2011 - had said he expected:

“to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of American commitments made to Israel in 2004 which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress.”

Netanyahu never received that affirmation then — nor did he from Trump now.

Their reasons however are very different.

Obama proceeded to trash those commitments made with one of America’s closest allies with disastrous consequences for America’s foreign policy, its reputation and integrity.

Trump however had difficulty in reaffirming all of Bush’s commitments because one of them stated:

“the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap. The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan”

Trump doesn’t like long negotiations without any deal — and Trump wants to cut a deal.

Trump has accordingly ditched the Bush two-state solution — endorsed by Russia, the European Union and the United Nations. It now joins the diplomatic graveyard housing other two-state solutions proposed by

1. the 1937 Peel Commission
2. the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan,
3. the 1993 Oslo Accords and
4. Israel in 2000/2001 and 2008.

The Arabs have missed yet another opportunity to end the 100 years old Arab-Jewish conflict.

Trump-Netanyahu Meeting Set To Expose Obama’s Collusion On Resolution 2334

[Published 10 February 2017]


One of the intriguing aspects of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s visit to the White House on 15 February will be the evidence he produces to President Trump to establish former President Obama’s collusion in promoting Security Council Resolution 2334.

America abstained from voting on Resolution 2334 – but the language used in that Resolution was inimical to the national interests of Israel and the Jewish people by declaring that:

1. the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity and constituted a flagrant violation under international law

2. Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem

This language identifies as “Palestinian territory”:

(i) the centuries old Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem,
(ii) the site of the First and Second Temples,
(iii) the Western Wall,
(iv) the Mount of Olives Jewish Cemetery,
(v) Rachel’s Tomb,
(vi) the Machpelah, and
(vii) Judea and Samaria

Resolution 2334 seeks to erase the legal rights vested in the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in these areas under the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Such language gives credence to the PLO claim that the Mandate — a critical building block in the 100 years old Arab-Jewish conflict — is null and void.

Resolution 2334 contravenes article 80 of the United Nations Charter - exceeding the Security Council’s powers and condemning the hypocrisy of the Security Council which sanctimoniously professes to be concerned about “legal validity” and “international law”

The Egyptian newspaper Al-Youm Al-Sabea was the first to allege American collusion in promoting Resolution 2334 - claiming to have a transcript of a meeting in December — prior to the passage of Resolution 2334 - between Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, US Secretary of State John Kerry, and US National Security Advisor Susan Rice in which Kerry said the US was prepared to cooperate with the Palestinians at the Security Council.

White House National Security Council spokesman Ned Price claimed no such tripartite meeting took place and that the ‘transcript’ was a total fabrication — although he admitted Erekat had met with Kerry and Rice separately.

Netanyahu issued a Press Release on 28 December 2016 declaring:

“We have it on absolutely incontestable evidence that the United States organized, advanced and brought this resolution to the United Nations Security Council. We’ll share that information with the incoming administration. Some of it is sensitive, it’s all true. You saw some of it in the protocol released in an Egyptian paper. There’s plenty more; it’s the tip of the iceberg.”

Netanyahu’s claim that some of the information is sensitive suggests that there has been an interception of emails or other classified American documents emanating from Obama or Kerry’s offices.

America’s cybersecurity record has been appalling - as the hacking of the Democrats web site and Hillary Clinton’s emails and private server has shown.

Netanyahu’s description of the transcript held by the Egyptian newspaper as “the tip of the iceberg” suggests Israel holds a Wiki-style treasure trove of incriminating documents.

Sensational claims of Israel-hacking will doubtless fuel the media.

There appears to be no evidence that this material has yet been given to the Trump Administration. If it had — some leak would surely have emerged by now.

Netanyahu’s visit to the White House presents the perfect opportunity to personally hand his evidence to President Trump - enabling him to decide whether to disclose such evidence publicly or not.

Netanyahu’s moment exposing Obama’s betrayal of Israel is fast approaching.

[Author’s Note: The Israeli Foreign Affairs Ministry was asked to confirm or deny some of the facts in this article but no response was received]

Paris buries Palestine and UN Security Council Resolution 2334

72 States and Organizations meeting in Paris on 15 January have repudiated Security Council Resolution 2334 (“UNSCR 2334”) - just three weeks after it was passed on 23 December 2016.

UNSCR 2334 had reiterated the Security Council’s:

“vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,”

The final Paris communique dumped this “two democratic states solution” by reaffirming:

“that a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, is the only way to achieve enduring peace.”

The word “democratic” was in fact omitted in the Paris communique in nine places – signalling that Paris did not accept the definitive terms of the “two-state solution” proposed by the Security Council.

The Paris communique deliberately sought to mislead and deceive what UNSCR 2334 had actually stated – declaring the Participants:

“welcomed international efforts to advance Middle East peace, including the adoption of United Nations Security Council resolution 2334 on 23 December 2016 which … called on both sides to take steps to advance the two-state solution on the ground;"

- blatantly failing to identify that it was the “two democratic states solution” that was envisioned in UNSCR 2334.

Paris went even further in attempting to gloss over the obligation for any Palestinian State to be democratic - the communique noting:

“the importance of addressing the dire humanitarian and security situation in the Gaza Strip and called for swift steps to improve the situation.”

No mention about addressing the absence of democracy in Gaza - where Hamas has denied the Arab population any elections for the last 10 years.

Paris omitted any reference to the only framework within which Israel and the PLO have been negotiating during the last 13 years – the 2003 Bush Roadmap – which clearly states:

“A settlement, negotiated between the parties, will result in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbors.”

The Paris communique:

“called on both sides to take steps to advance the two-state solution on the ground; the recommendations of the Quartet on 1 July 2016; and the United States Secretary of State’s principles on the two-state solution on 28 December 2016.”

However one Quartet recommendation states:

“Gaza and the West Bank should be reunified under a single, legitimate and democratic Palestinian authority on the basis of the PLO platform and Quartet principles and the rule of law, including control over all armed personnel and weapons in accordance with existing agreements.”

Kerry mentioned “two-state solution” 29 times but never once uttered the word “democratic”.

Israel should now not fall into the trap of negotiating with any entity less than one already democratically elected and functioning in Areas “A” and “B” of the West Bank and Gaza – nor rely on any promises of democracy emerging there in the future.

Paris has managed to bury the “two democratic states solution” in just 24 hours.

The Roadmap and UNSCR 2334 have received the last rites.

Perhaps the Security Council and the Paris participants should now consider the “two-state solution” first envisaged in 1922:

One Jewish State – Israel – and one Arab State – Jordan – in the territory covered by the Mandate for Palestine.

This territorial subdivision has already happened in 95% of the Mandate territory. It can happen very quickly in the remaining 5%.

In fact it only involves redrawing the existing international boundary between Israel and Jordan – two states already living side by side in peace within secure and recognised borders.

Simple and achievable.

Palestine: Paris conference challenges UN Security Council Resolution 2334

[Published 11 January 2017]


Seventy countries flocking to Paris on January 15 seem set to challenge Security Council Resolution 2334 before the ink has hardly dried.

America’s House of Representatives voting 342-80 has already declared that it:

“opposes United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 and will work to strengthen the United States-Israel relationship, and calls for United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 to be repealed or fundamentally altered so that —

(A) it is no longer one-sided and anti-Israel; and

(B) it allows all final status issues toward a two-state solution to be resolved through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties.”

Now the Paris Conference seems set to blindside the Security Council’s vision expressed in the preamble to Resolution 2334:

“a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,”

Four indicators point to this Security Council “two democratic states solution” being deliberately abandoned at the Paris Conference:

1. A statement by France’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development on 28 December 2016 welcomed:

”.. John Kerry’s clear, courageous, and engaged speech in support of peace in the Middle East and the two-state solution, with Israel and Palestine living side-by-side in peace and security.

France shares the US Secretary of State’s conviction that it is necessary and urgent to implement the two-state solution.”

Kerry’s speech mentioned “two states” 29 times without stipulating they must be “democratic.”

The Foreign Minister’s above statement does likewise twice.

2. An updated draft of the Paris Conference’s summary statement obtained in advance by Haaretz - indicates that the conference decisions are already a done deal before one glass of champagne or a canape have been enjoyed by the delegates and their entourages.

This summary statement mentions the term “two-state solution” eight times without highlighting they be “democratic” once.

3. The summary statement (Paragraph III) says that looking ahead the conference participants:

“expect both sides to restate their commitment to the two-state solution and to disavow official voices on their side that reject this solution”

This statement is the very antithesis of democracy - seeking to shame duly elected politicians from freely expressing their ideas and thoughts.

Paul Waldman asks what is the point of the “disavowal ritual” and answers as follows:

“its real purpose is to define the boundaries of the acceptable, both within each party and in politics as a whole. When someone gets disavowed, we all know that to be associated with them will lead to shame and reproach. That person and what they represent, it has been made clear, is out of bounds.”

Disavowal might appeal to those seven UN Security Council member-States that are not democracies and repress free speech — China, Russia, Angola, Egypt, Malaysia, Ukraine and Venezuela.

However the other eight democratic member-States on the Security Council — France, United Kingdom, America, Japan, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain and Uruguay should be appalled.

Demanding two democratic States envisioned by Security Council Resolution 2334 — and the disavowal of official voices on both sides that reject the Security Council’s solution - will not be embraced at this Conference.

4. Not one word in the summary statement says how and when democracy will be achieved and maintained in the “State of Palestine”

The “two-state solution” does not necessarily require:

(i) Mahmoud Abbas to terminate the thirteenth year of his four year Presidential term,

(ii) Gazan and West Bank Arabs being given the vote for the first time since 2006 and

(iii) two non-elected governing authorities making way for one elected Government.

Paris promises the sudden death of Resolution 2334 with the burial of the Security Council’s “two democratic states solution”.

Congress rebuffs Obama and Kerry for abandoning American policy on Israel

By a vote of 342-80 Congress resolved on 5 January 2017:

“the passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 undermined the long-standing position of the United States to oppose and veto United Nations Security Council resolutions that seek to impose solutions to final status issues, or are one-sided and anti-Israel, reversing decades of bipartisan agreement;”

Congress’s decision goes a long way to restoring America’s reputation and integrity.

Vice President-elect Pence has certainly signalled the incoming Trump Administration’s approval of such Congress action with the following tweet:

"Great to see strong bipartisan vote in Congress opposing recent UN resolution against our most cherished ally. America stands with Israel"

Congress now needs to rectify Obama’s abandonment of the written commitments made to Israel by President Bush in his letter to then Israeli Prime Minister Sharon on 14 April 2004 (“Commitments”).

Congress has a vested interest in seeing those Commitments restored - because it overwhelmingly approved Bush giving those Commitments to Israel by a massive vote of 502 to 12.

Among those voting to support those Commitments was Senator Hillary Clinton.

Senator John Kerry — whilst not casting a vote in the Senate - made his position very clear to Moderator Tim Russert on Meet The Press on 18 April 2004:

RUSSERT: On Thursday, President Bush broke with the tradition and policy of six predecessors when he said that Israel can keep part of the land seized in the 1967 Middle East War and asserted the Palestinian refugees cannot go back to their particular homes. Do you support President Bush?

KERRY: Yes.

RUSSERT: Completely?

KERRY: Yes.

Subsequent decisions by both Clinton and Kerry respectively as Secretary of State played an active role in aiding and abetting Obama’s abandonment of the Bush Commitments - marking a shameful period in American history.

Bush gave his Commitments to Israel for the following stated reasons:

“We welcome the disengagement plan you have prepared, under which Israel would withdraw certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and withdraw certain military installations and settlements in the West Bank. These steps described in the plan will mark real progress toward realizing my June 24, 2002 vision, and make a real contribution towards peace. We also understand that, in this context, Israel believes it is important to bring new opportunities to the Negev and the Galilee. We are hopeful that steps pursuant to this plan, consistent with my vision, will remind all states and parties of their own obligations under the roadmap.

The United States appreciates the risks such an undertaking represents.”

Neither Bush nor Sharon could have envisaged what followed:

1. Hamas installed as the Government in Gaza,

2. a terrorist tunnel network being dug into Israel,

3. thousands of rockets indiscriminately fired into Israeli population centres,

4. chaos in Sinai,

5. three wars with heavy Jewish and Arab casualties.

Clinton and Kerry should have resigned in protest at Obama abandoning the Bush Commitments.

Reaffirming those Commitments should be an immediate priority for Congress — which is clearly in no mood to allow Obama to do any further damage.

Congress has signalled it will not tolerate Obama or Kerry attempting to subvert American foreign policy on Israel at the forthcoming international conference in Paris on 15 January or in the Security Council in the last five days of Obama’s Presidency.

America can stand tall and proud. American commitments to Israel will be honoured once again.

Obama and Kerry open door for Palestine Mandate solution

[Published 30 December 2016]


US Secretary of State John Kerry – perhaps unwittingly – has now opened the door to reviving the solution contained in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine – one homeland for the Jews and one homeland for the Arabs (“Palestine Mandate Solution”)

This solution has already been realised in 95% of the territory of the Mandate with the creation of the Arab State of Jordan in 1946 and the Jewish State of Israel in 1948.

Kerry completely ignored mentioning the Palestine Mandate Solution in his speech whilst reiterating on many occasions that there was no viable alternative to the creation of a second Arab State - in addition to Jordan (“the two state solution”) - in the 5% of the Mandate territory still remaining unallocated – Judea and Samaria (West Bank) Gaza and East Jerusalem (“unallocated Mandate territory”)

The longer Kerry spoke on what was needed to be done to achieve the two-state solution after fruitless negotiations extending over 23 years – the more it became obvious that such a result was totally unrealistic and unachievable.

His prediction that failure would result in the creation of one State between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – is alarmist and simply fanciful.

Why did Kerry avoid any mention of the Palestine Mandate Solution being a viable alternative to the two state solution – especially as Jordan and Egypt occupied the unallocated Mandate territory between 1948 and 1967 – and both have long-standing peace treaties with Israel?

The only reason seems his apparent ignorance of the history of the conflict as evidenced by his two following remarks:

1. Kerry referred to the first Zionist Congress in 1897 called to realise the Jewish dream - but failed to mention the San Remo Conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 and the Palestine Mandate in 1922 which set out the framework unanimously agreed to by the international community for the:

“reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Palestine”

The Mandate is legally binding in international law and it cannot be flippantly ignored by Kerry. The benefits conferred by the Mandate on the Jewish people to settle in the unallocated Mandate territory have been preserved by article 80 of the UN Charter – another piece of international law that did not rate a mention by Kerry.

Kerry and Obama have ignored these binding international law provisions to their dying shame.

2. Kerry refers to an intimate, one-on-one dinner with Israel’s Shimon Peres just a few months before he died and quotes Peres as having told him:

“The original mandate gave the Palestinians 48 percent; now it’s down to 22 percent. I think 78 percent is enough for us.”

Peres got it wrong - and so has Kerry in quoting him.

Israel presently constitutes 17% - not 78% - of the original mandate

Peres was talking about the area allocated for a second Arab State in 22% of the original Mandate territory by the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan. The remaining 78% had become an independent Arab State in 1946.

The additional 48% was not enough for the Arabs. They wanted 100% - rejected the UN Plan and saw it whittled down to 22% after the 1948 War of Independence and the 1967 Six Day War.

The Arabs – with Security Council Resolution 2334 and now Obama and Kerry’s backing - demand another Arab State in an area equivalent to the remaining 22% - having rejected offers of 90% in 2000/1 and 95% in 2008.

It won’t happen.

The UN Security Council buried the two-state solution on 23 December 2016. John Kerry delivered the eulogy on 28 December 2016.

The Palestine Mandate Solution beckons….

Trump Must Confirm Bush-Congress Endorsed Commitments To Israel

[Published 10 November 2016]


Donald Trump’s stunning Presidential victory - coupled with the Republican Party retaining control of the Congress - presents Trump with the opportunity to restore America’s tarnished reputation and integrity by affirming he will honour the commitments made to Israel by President Bush in his letter dated 14 April 2004 - overwhelmingly endorsed by the then Congress by 502 votes to 12.

Those Bush-Congress commitments were seriously undermined by President Obama and his two Secretaries of State - Hillary Clinton and John Kerry - just one of many American disastrous policy failures in the Middle East during Obama’s term of office.

The Bush-Congress Commitments were crucial to:

1. Israel’s unilateral, unconditional and complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 and

2.Israel’s agreement to resume negotiations with the Palestinian Authority as publicly declared by Israel’s then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at the international conference called by President Bush in Annapolis in 2007.

“In the course of the negotiations, we will use previous agreements as a point of departure. U.N.Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the road map, and the letter of President Bush to the prime minister of Israel dated April 14, 2004.”

Israel has expressed concern that President Obama and current Secretary of State John Kerry might be planning to further undercut the following Bush Commitment at the United Nations or in the international arena during the period leading up to Trump and the new Congress being installed into power on 20 January 2017.

“... the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap. The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan”

Obama and Kerry have not leapt to defend Israel’s refusal to take part in an international conference currently being planned by France in December - designed to depart from the clear negotiating guidelines laid down in the Bush Roadmap and Bush’s 2004 letter - as subsequently clarified at the Annapolis Conference.

Obama has remained mum on using America’s power of veto at the the UN Security Council to resist any efforts to depart from the terms of the Bush Roadmap or substitute some different negotiating process outside the Roadmap and the Bush-Congress endorsed commitments.

President-elect Trump made his views clearly known on America upholding commitments to its allies during the election campaign:

”... your friends need to know that you will stick by the agreements that you have with them. You’ve made that agreement, you have to stand by it and the world will be a better place.”

Senator Marco Rubio - who unsuccessfully challenged Trump for Republican Party Presidential nominee but who has now been reelected to the Senate for a further term by a large majority - pledged during that campaign:

“I will revive the common-sense understandings reached in the 2004 Bush-Sharon letter and build on them to help ensure Israel has defensible borders.

Israel, our great friend and the one true democracy in the Middle East has been snubbed and criticized by an administration that lacks moral clarity.”

Moral clarity demands that Trump immediately inform Obama that no action should be undertaken by Obama between now and January that would in any way depart from or undermine the commitments made by former President George Bush and the Congress to Israel in 2004.

Trump also needs to unequivocally state that his Administration intends to fully uphold those Bush-Congress commitments.

Draining the swamp and making America great again will be given a huge impetus if Trump makes these policy declarations without obfuscation or delay.