Palestine: Netanyahu sends clear message to Trump, Putin, May and UN

[Published 16 March 2017]


Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has had a busy week meeting with UK Foreign Minister Boris Johnson in Jerusalem, President Vladimir Putin in Moscow and then back to Jerusalem for a five hour meeting with President Trump’s Special Representative for International Negotiations — Jason Greenblatt.

The framework for these meetings was set by Netanyahu — who told Johnson:

“It’s evident that we agree on most things, but not on all things. And one of the things, I think the source of it when you analyze a problem, get to its roots and reason that we haven’t had peace for a hundred years is not the settlements, but the persistent refusal to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. I think if you want to solve a problem, go to the core of the problem, and that is something I look forward to discussing with you further.”

Netanyahu’s claim is substantiated by the following facts:

1.Settlements were not the problem when the first two-state solution was proposed by article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922.

That solution - which envisaged allocating the Arabs 78% of Mandatory Palestine [Transjordan] and the Jews the remaining 22% - was rejected by the Arabs but accepted by the Jews.

Iran - one of the 51 States then unanimously endorsing the Jewish people’s legal right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Palestine — now seeks to destroy the Jewish State in 2017.

2. Settlements were not the problem in 1937 when the Peel Commission recommended partition of the territory of the Mandate into one Jewish State and one Arab State —again rejected by the Arabs but accepted by the Jews.

3. Transjordan remained part of the Mandate for Palestine until Great Britain granted it independence on 22 March 1946. 78% of the Mandate territory was thus irrevocably transformed into an exclusive Arabs-only State contrary to article 5 of the Mandate.

4. The United Nations recommendation to partition the remaining 22 % of the Mandate territory into one Arab State and one Jewish State in November 1947 was again rejected by the Arabs and accepted by the Jews — culminating in Western Palestine being invaded in May 1948 by six Arab armies and the forcible eviction of all Jews living in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

5. Settlements were not the problem between 1948 and 1967 when another Arab State could have been created with the stroke of an Arab League pen in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza whilst not one Jew lived there.

6. Offers by Israel in 2000/2001 and 2008 to another Arab State being created in Gaza and the West Bank were rejected by the Arabs.

7. In December 2016 UN Security Council Resolution 2334 declared that the Jewish Quarter and Kotel in East Jerusalem, the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives, the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel’s Tomb near Bethlehem were “occupied Palestinian territory”.

UK and Russia shamefully failed to veto this Resolution.

8. Gaza is ruled by Hamas and the Palestine Liberation Organization governs Areas A and B of the West Bank. Both have held onto power without holding elections since 2006. Both refuse to recognize a Jewish nation-state in any boundaries.

Johnson told Netanyahu:
“I first visited [Israel] when I was — as I never tire of telling you — when I was 18.”

Netanyahu should never tire of telling world leaders that the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict will not be resolved until the Arabs recognise the right of the Jewish people to their own independent State.

Palestine: Netanyahu needs to expose PLO hoax

[Published 21 February 2017]


The first visit to Australia by a sitting Israeli Prime Minister – Benjamin Netanyahu – has been preceded by a statement signed by 65 prominent Australians on the initiative of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network.

That statement declares:

“The Australian Government needs to rethink its one-sided support for the Israeli Government. We are appalled that our Government opposes the recent UN Security Council resolution supporting the application of international law to Israel and Palestine, when most nations, including the United Kingdom, Germany, France and New Zealand, support it. Even the USA did not oppose it. It is time for the suffering of the Palestinian people to stop and for Australia to take a more balanced role in supporting the application of international law and not supporting Mr Netanyahu and his policies.”

Signatories to this statement include:

1. senior legal professionals – including former Solicitor General Gavan Griffith QC, and former Federal Court judge Murray Rutledge Wilcox
2. former parliamentarians –and diplomats including Jon Stanhope, former ACT Chief Minister, former ALP Minister The Hon Alan Griffin, and Ambassador Bruce Haigh
3. senior clergy – including Bishop George Browning, Bishop Pat Power and former Uniting Church President Rev Gregor Henderson AM
4. Artists – including actor Miriam Margolyes, writer and commentator Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah, artist Luke Roberts, and filmmaker Christina Wilcox
5. Academics – including Dr Susan Carland, Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees AM and Associate Professor Peter Slezak, and many others

Their signatures are a sad testament to their embrace of Security Council Resolution 2334 and to its claim that the Jewish Quarter, the Kotel and the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem and the Machpelah in Hebron are “Occupied Palestinian Territory”.

If they did not understand that is what they were endorsing then they should withdraw their signatures immediately.

Interestingly they also signed up to “supporting the application of international law to Israel and Palestine”

International law indisputably establishes:

1. The right of the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Jerusalem, Hebron and Judea and Samaria (West Bank) pursuant to the provisions of the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine
2. The preservation of such vested legal rights under article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

The Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) – Israel’s “partner for peace” has:

1. declared this established international law to be “deemed null and void” under its Charter
2. claimed in its 1964 Charter:

“Article 24. This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area. Its activities will be on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields.”

This article remained unamended when UN Security Council Resolution 242 was passed after the Six Day War. Article 24 was removed from the Charter in 1968 but no claim to sovereignty replaced it.

The PLO claim in 2017 to a separate State where sovereignty still remains unclaimed under its own Charter has been one of the greatest scams perpetrated on and swallowed by the international community during the 100 years conflict.

That persons of the quality and calibre of these 65 prominent Australians should have signed this declaration is testament to the stunning inroads that false Arab propaganda has been used to influence public opinion over the last fifty years.

The idea of two Arab states in the area covered by the Mandate for Palestine has been offered to – and rejected by - the Arabs on many occasions since 1922.

Prime Minister Netanyahu should take the opportunity to say a few words on this PLO hoax during his visit to Australia.

Jewish Rights Undermined By Media Indulgence

[Published 1 December 2010]

The Sunday Observer describes itself as “Sri Lanka’s English Newspaper with the largest circulation”. If its shoddy editorial policy is anything to go by it could soon be relegated to having that circulation drastically reduced.

Take the recent publication of an article headlined : “Palestine: The Holy Land is shrinking and vanishing”.

That headline immediately caught the eye - arousing many intriguing thoughts.

Was a Sri Lankan newspaper privy to some information that suggested a land mass which had existed unchanged for thousands of years since Biblical times was disappearing? Could this herald an end to the 130 years old conflict between Jews and Arabs and leave them both lamenting for having failed to settle their differences before this looming catastrophe occurred?

Alternatively was this an expose of Moslem attempts to diminish Jewish and Christian reverence for sites in the Holy Land such as the Tomb of the Patriarchs, Rachel’s Tomb, Joseph’s Tomb and the Kotel not to mention Jerusalem?

An entirely different message was however conveyed in the body of the article.

It was written by Dr T Jayasinghe - the Founder General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Committee for Solidarity with Palestine and the Representative for Sri Lanka in Palestine.

Dr Jayasinghe is what I term - “a Jewish Underminer” - a person who seeks to undermine the rights of the Jewish people to pursue their inalienable right in international law to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in former Palestine pursuant to the rights granted to them by League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and the United Nations Charter.

Such undermining occurs when statements are made relating to the conflict between Jews and Arabs that are factually wrong, deceptive or misleading and serve to undermine or denigrate Jewish rights. They are usually made in ignorance by well intended but misguided persons relying on factually inaccurate or deliberately misleading Arab propaganda.

Consider these statements appearing in Dr Jayasinghe’s article:

1. “Ironically it was the United Nations General Assembly in 1947 that passed the resolution 181 (partition plan) to create Israel. Unfortunately it is from that day onwards that an Israeli - Palestinian conflict came into being.”

The UN Resolution did not create Israel. It recommended the creation of a Jewish State and an Arab State. Its recommendation was accepted by the Jews and refused by the Arabs. The conflict did not start in 1947. It had been ongoing since about 1880. The Arabs had refused a similar proposal to divide the territory of Mandated Palestine between Jews and Arabs in 1937 and had already received 78% as an independent Arab State in 1946. Arab riots in 1920, 1929 and between 1937-1939 are further evidence to rebut Dr Jayasinghe’s statement.

2. “This conflict is considered the main explosive issue in Middle East that drag on with no sign of a solution"

The conflict could have been resolved at any time between 1948-1967 when Jordan and Egypt occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza when any negotiations with the Jews was unnecessary. Trying to rectify in 2010 what was available for 19 years and was passed up more than 50 years ago is impossible to achieve.

3. “With the partition plan Palestinians were allocated an area called the West Bank and also the Gaza Strip with no connection by land to the West Bank.”

There is no mention of “Palestinians” in the Partition Plan - only “Arabs”. The Arabs were allocated an area much larger than the West Bank and Gaza in the Partition Plan. These two areas were connected to each other.

4. “…the main issue where the negotiations resolve round is the question of settlements that are being established by Israel in West Bank that was allocated to Palestinians.“

The West Bank was allocated to the Arabs in 1947 but they rejected that proposal. How does a rejected offer become an entrenched right 63 years later?

5. “These settlements occupy 43% of the land in West Bank.”

They only occupy 1% of the West Bank

6. “Many settlements have been built on confiscated Palestinian privately owned land”

The majority of the land in the West Bank was not privately owned but was State land and waste lands that had become vested in Israel as the successor to Jordan which lost control of the land to Israel in the Six Day War in 1967.

Under Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine close settlement by Jews on such land was encouraged. This right had been exercised by the Jews prior to 1948 until they were all driven out by the invading Jordanian army. Jewish rights to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in the West Bank are preserved by article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

7. “Their struggle is for a free State within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital.”

This state could have been achieved at any time between 1948-1967. That missed opportunity can only now be possible in part - but not all - of the territory. There were no 1967 borders - only armistice lines that had been agreed between Israel and Jordan in 1949.

8.“As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, since 1970, it has become a consistent supporter of Palestine and with the establishment of Sri Lanka Committee for Solidarity with Palestine November 29 every year is marked with a suitable public event to educate the masses"

If this article is part of the program to educate the masses then they are being poorly informed and indeed misled.

Dr Jayasinghe is perfectly entitled to support the creation of a Palestinian State. However in doing so he makes it apparent that his view has been formed on the basis of a serious misunderstanding of the facts of the conflict.

Perhaps his view might still be the same when these errors are brought to his attention. That is fine. But in recanting these statements he will at least be seen to not be falsely undermining the rights of the other side to the conflict.

The Sunday Observer in allowing these inaccuracies to be printed has placed its own editorial policy under a cloud.

One cannot expect every error in a story to be detected. But when an article like this is replete with so many errors - one must seriously question the paper’s policy in failing to adequately edit submissions so as to ensure the article is factually correct and not misleading.

Jewish underminers and their errant media publishers will not go away. They need to be constantly monitored and exposed to prevent the reader being misled or deceived as to the facts of what is a very difficult and complicated conflict.