Palestine - Mediterranean Union Misses Making Its Mark

[Published February 2010]

An International Meeting in support of Israeli- Palestinian Peace was organized by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean Union and the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People [CEIRPP] of the United Nations in Malta on 12 and 13 February 2010.

The Union now includes all 27 member states of the European Union, along with 16 partners across the Southern Mediterranean and the Middle East.

The meeting turned out to be the usual talkfest in flogging a dead horse - the creation of a 22nd Arab State between Jordan, Israel and Egypt - also known as “the two-state solution“. This solution has been unsuccessfully pursued for the last 16 years and there is no possible chance that such a resolution will be achieved at any time in the future.

The two-state solution could have been availed of in 1937,1947, between 1948-1967, in 2000/2001 and 2008 but was rejected on each occasion by the Arabs. It will continue to be rejected by the Arabs who are not prepared to tolerate Israel gaining sovereignty in any part of the West Bank.

Despite the hopelessness of ever reaching the two-state solution - those present in Malta still concluded in their final communique :

“The Organizers appreciated that the participants had stated their firm commitment to ending Israeli occupation which started on 4 June 1967 in order to achieve a permanent two-State solution in which Israel and Palestine would live side by side in peace and security within mutually recognized borders. …

The Organizers support the firm stance by the international community not to recognize any changes to the pre-1967 borders including with regard to occupied Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties.”

These statements go to the heart of explaining why the two-state solution can never be achieved for the following reasons:

•Israel’s occupation of the West Bank as a consequence of the Six Day War in 1967 is conveniently forgotten

•The use of the term “borders” is clearly wrong. There were in 1967 - and still are in 2010 - only armistice lines - a legacy of the Arab League‘s refusal to recognize Israel and settle the final boundaries between Israel, Jordan and Egypt following the conclusion of hostilities in 1948.

•No recognition is given to Security Council resolution 242 which does not require Israel to withdraw from the entire West Bank but only to withdraw to secure and recognized boundaries

•The statement ignores the Palestinan Authority’s continuing refusal to surrender its claim to even one square metre of the West Bank to Israel.

•America has recognized that a change to the 1967 armistice lines is necessary given the changed circumstances on the ground where 500000 Jews now live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The notion that these Jews can be forcibly evicted from their homes is racist and offensive.

•No account has been taken of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine which provides that the West Bank and East Jerusalem were to form part of the area within which the Jewish National Home was to be reconstituted and that such right has been preserved by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

No doubt the tone and language of the final communique was inevitable given the involvement of the CEIRPP, whose participation ensured that no attention would be paid to Arab intransigence and lost opportunities over 62 years - which has been largely responsible for any progress in finalizing the two-state solution.

What was particularly interesting was the frequent reference to the importance, observance and respect for the rule of international law in resolving the conflict to achieve the two-state solution. Such a reference appears on six separate occasions in the communique.

Yet the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter didn’t rate a mention in Malta.

Strangely enough these critical documents were also omitted from inclusion by the United Nations Secretary General in the brief submitted to the World Court when seeking the advisory opinion of the Court on the legality of the construction of Israel’s security barrier in the West Bank.

One wonders whether any of these august bodies will eventually take the time to read the Mandate and article 80 and fully understand what was determined by the League of Nations in 1922 following the Treaty of Sevres in 1920.

This is not ancient history but has been kept alive and is relevant today by virtue of Article 80.

Whilst the United Nations and its member States flagrantly breach the terms of the UN Charter pursuing a course of conduct that is completely devoid of compliance with and acknowledgment of international law, any hope of a peaceful resolution of the conflict between Jews and Arabs relating to the territory once called “Palestine” will be impossible.

The reference by the Malta Meeting to the West Bank as “occupied Palestinian land” rather than “territory disputed between Jew and Arabs” further indicates an Arab bias that needs to be eradicated if the Mediterranean Union wishes to play any future role in resolving the conflict.

A hint of things to come was apparent in the following terms of the final communique:

“They [the participants] expressed their hope that the ten-month freeze of settlement expansion declared by the Israeli Government would be comprehensive, extended to East Jerusalem and retained indefinitely. “

Israel will no doubt be subjected to intense pressure to comply with this demand - irrespective of whether the Palestinian Authority resumes negotiations within the ten months time frame or not.

Rather than exploring new ideas to end the conflict, the Malta Meeting trotted out the old and familiar phrases that have formed the vocabulary of Middle East diplomacy for decades.

In doing do the Mediterranean Union has shown itself unable to break free from the failures of the past and embrace new and innovative ideas - such as the return of Jordan to the West Bank - which might offer some hope to resolving what President Obama has described as “an intractable problem”.

Quartet Quartered, Road Map Thwarted, Palestine Aborted

[Published July 2007]

The Quartet’s Road Map has failed according to the ten foreign ministers of the European Union’s Mediterranean States - Bulgaria, Cyprus, Spain, France, Greece, Italy , Malta, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia - (“the Mediterranean Ten”).

In an open letter to the Quartet’s new negotiating supremo Tony Blair, they state unequivocally and without any diplomatic nuances :

“Topping this analysis - we might as well admit it straight away - is the recognition of a shared failure we can no longer ignore: the “road map” has failed. The status quo which has prevailed since 2000 is leading nowhere, as we know.”

[http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/open_letter/2007/07/the_road_map_has_failed.html ]

This unusually frank admission heralds the end of the European Union’s involvement with America, Russia and the United Nations in the Road Map jointly sponsored by the four of them in 2003.

Four years of intense international diplomacy in the Middle East by the world‘s most powerful negotiating team ever assembled to achieve what the Mediterranean Ten call “an idea“ - the creation of a new Arab state between Israel and Jordan in 6% of historic Palestine - has finally been recognised as a total waste of time and effort.

This idea has never really progressed beyond an idea since its conception 70 years ago - due to continuing Arab intransigence at every point of time that it has been proposed.

But undaunted by this spectacular failure, the Mediterranean Ten have not yet given up on making this idea a reality.

They now hope to get there by laying down four “revised objectives” in a new European Union Road Map that are totally impossible to achieve - and which guarantee that this latest version will also be shredded into the waste paper basket like its many predecessors.

These four revised objectives include:

1. Negotiations without prerequisites on the final status, embracing such issues as refugees and borders.

What is there to negotiate about ?

On refugees, - the Palestinian Authority will not and cannot agree to compromise its demand that millions of Arabs be allowed to go and live in Israel. It would be dead in the water if it did.

On borders - the Palestinian Authority wants every square metre of the West Bank and Gaza - having rejected an offer of 92% in 2000. Do the Mediterranean Ten really believe the Authority would be prepared to accept less than 100 % after years of international arm twisting has failed to get it to moderate its demand?

2. Consider sending in a “robust international force”

Even the Mediterranean Ten acknowledge the risks are high and that this objective is predicated on the condition that “it must operate alongside a peace plan without taking its place…”

How can a peace plan ever emerge if the first objective hits a brick wall?

3. Get Israel to help Mahmoud Abbas by releasing the thousands of prisoners without blood on their hands, and by freezing Israel’s settlement policy.

The Mediterranean Ten are surely on the road to dreamland - displaying naiveté and stupidity that should forever disqualify them from holding their positions as Foreign Ministers for their respective countries.

Are they unaware of the damage, carnage and havoc that can be wreaked by just one of these convicted terrorists successfully making it through Israel’s tight defences next time? Are they blind to what has happened in America, Iraq, Afghanistan, Spain, Bali, England and Scotland?

And the Mediterranean Ten still seek to maintain the Quartet’s racist and discriminatory policy to halt Jews populating and copulating in the West Bank. What international outcry would there be if the Mediterranean Ten suggested Arab residents similarly refrain?

4. Don’t push Hamas to up the stakes - reopen the border between Gaza and Israel.

In other words - reward terrorism and rejectionism, open the gates to enemies who are sworn to wipe you off the earth and are not prepared to change their mindset.

Incredibly the Mediterranean Ten believe these four objectives are within their grasp. Their arrogance and dictatorial attitude display a total lack of understanding of what the conflict is really about.

Seven of these ten Mediterranean countries were members of the League of Nations which in 1922 unanimously endorsed the creation of the territory of Palestine with defined borders for the first time in history - and voted in favour of the Jews being granted the right to reconstitute their national home there.

They were also parties in agreeing to postpone or withhold the right of the Jews to live in 77% of Palestine just less than two months later to appease Arab demands - which ultimately led to an independent Palestinian Arab State being created in that area in 1946 that is today called Jordan.

Are their Foreign Offices ignorant of their countries’ acquiescence in this process?

Do they seriously believe the idea of a State between Israel and Jordan is ever likely to happen after 70 years of trying have resulted in abject failure every time?

The Mediterranean Ten need to understand that the real key to resolving this conflict is two states - not three states - in former Palestine - one for the Arabs, one for the Jews.

This can be achieved by redrawing the boundary between Israel and Jordan so as to divide sovereignty in the West Bank between them.

This will give the Jews about 20% of historic Palestine and the Arabs about 80% of historic Palestine.

This solution will not require any negotiations on the four objectives proposed by the Mediterranean Ten.

This is an idea that can quickly become an achievable reality. Anything else is surely certain to fail.

Going Gaga over Gaza

[Published February 2007]

Gaza has all the trappings of a State except declared Statehood.

The Quartet - America, Russia, the United Nations and the European Union - and the 22 members of the Arab League have allowed this farce to continue for the last 18 months.

Gaza, larger in area than Malta, has a President, a Parliament, a Prime Minister, a full complement of Ministers, a burgeoning bureaucracy, observers to every United Nations Committee you can think of, delegations to countries all around the world, a flag and an anthem and most importantly of all - not one Jew.

It is as racially pure as you could imagine, making South Africa’s apartheid regime pale in comparison.

The 7000 Jews living in Gaza were forcibly removed from their homes and businesses 18 months ago. That they were so evicted by other Jews, supposedly for their safety, is shameful. However given half a chance the Gazan Arabs would have willingly expelled the Jews. They even boasted that it was their campaign of terror and violence that finally forced the Jews to leave. Ethnic cleansing is apparently acceptable where Jews are the victims.

The violence against Jews has been replaced by the killing and intimidation of Gaza’s now exclusively Arab citizenry, as Hamas and Fatah each battle to assert their authority over the other in an internecine struggle that shows no signs of abating.

The people without a land who had been yearning for a land for the last 40 years suddenly found itself in full possession and control of part of that land but just couldn’t bring itself to utter the magic words of independence. Figuratively speaking the jilted bride was left waiting at the mosque.

The occupation had ended, the occupiers had gone but the population acted as though nothing had changed.

There was no rejoicing and dancing in the streets, no hugs embraces and tears among the populace who now found themselves in full control of their destiny and self-determination. Instead the liberated population could not quickly enough destroy, burn and gut, synagogues, schools, houses and infrastructure left behind by the Jews and then turn around and try to destroy each other.

There have been no exciting nation building programs implemented to give new direction and vision to Gaza’s population. Destruction, not creation, has become the buzzword in Gaza.

Sadly statehood is the last thing that Gaza wanted because it would put an end to the claim of statelessness, terminate the claim to refugee status by a large proportion of its population and signal the end of the perpetual financial support received from UNWRA.

Furthermore statehood might be taken to be an abandonment of further claims to any land that formerly comprised the Mandate of Palestine.

The reticence of the Arab League in these circumstances was misplaced. True, Statehood for Gaza would pull the rug from under the feet of this cartel and put pressure on it to end its refusal to recognise or negotiate with the State of Israel. But the League’s policy of silence and its’ failure to intervene has seen Gaza’s population become a killing field of ever growing proportions.

The Quartet however need not have been so coy. It had a different agenda aimed at solving “the Palestinian question” which it considered to be the most intractable problem in the Middle East.

The removal of all Jews from Gaza presented the Quartet with the opening it had been desperately seeking to take a giant step forward in solving this problem. Yet the Quartet faltered dismally in failing to demand that the Parliament in Gaza declare statehood within the boundaries that separate it from Israel and Egypt.

This single act could have been the circuit breaker towards ending 130 years of conflict between Jews and Arabs over the same land.

Instead the Quartet misguidedly focused its efforts on attempting to achieve an overall rather than a partial solution to Arab claims in the West Bank and Gaza in fulfilment of its‘ misconceived Road Map aimed at creating a third State in Mandatory Palestine.

It has now paid the price for its’ folly.

The Quartet’s failure to insist on Gaza declaring its independence has created a void into which Hamas has stepped making it impossible now to achieve statehood in Gaza.

The frantic shuttle diplomacy and endless meetings that seem to never have any outcome other than the accumulation of frequent flyer points for their participants will continue to be held, and the killing and mayhem in Gaza will continue to head the news bulletins.

It is time to call on Jordan and Egypt to play a constructive role in cleaning up the mess in Gaza, which is quickly sinking into the arms smuggling tunnels it has been so busily excavating under its very foundations.

The time for playing semantic word games, holding joint press conferences and grabbing photo opportunities is surely over.