Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine to end Mandate for Palestine saga

 

The creation of the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine –the merger of Jordan, Gaza and part of the West Bank into one single territorial entity comprising about 80% of the territory of the Mandate for Palestine (Mandate) - will be a fitting end to the Mandate saga which began on July 24, 1922 with the unanimous approval of its terms by all 51 Members of the League of Nations. 

The remaining 20% of the Mandate territory will mark the final internationally recognised boundaries of Israel -3000 years after the loss of the Jewish ancient and biblical homeland to the Roman General -Pompey - following his conquest of Jerusalem and its surroundings in 63 BC.

This two-state solution in Palestine - one Arab the other Jewish - had not been that originally planned by the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference in April 1920 and confirmed by the Treaty of Sevres in August that year. 

San Remo had provided for: 

• Arab self-determination within the territory comprised in the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon and the Mandate for Mesopotamia - comprising 99.99% of the territory formerly part of the 400 years old Ottoman Empire liberated after World War 1
• Jewish self-determination within the territory comprised in the Mandate for Palestine located on both sides of the Jordan River - the remaining 0.01% of the liberated Ottoman Empire 

Two and a half of the 12 Tribes of Israel had settled East of the Jordan River after reaching the Promised Land - as recorded in the Old Testament. The other nine and a half tribes had continued on to settle West of the Jordan River.  

However the arrival of Abdullah - a member of the Hashemite dynasty - in Transjordan on 21 November 1920 accompanied by a band of armed troops en route to help his brother Faisal fight the French to retain Faisal's crown in Syria - resulted in:

• Great Britain - at the Cairo Conference held on March 12, 1921 - stopping Abdullah by creating the Emirate of Transjordan for Abdullah in 78% of Mandatory Palestine East of the Jordan River. The Emirate remained part of the Mandate until granted independence by Great Britain in 1946 - changing its name to the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan.
• Article 25 being inserted into the Mandate document on July 24, 1922--restricting the right of the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in 22% of Mandatory Palestine West of the Jordan River
• The Council of the League of Nations approving these changed arrangements on September 16, 1922.

These changes have been preserved until today under article 80 of the United Nations Charter. 

The United Nations failure to observe the terms of its own Charter has been the greatest obstacle to achieving the Mandate-contemplated two-state solution. 

That two-state solution has however become politically attainable following a detailed plan for its creation in an article dated 8 June - written by Ali Shihabi a close confidante of Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman the next King of Saudi Arabia - and published in Al-Arabiya News – owned by the Saudi Royal Family. 

Successful negotiations between Israel and Jordan to implement Shihabi's plan would result in:

• The merger of Mandate territory located East and West of the Jordan River into one Arab State and
• the recognition of a Jewish State in the remaining Mandate territory West of the Jordan River 

The last chapter of the Mandate saga begun on July 24, 1922 is on the diplomatic horizon. 

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.

Antisemitic EU & ECRI policies on Israel cannot be whitewashed

 

The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) - in attempting to whitewash European Union (EU) policies directed against Israel in Judea and Samaria being labelled as “antisemitic” – is engaging in similar antisemitic conduct in denying Israel’s right to claim sovereignty there.

Antisemitic EU anti-Israel policies:

• Require goods produced by Israelis living in Judea and Samaria to be distinctively labelled for sale in the EU: “Product from West Bank (Israeli settlement)” 
• Facilitate and finance illegal Arab building in Area C of Judea and Samaria  - totally under Israeli control pursuant to the Oslo Accords – without the EU seeking Israel’s approval

ECRI’s 47 members – one from each Council of Europe member state – are appointed:

“on the basis of their independence, impartiality, moral authority and expertise in dealing with issues of racism, discrimination, xenophobia, antisemitism and intolerance.”

ECRI – in a recent report - clarified when it considers criticism of Israel to be antisemitic:

“Contemporary forms of antisemitism can differ from traditional forms of prejudice against Jewish people, but both forms can also exist in parallel. Nowadays, antisemitism can also be expressed in certain criticism of Israel that is baseless. For example, denying Jews their right to a national homeland, holding the State of Israel to a different standard of behaviour than other states, or demonising the State of Israel and viewing it and its people as inherently evil or racist, may be regarded as antisemitic.” 

Under these guidelines:

• Textbooks used in Palestinian Arab and Saudi Arabian schools depicting hundreds of maps without “Israel” being designated on them - are antisemitic 
• The Palestine Liberation Organisation and Hamas - whose respective Charters deny Jews have any right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in their ancient and biblical homeland – are antisemitic organisations and their leaders are antisemites.
• EU criticism of Israel for its responses in protecting Israel’s citizens from rockets fired from Gaza indiscriminately into Israeli population centres - is antisemitic - since European States would act similarly were their countries so confronted 

ECRI however shoots itself in the foot when stating what criticism of Israel is not antisemitic:

“However, ECRI strongly emphasises that any attempts to stifle, or stigmatise as antisemitic, legitimate criticism of Israel and its policies, in particular towards the Palestinian people and in the context of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, will jeopardise efforts to combat antisemitism and should therefore be rejected.”

ECRI’s choice of the phrase “Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories” is itself a manifestation of antisemitism – denying Jews have the right to reconstitute their national homeland in any part of Judea and Samaria – even though their right to do so was legally mandated - indeed encouraged - by:

• The San Remo conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920
• Article 6 and Article 25 of the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine
• Article 80 of the United Nations Charter

Labelling these territories “Palestinian territories” – rather than “disputed territories” – denies Israel’s right to establish the Jewish national homeland in these territories and asserts that only the “Palestinian people” – not the “Jewish people” - has such a right. 

ECRI’s stated position is antisemitic under its own guidelines.

EU criticism of Israel’s settlement policy in Judea and Samaria also ignores Israel’s right to pursue that policy under the above internationally agreed consensus and is also antisemitic.

EU and ECRI – by their policies, statements and criticism of Israel in Judea and Samaria - are helping to fuel rapidly increasing antisemitism in Europe. 

Antisemitism - wherever and whenever it appears – needs to be exposed, condemned and eradicated. Organizations and their leaders – including the EU and ECRI - who propagate antisemitic criticism of Israel need to be named and shamed.

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.

Jewish People reclaiming sovereignty in biblical heartland after 3000 years

[Published 29 June 2020]

The United Nations is disgracefully trying to prevent a miracle happening 100 years after the world first gave its historic imprimatur to an impossible dream becoming a possible reality: 

The restoration of Jewish sovereignty in 1697km² of the Jewish People’s biblical heartland in Judea and Samaria (West Bank)

The defeat of the 400 years-old Ottoman Empire in World War I revived the Jewish People’s 3000 years-old dream of regaining nationhood in their ancient homeland—which had extended across both banks of the River Jordan where the twelve tribes of Israel had finally settled 40 years after their exodus from Egypt.

The San Remo Resolution signed by Great Britain, France, Japan and Italy on April 25, 1920 promised the Jews real hope.

The Treaty of Sevres involving the international community quickly followed on August 10, 1920.

The British Empire, France, Italy and Japan (“Principal Allied Powers”) were joined by Armenia, Belgium, Greece, the Hedjaz, Poland, Portugal, Romania, The Serb-Croat Slovene State and Czechoslovakia (“Allied Powers”) in this peace treaty signed with Turkey.

Signatories for the British Empire were representatives for:

His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
The Dominion of Canada
The Commonwealth of Australia
The Dominion of New Zealand
The Union of South Africa
India

Article 95 provided that Palestine — within such boundaries as might be determined by the Principal Allied Powers — be administered by a Mandatory to be selected by them. The Mandatory was to be responsible for putting into effect the Balfour Declaration made on November 2, 1917 by the British Government — and adopted by the Allied Powers — in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people — it being clearly understood that nothing would be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine — or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The League of Nations 51 member states unanimously appointed Britain as Mandatory and approved the terms of the Mandate for Palestine on July 24, 1922.

Intervening political events in Syria between 1920 and 1922 involving France and Britain saw the Mandate’s provisions deny the Jewish People the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home on the East Bank of the Jordan River where two and a half of the twelve tribes had settled after reaching the Promised Land.

Judea and Samaria was reserved however for the Jews under the Mandate — that right being preserved under article 80 of the 1945 United Nations Charter notwithstanding the demise of the League of Nations in 1946.

After Britain handed its Mandate back to the United Nations in 1948 — every Jew living in Judea and Samaria was driven out by the invading army of Transjordan which itself comprised 77% of the Mandate territory and had achieved independence in 1946.

Judea and Samaria was unified with Transjordan to become “The West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” from 1950 to 1967 — recognized only by Great Britain, Iraq and Pakistan. Jordanian citizenship was extended to all its Arab citizens from 1954 to 1988.

Jordan’s loss of Judea and Samaria to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War saw some 450,000 Jews returning to reclaim their patrimony over the next 53 years — but the international community’s seal of approval soon changed to outright condemnation. President Trump’s 2020 Peace Plan has confirmed those vested legal rights acquired 1920-1922 by the Jewish People in Judea and Samaria.

An amazing miracle is about to occur on July 1st without any parallel in world history.

America erases its past as Israel resurrects 3000 years-old history

[Published 15 June 2020]

It is amazing that in the midst of an unprecedented global economic shutdown—some Americans are presently hell-bent on erasing America’s past by pulling down statues of ionic people from America’s history and engaging in cultural cancelling —whilst Israelis are simultaneously planning to resurrect Jewish history by restoring Israeli sovereignty in the Jewish people’s biblical heartland—Judea and Samaria — after 3000 years.

Trashing America’s past is violent and unlawful—whilst Israel’s democratically elected Government is reinstating the Jewish People’s past in tandem with President Trump’s Peace Plan published on 28 January 2020.

Many American mayors and Governors have watched on — restraining their police forces from doing anything to halt these monuments to history being torn down by chanting mobs. Residents and businesses located in the affected cities will continue to pay a high price for these elected officials failing to allow the police to take back control of the streets and restore safety and security for all.

Alarmingly many of these mayors and Governors are now considering defunding or replacing their police forces in what can only be described as abject surrender in the face of extreme provocation by rampaging and looting protestors out of control and oblivious to maintaining any semblance of complying with the laws of social distancing that the majority populations in these cities under attack follow, respect and obey.

As this epidemic of unbridled lawlessness spreads world-wide — the international community’s response to Israel’s intended application of sovereignty in 1697 km2 of Judea and Samaria’s 5655 km2 is deeply troubling.

An avalanche of international opposition – led by the United Nations and European Union – falsely claims that Israel is acting “in flagrant violation of international law” — ignoring:

1. The San Remo Resolution and the Treaty of Sevres 1920
2. The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine 1922
3. Article 80 of the United Nations Charter 1945
4. President Bush’s written commitment to Israeli Prime Minister Sharon on 14 April 2004 overwhelmingly approved by the Congress by 502 votes to 12 (America’s Commitment) – promising that Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza would not require Israel to withdraw from all of Judea and Samaria.
5. The Quartet – Russia, United Nations, European Union and America – endorsing America’s Commitment on 4 May 2004
6. Israeli Prime Minister Olmert acknowledging Israel’s reliance on America’s Commitment at the Annapolis Conference on 27 November 2007:
“The negotiations [with the PLO] will be based on previous agreements between us, UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the Roadmap and the April 14th 2004 letter of President Bush to the Prime Minister of Israel.”

51 nation states comprised the League of Nations that unanimously approved Judea and Samaria forming part of the area proposed for reconstitution of the Jewish National Home:

Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, British India, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Italy, Japan, Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, Latvia, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Persia, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of China, Romania, Siam, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Union of South Africa, United Kingdom, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

These states who are now United Nations and/or European Union members supporting the current cacophony of “flagrant violation of international law” - need to hang their heads in collective shame. They are encouraging an atmosphere of Jew-hatred and incitement to violence.

Pray for America as its past is being trashed and its future is distinctly uncertain.

Recognise the resurrection of sovereignty in the Jewish people’s biblical heartland after 3000 years as a modern-day miracle that could help end the 100 years-old Arab-Jewish conflict.

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.

European Union shamefully denies Jewish rights in Judea and Samaria

[Published 5 June 2020]

The frenzied rush by the European Union (EU) to condemn Israel’s restoration of Jewish sovereignty in 30% of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) reflects poorly on an organization which has adopted an exceptionally confrontational approach to the Jewish State.

EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has led the charge:

“We strongly urge Israel to refrain from any unilateral decision that would lead to the annexation of any occupied Palestinian territory and would be, as such, contrary to International Law”

So many false statements appearing in such a short sentence by this high-ranking EU official is breathtaking:

1. Israel’s action is not unilateral

Such action is being taken in tandem with President Trump following the outright refusal by the PLO to enter into negotiations with Israel on the basis of Trump’s detailed plan released on January 28, 2020.

70% of Judea and Samaria awaits the PLO - or any other Arab interlocutor such as Jordan—prepared to step up and negotiate on its future sovereignty.

2. Israel will not be annexing occupied Palestinian territory contrary to international law

“Annexing occupied Palestinian territory” means taking territory belonging to someone else to which Israel has no entitlement.

“Contrary to international law”: Israel will be applying sovereignty in 30% of Judea and Samaria pursuant to vested legal rights to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in this specific area conferred on the Jewish people by:

• The San Remo Resolution and the Treaty of Sevres 1920
• The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine 1922
• Article 80 United Nations Charter 1945

The EU’s attempt to trash these existing Jewish legal rights in Judea and Samaria is extremely disturbing - since 20 of the 27 current member States of the EU – plus former member the United Kingdom - were among the 51 member States of the League of Nations that had unanimously included Judea and Samaria as part of the area in which the Jews were entitled to reconstitute their biblical Jewish homeland after 3000 years.

Article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine - approved on July 24, 1922 - had provided for the provisions of the Mandate relating to the establishment of the Jewish National Home to be postponed or withheld “In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined”.

Judea and Samaria (West Bank) - was clearly being reserved for the Jewish National Home.

Minutes of the Council of the League of Nations held on September 16,1922 (below) confirmed this decision.

78% of the territory of Palestine originally proposed for reconstitution of the Jewish National Home east of the Jordan River in 1920 had thus been denied to the Jewish people by 1922—but Judea and Samaria clearly was not excluded.

Those 20 EU member States who actually voted in favour of creating these Jewish rights in 1922 were:

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden

These reasons help explain the EU’s strenuous opposition to Israel’s sovereignty move:

“first, [Israel] is proudly nationalist;
second – thanks to the ideological cover provided by the KGB’s propaganda offensive of the 1960s and 70s—[Israel] can be falsely portrayed as colonialist and racist, thus providing the Europeans a way to assuage their guilt for their own colonialist and racist past;
third, [Israel’s] local enemies are Muslims, providing a way for Europe to pay jizya to its own uneasy Muslim minorities; and finally, [Israel’s] a Jewish state—and here no further explanation is necessary.” 

 Europe’s antipathy to Jews is becoming fashionable once again. 

The EU has acted shamefully.

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.

PLO opens door to Jordan returning to Judea and Samaria

[Published 25 May 2020]

Advancing an end to the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict has become a miraculous possibility since the formation of an Israeli Government of National Unity just 7 days ago.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately gave the lie to mounting international opposition claiming that Israel’s intention to restore Jewish sovereignty in 30% of Judea and Samaria amounted to “West Bank annexation”:

“It’s time to apply the Israeli law and write another glorious chapter in the history of Zionism. These territories are where the Jewish nation was born and grew. This will not distance us from peace, it will bring us closer.”

The Jewish People’s right to reconstitute its ancient Jewish National Home in Judea and Samaria — the biblical heartland of the Jewish People - after 3000 years — had been recognized by the international community in:

1920: The San Remo Resolution and the Treaty of Sevres

1922 : The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine

1945 : Article 80 United Nations Charter

Attempts by that international community to deny such vested legal rights in the Jewish People over the past 53 years had exacerbated the long-running conflict — contributing materially to it failing to be resolved. Netanyahu had no compunction in calling out and exposing the continuing travesty of justice that these current protestations represented.

However the roadblock jamming any progress in resolving the conflict was suddenly cleared when days later PLO President Mahmoud Abbas announced:

“The Israeli occupation authority, as of today, has to shoulder all responsibilities and obligations in front of the international community as an occupying power over the territory of the occupied state of Palestine, with all its consequences and repercussions based on international law and international humanitarian law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which holds the occupying power responsible for the protection of the civilian population under occupation and their property, criminalizes collective punishment, bans theft of resources, appropriation and annexation of land, bans forced transfer of the population of the occupied territory and bans transfer of the population of the occupying state (the colonialists) to the land it occupies, which all are grave violations and war crimes,”

Stripped of the lies and false and deceptive claims contained in this statement that have formed part and parcel of the PLO’s propaganda arsenal since its formation in 1964 — Abbas’s message was clear: Abbas was now turning over responsibility for Judea and Samaria to Israel.

The PLO had never claimed “regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” or “on the Gaza Strip” as article 24 of its founding 1964 Charter declared. Its activities were to be “on the national popular level in the liberational, organizational, political and financial fields”

This PLO position only changed in 1968 after Jordan — having occupied Judea and Samaria between 1950 and 1967 driving out every Jew living there — lost that territory to Israel in the Six Day War. Gaining sovereignty in 100% of Judea and Samaria by the creation of another Arab State became the focus of the PLO from 1968.

President Trump’s peace plan offering the PLO possibly 70% of Judea and Samaria plus Gaza has been rejected by the PLO.

Abbas — in turning over responsibility for Judea and Samaria to Israel — has opened the door to Jordan replacing the PLO as Israel’s negotiating partner.

Successful negotiations between Jordan and Israel could see Jordan annexing part of Judea and Samaria, Jordanian citizenship being restored for the Arab residents as existed between 1954 and 1988 and a possible end to the Jewish-Arab conflict.

King Abdullah — expect a call from President Trump.

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 and Netanyahu ready to create history in Judea and Samaria

[Published 11 May 2020]

President Trump and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are readying to create history together on 1 July - when Israel restores Jewish sovereignty after 3000 years in 1697km² of territory comprising 30% of Judea and Samaria — the Jewish People’s biblical and ancient heartland.

About 65000 Arabs — 5% of the Arab population of Judea and Samaria — and 450000 Jews live in the area proposed for Jewish sovereignty.

The road forward has been made possible after Netanyahu was unanimously confirmed as Israel’s next Prime Minister by 11 judges of Israel’s Supreme Court.

Trump’s map gives practical expression to the following international treaties and documents justifying Israel’s proposed action:

1. The San Remo Resolution and Treaty of Sevres in 1920
2. The League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922
3. Article 80 of the UN Charter

Trump’s translation of a dream begun 100 years ago at San Remo into a miraculous reality for the Jewish people in July 2020, should be welcomed by every Jew worldwide privileged to be the generation to see this amazing reaffirmation of the Jewish People’s past history coming alive again.

Instead this momentous occasion is being met with opposition by many Jewish organisations, media and individuals concerned at what they call “West Bank Annexation” — the identical language used by the UN and EU, PLO and Arab League in opposing Israel’s action.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Restoring Jewish sovereignty in Judea and Samaria - designated for reconstitution of the Jewish National Home by the international community 100 years ago - is not “West Bank annexation”.

Trump and Netanyahu - therefore - would certainly not have welcomed the publication in the New York Times of an article by Middle East Forum President - Daniel Pipes – headlined “Annexing the West Bank would hurt Israel”.

Pipes opposes Israel’s decision for six reasons:

1. President Trump could well erupt in fury at Israel for “unilaterally acting” on July 1
2. “Annexation” would alienate and weaken Israel’s diminishing number of friends in the Democratic Party and in Europe

3. “Unilateral Israeli annexation” could end Israel’s expanding ties with Sunni Arab states.

4. “Annexation” could destabilize “Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza”.

5. “Annexation” is sure to alienate Israel’s Left which would lead probably to a contingent of Israeli Zionists turning anti-Zionist, with some Israelis leaving the country in disgust.

6. “Annexation” would be likely to make more Palestinians eligible to become citizens of Israel.

Two of Pipes’ reasons suggesting “unilateral action” by Israel are simply untrue.

The remaining four will not deter Netanyahu from proceeding to realise this epic milestone in the history of the Jewish People — simultaneously strengthening Israel’s ability to protect the safety and security of its citizens against those Arab neighbours who seek its destruction.

Pipes - like so many other critical Jews – is sadly missing the big picture.

Pipes asks:

“And what does annexation actually achieve?”

His answer indicates he has no conception of the miracle unfolding before his very eyes:

“It is a symbolic move, a gesture toward Israelis living on the West Bank in legal limbo. But annexation does not extricate them from that limbo, since it is likely that no important government in the world would recognize their change in legal status.”

This is no symbolic move. The territory involved may be miniscule but this moment in the timeline of the Jewish people is also highly significant for mankind.

Those Jews who returned to reclaim Judea and Samaria following the Six Day War in 1967 — after every Jew living there was driven out in 1948 — will be finally recognized and vindicated.

Words count.

Pipes - like so many other critical Jews – is sadly missing the big picture.

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

UN Special Rapporteur incites hatred towards the Jewish People

[Published 4 May 2020]

Michael Lynk — UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967 — has issued an explosive anti-Jewish statement that fails to acknowledge the Jewish People have any vested legal and human rights claims to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Judea and Samaria.

Lynk’s statement is the latest in a steadily-growing outpouring of hatred towards the Jewish people that could lead to violence between Jews and Arabs as the July 1 date of destiny approaches for restoring Jewish sovereignty in about 30% of Judea and Samaria after 3000 years.

Couched entirely in the language of the enemies of the Jewish People, Lynk uses the terms:

1. “annexation” instead of “restoring Jewish sovereignty”

2. “West Bank” instead of “Judea and Samaria”

Lynk lays the groundwork for inflaming violent Arab responses with this highly-exaggerated claim:

“Israel’s decision to unilaterally march ahead with the planned annexation on July 1 undermines human rights in the region, and would be a severe body blow to the rules-based international order”

Israeli sovereignty will be applied in about 1697 km2 — approximating 30% of Judea and Samaria — where 65,000 Arabs — 4% of Judea and Samaria’s Arab population — live.

Lynk then misleadingly states:

“It would also further undermine any remaining prospect for a just and negotiated settlement”

Rubbish.

Sovereignty in the remaining 70% — 3958 km2 — home for 96% of Judea and Samaria’s Arab population will be allocated in direct Israeli-Arab negotiations.

Lynk continues:

“If Israel’s annexation plans proceed, what would be left of the West Bank would become a Palestinian Bantustan, an archipelago of disconnected islands of territory, completely surrounded and divided up by Israel and unconnected to the outside world”

Lynk makes this sensational claim without having seen the actual joint US-Israel Mapping Committee proposals.

Certain to inflame Arab passions is Lynk’s assertion:

“The plan would crystalize a 21st century apartheid, leaving in its wake the demise of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination. Legally, morally, politically, this is entirely unacceptable.”

The 65,000 Arab residents affected will acquire Israeli residency rights.

Lynk’s claim that “apartheid” will be the outcome of Israel’s decision is outrageous.

Lynk’s use of the term “annexation” throughout his statement becomes clear as he continues his diatribe:

“Annexation has been strictly prohibited under international law since the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations in 1945. Drawing from the bitter lessons of two world wars fought within a generation, the international community outlawed annexation because it generates conflict, vast human suffering, political instability, economic ruin and systemic discrimination.”

Israel’s decision does not involve “annexation” but “restoring Jewish sovereignty in Judea and Samaria” in accordance with the following legal authorizations:

1. San Remo Resolution 1920
2. Treaty of Sevres 1920
3. League of Nations Mandate for Palestine 1922
4. Article 80 UN Charter

Lynk’s annexation-phobia continues unabated:

“The looming annexation is a political litmus test for the international community. This annexation will not be reversed through rebukes, nor will the 53-year-old occupation die of old age”

Lynk concludes:

“As I stated in March, the international community should review its extensive menu of sanctions and countermeasures to stem this march towards further illegality. Settlement products should not enter the international marketplace. Agreements, existing and proposed, with Israel should be reviewed.”

There is no illegality — only legality heaped on legality.

The 30% of Judea and Samaria to become part of Israel is the Jewish People’s biblical and ancestral heartland. Lynk’s attempt to erase its Jewish patrimony is disgraceful.

Lynk’s refusal to acknowledge Jewish claims in Judea and Samaria smacks of unadulterated Jew-hatred, will incite violence against Jews and should be roundly condemned.

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

Jordan must not socially distance from Judea and Samaria's Arabs

[Published 27 April 2020]

Formation of a National Unity Government in Israel has focused attention on the future of Judea and Samaria — 4% of the territory of the Mandate for Palestine — in which sovereignty still remains unallocated between Jews and Arabs.

President Trump’s Peace Plan published on January 28, 2020 has been endorsed by Israel.

Trump’s Plan proposes that Israeli sovereignty be extended into parts of Judea and Samaria – with the balance reserved to create a second Arab state in former Palestine – in addition to Jordan – for the first time in recorded history.

The PLO, Arab League and the international community have rejected Trump’s proposals.

However US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has given the greenlight to Israel proceeding with extending Israeli sovereignty in about 30% of Judea and Samaria now the new Israeli Government of National Unity is finalised.

Blue and White leader Benny Gantz has agreed that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can seek Parliament’s approval for Israeli sovereignty to be extended into about 30% of Judea and Samaria after July 1st. in accordance with the decisions of a joint US-Israel mapping committee.

Israel’s entitlement to do so is grounded in the legal rights vested by the international community in the Jewish People pursuant to:

1. The San Remo Resolution dated April 25, 1920

2. Article 95 Treaty of Sevres dated August 10, 1920,

3. Article 6 Mandate for Palestine dated July 24, 1922,

4. Article 16 Treaty of Lausanne dated July 24, 1923

5.Article 80 United Nations Charter 1945

These commitments have been previously breached by:

1. The Council of the League of Nations approving article 25 being inserted in the Mandate for Palestine - allowing Britain to postpone or withhold the Jewish National Home being reconstituted in Transjordan - 77% of the territory of the Mandate for Palestine

2. Britain unilaterally granting independence to Transjordan on May 25, 1946 contrary to article 5 of the Mandate for Palestine

3. Britain handing back its Mandate to the United Nations — uncompleted — on May 15th 1948 — leaving the Jews to defend themselves against six invading Arab armies from neighbouring States.

The European Union has now hypocritically chosen to strongly oppose Israel extending sovereignty into Judea and Samaria after July 1st.

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell released the following statement:

”…the EU’s position on the status of the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 remains unchanged. The EU does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over the occupied West Bank. The EU reiterates that any annexation would constitute a serious violation of international law.”

Borrell is way off the mark:

1. Not “sovereignty over the occupied West Bank” — but “sovereignty over 30% of Judea and Samaria — land designated for reconstitution of the Jewish National Home under internationally-negotiated agreements”

2. Not “annexation” — but “the restoration of sovereignty lost 3000 years ago by the Jewish people in its biblical heartland”

3. Not “a serious violation of international law”: Israeli sovereignty is being applied in accordance with international agreements that the international community is obligated to uphold.

Trump should focus on Jordan — having occupied and ruled Judea and Samaria between 1948 and 1967 — to replace the PLO in negotiations with Israel on Trump’s additional Arab State proposal.

The PLO — only founded in 1964 - expressly stipulated under article 24 of its Charter that it did:

“not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,”

The PLO reversed its position in 1968 after Israel gained control in the 1967 Six Day War.

Judea and Samaria’s Arab residents were Jordanian citizens between 1954 and 1988. Socially distancing from them now is the last thing Jordan should be doing.

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

Three politicians can make 3000 years-old Jewish dream a reality

[Published 9 March 2020]

The votes are in - and it seems Israel’s Prime Minister — Bibi Netanyahu — is just three politicians shy of realizing the 3000-years old dream of the Jewish People to regain sovereignty in Judea and Samaria — its ancient and biblical heartland.

The opportunity to turn this dream into a miraculous reality came with the release of President Trump’s Peace Plan on January 28 — embraced by Netanyahu but rejected by the Israeli Arabs, the PLO and the Arab League.

America and Israel’s response was to set up a joint six member Sovereignty Mapping Committee to determine where Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria could be extended immediately. The residue — about 40% of Judea and Samaria where about 95% of the Arab population live — would continue to enjoy its current status quo — mainly under total PLO administration and security control.

Judea and Samaria formed part of the territory in which the Jewish National Home could be reconstituted following:

1. the San Remo Conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 and

2. all 51 member states of the League of Nations endorsing the Mandate for Palestine in 1922.

These rights vested in the Jewish people were preserved under article 80 of the United Nations Charter when the League of Nations was wound up on April 20, 1946.

Netanyahu’s main rival in Israel’s election held on 2 March – Benny Gantz – accepted the Trump Peace Plan but made it clear he would only implement it with the agreement of the Arab States and the international community. Given the rejection of the Plan by the Arabs and the European Union – Gantz’s promise was simply hot air that never had any chance of being implemented.

This latest election was the first in Israel’s history that had presented the electors with the opportunity to vote on the Jewish people regaining sovereignty in Judea and Samaria after an absence of 3,000 years.

The battle lines were drawn — Netanyahu would do so immediately. Gantz would do so maybe, perhaps, possibly — but not certainly for sure — in the future.

The results were staggering:

1. Likud converted a deficit of 37,597 votes as against Blue and White in September 2019 into an amazing surplus of 132,071 votes in March 2020 – clear evidence that the voters wanted sovereignty in Judea and Samaria now.

2.The turnout was impressive: 4,615,124 voters this time against 4,340,253 in September 2019.

Yet Netanyahu only managed to secure 58 of the 61 seats needed to turn this 3,000 years-old dream of the Jewish people into a reality.

Netanyahu’s ability to find the support of another 3 of his 47 Jewish political opponents is complicated by the fact that he has been indicted by the Attorney General in three cases alleging fraud and corruption and is due to appear in Court on March 17.

Four of Netanyahu’s 47 political opponents reportedly could switch their allegiance to Netanyahu to enable him to make this dream a reality.

Given this once in 3,000 years opportunity of restoring Jewish rights in Judea and Samaria — it would be strange if many more of the remaining 43 politicians — including Liberman’s 6 Yisrael Beiteinu bloc — were not prepared to put the national interest of the Jewish People before their personal hatred of Netanyahu.

Restoring sovereignty would also fittingly complete the political process begun 100 years ago at San Remo in April 1920.

Netanyahu should not be written off just yet.

A fourth election beckons if Netanyahu fails.

The Jewish People’s long held dream – if unrealized - could then turn into a debilitating nightmare – resulting in unprecedented political upheaval, civilian demonstrations and unrest.


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

Sanders and Bloomberg boost hopes for Netanyahu election win

[Published 27 February 2020]

Democratic Party contenders for the American Presidency — Bernie Sanders and Michael Bloomberg — have unwittingly given Israel’s Prime Minister — Bibi Netanyahu — an unexpected boost to becoming Israel’s next Prime Minister on March 2.

During a nationally-televised Democratic Party Presidential contenders’ debate, Sanders made this inflammatory claim:

“I am very proud of being Jewish. I actually lived in Israel for some months. But what I happen to believe is that, right now, sadly, tragically, in Israel, through Bibi Netanyahu, you have a reactionary racist who is now running that country.”

This “reactionary racist” just happens to be Israel’s longest serving Prime Minister — victorious after six election campaigns conducted in fully democratic and openly transparent elections. Sanders’ comment doesn’t say much for his opinion of the majority of Israelis whose votes have kept Netanyahu there.

Bloomberg was motivated to chime in with his take on Israel:

“Well, the battle has been going on for a long time in the Middle East, whether it’s the Arabs versus the Persians, the Shias versus the Sunnis, the Jews in Israel and the Palestinians, it’s only gone on for 40 or 50 years.

Number one, you can’t move the embassy back. We should not have done it without getting something from the Israeli government. But it was done, and you’re going to have to leave it there.

Number two, only solution here is a two-state solution. The Palestinians have to be accommodated…”

The conflict between Jews and Arabs in former Palestine has been going on for 100 years — not 40 or 50 years. Brainwashed by Arab propaganda — Bloomberg had erased the origins of the conflict which began with the San Remo conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 and the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Bloomberg - in mentioning the need for a two-state solution - was apparently ignorant of the fact that the Palestinian Arabs had been allocated 78% of Palestine in 1922 - which subsequently became a sovereign state renamed the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan in 1946 — today called Jordan.

For someone aspiring to be America’s next President Bloomberg displayed an appalling lack of knowledge about this long running and unresolved conflict.

Had President Trump obtained a quid pro quo from Israel for moving America’s Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem he would have risked impeachment by the Trump-hating Democrats. The Embassy was moved because American embassies are always located in the capitols of each country.

One major policy difference between Netanyahu and Gantz makes this Israeli election an especially historic and momentous one:

Netanyahu is offering — if re-elected and with Trump’s approval — to immediately extend sovereignty into the Jewish People’s heartland — Judea and Samaria — after a 3000 years absence

Netanyahu’s chief rival – Benny Gantz will not do so until the Arab States and the international community agree.

Sanders and Bloomberg’s disparaging anti-Zionist rants could prove to be the catalysts needed to see the Jewish People turning this 3000 year dream into a living reality.

Sander’s and Bloomberg’s comments could galvanize tens of thousands of angry Israelis - who don’t usually vote out of sheer apathy — into voting for Netanyahu.

Voter turnout at Israel’s last election in September 2019 was a disappointing 69.83% — only slightly higher than the 68.46% in the February 2019 elections — given the huge incentive to vote to break the unprecedented February deadlock.

Latest polls indicate Netanyahu has now moved ahead of Gantz for the first time.

Sanders and Bloomberg have ensured Netanyahu’s late momentum continues — which could indeed see Israel finally ending the political stalemate that has marked the previous two deadlocked elections.


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

Voter apathy threatens reunion of Judea and Samaria with Israel

[Published 23 February 2020]

Crunch time has come for approximately 6.5 million Jews and Arabs to vote on Israel regaining immediate sovereignty in parts of the Jewish People’s biblical and ancient heartland in Judea and Samaria - 3000 years after its loss.

Voter apathy could possibly see this historic opportunity being lost because of these existing political realities:

1. Current Prime Minister and determined proponent for claiming immediate sovereignty in Judea and Samaria – Bibi Netanyahu – could lose voter support as corruption charges against him have been fixed to commence just fifteen days after the March 2 elections

2. Netanyahu’s challenger as Israel’s next Prime Minister — Benny Gantz — wants to maintain the current status quo in Judea and Samaria pending agreement in tandem with Israel’s Arab neighbours and possibly in co-ordination with the international community — which could mean never.

3. These upcoming elections will be the third held in the last 12 months since two earlier elections in April and September 2019 — which resulted in deadlocks that prevented either Netanyahu or Gantz being able to acquire the 61 seats required to form government.

4. Voter turnout at the April 2019 election was only 68.46% and only slightly higher in September 2019 at 69.83%

5. Support for the major Arab political parties has risen from 7.82% in April 2019 to 10.6% in September 2019

6. Gantz has refused to have any televised debates with Netanyahu.

7. Gantz is now facing a probe by the Attorney General into the affairs of a bankrupt company — The Fifth Dimension — of which Gantz himself was Chairman

Voters might be tempted to throw up their hands in despair at this seeming turmoil in Israel’s political system and simply not turn up to vote — thereby possibly denying the fulfilment of a dream that was reborn 100 years ago at the San Remo Conference in April 1920 and sealed with the Treaty of Sevres in August 1920 — culminating with the League of Nations unanimously creating the Mandate for Palestine in July 1922 recognizing the Jewish People’s right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Palestine.

100 years later the Jewish National Home exists — but sovereignty in its ancient and biblical heartland — Judea and Samaria — does not.

President Trump’s Peace Plan released on January 28, 2020 recognizes Israeli sovereignty being extended into parts of Judea and Samaria whilst recognizing the creation of a 22nd Arab State in the residue for the first time in recorded history.

Rejection of Trump’s Plan by the Arab League on February 1 has led to the formation of a joint American-Israel Mapping Committee which is expected to produce a map in two months designating the areas of Judea and Samaria where Israeli sovereignty can be extended immediately.

Gantz has not embraced Trump’s Plan with the same enthusiasm as Netanyahu — choosing to maintain the existing status quo in Judea and Samaria for an indefinite period of time.

Had Gantz and Netanyahu agreed — voter apathy would not have mattered. Both major political parties would have been locked in to immediately implementing sovereignty in Judea and Samaria with America’s approval. Lack of unanimity demands condemnation by Jews worldwide.

The portents for another low voter turnout have been signalled by the announcement that only 66% of eligible Israeli diplomats, members of official delegations and their families abroad have voted — a decline from the 69.5% turnout in the September 2019 election.

Hopefully the historic significance of these elections will generate a much larger local turnout of at least 75-80%. The future of the Jewish People’s heartland deserves this level of minimum participation from those Jews and Arabs blessed to have been chosen to make this momentous decision.

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, Netanyahu and Gantz can end in 2020 what began in 1920

[Published 9 December 2019]

Designating the territory for reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Palestine – begun with the San Remo Convention and Treaty of Sevres in April and August 1920 respectively – could finally be completed 100 years later in 2020.

Achieving this long-overdue outcome will require Israel to form a Government of National Unity by 11 December 2019 - headed initially by Benjamin Netanyahu as Prime Minister for a minimum term of six months - enabling the new Parliament to ratify those areas of Judea and Samaria to which Israeli sovereignty will be extended as delineated by the Government.

This Unity Government should ideally hold at least 80 of the 120 seats in the Knesset so that there is an overwhelming majority of Israel’s elected politicians supporting any determinative decisions made by the Knesset in relation to Judea and Samaria.

Israel has been presented with this amazing opportunity following President Trump’s Secretary for State - Mike Pompeo - issuing this declaration on 19 November 2019:

“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.”

Pompeo’s statement followed US Ambassador to Israel – David Friedman – stating on 8 June 2019:

“Under certain circumstances I think Israel has the right to retain some, but unlikely all, of the West Bank.”

Friedman had then cautioned:

“We really don’t have a view until we understand how much, on what terms, why does it make sense, why is it good for Israel, why is it good for the region, why does it not create more problems than it solves. These are all things that we’d want to understand, and I don’t want to prejudge.”

Friedman will get the answers with the formation of Israel’s Government of National Unity – which hangs delicately by a thread and can vanish into thin air if it does not gain some oxygen by midnight on 11 December. Fresh elections on 3 March 2020 - for the third time in a year - will then become mandatory and this wonderful opportunity will have flown out the window.

It would be a national disgrace and betrayal of Israelis and Jews worldwide if Israel’s political parties allowed their political differences and personal rivalries to stymie the opportunity to determine the area within which the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home will be mandated after 100 years of fighting many wars and diplomatic battles.

Israel’s extended boundaries would be determined in coordination with President Trump and ratified over the next 6 months.

The fact that no Arab interlocutors will participate in any such decision-making process is regrettable. However continuing Arab intransigence in refusing to commit to negotiate with Israel on Trump’s still unreleased deal of the century - despite Trump’s best efforts to involve their participation in such decision-making with Israel – leaves Trump with no other option.

A Unity Government could be reasonably expected to agree to extend Israel’s sovereignty to about 75% of Area C – about 45% of Judea and Samaria.

Gantz reportedly told close associates he is:

“ready to make tough decisions in the coming days”

Hopefully Gantz as Deputy Prime Minister can rise to the occasion and allow Netanyahu – enjoying a unique relationship with Trump - to head a Government of National Unity to grab this once in a hundred years opportunity.

An unprecedented – almost miraculous - confluence of events has emerged since Israel’s second-deadlocked September elections - that cries out for a national consensus and historic response by Trump, Netanyahu and Gantz.

Seize the moment – seize the day….

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

Hashemite rule in Jordan on collision course with Trump and Israel

[Published 7 April 2019]

King Abdullah seems increasingly hell bent on ending 99 years of Hashemite-dynasty rule in Jordan.

This possibility is emerging as Abdullah is:

1. Seemingly refusing to commit to negotiating with Israel on President Trump’s soon-to-be-released deal of the century to end the Jewish-Arab conflict and

2. Taking active steps to place the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty in jeopardy.

Transjordan (renamed Jordan in 1950) has always been the key to resolving competing territorial claims by both Arabs and Jews in former Palestine.

Transjordan comprised 78% of the territory placed under the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine after being wrested from 400 years of Ottoman Empire sovereignty during World War 1. Mandatory Palestine was designated in April 1920 by the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference and in August 1920 by article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres as the location for reconstitution of the ancient and biblical homeland of the Jewish people.

Transjordan’s first Hashemite ruler — Abdullah I — arrived there in November 1920

Abdullah was en route by train from Hijaz to Syria with armed forces to assist his brother Feisal in his struggle with France to retain power in Syria. Winston Churchill
— at France’s request - offered Abdullah an Emirate in Transjordan — which Abdullah gratefully accepted on 11 April 1921.

Feisal was removed from Syria by the French and installed as ruler of Iraq under the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty dated 10 October 1922. France became the Mandatory for the territory comprised in the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon.

These British-Franco machinations cost the Jewish people dearly — when the Mandate for Palestine - adopted unanimously by all 51 members of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922 - denied the Jewish people the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in any part of Transjordan (Eastern Palestine) and restricted that right to the remaining 22% (Western Palestine).

The Jews reluctantly accepted this decision. The Arabs didn’t.

In 1946 Transjordan was granted independence by Great Britain.

In 1948 — immediately after the Mandate ended and Jews declared the State of Israel — Transjordan invaded Western Palestine conquering Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem (comprising 4% of Mandatory Palestine) — and unified these areas with Transjordan to form a new territorial entity — Jordan — encompassing 82% of Mandatory Palestine completely devoid of Jews.

The founding Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) Charter in 1964 specifically excluded any PLO claim to sovereignty in Judea and Samaria.

In the 1967 Six Day War Israel captured Judea and Samaria from Jordan. The PLO - claiming Jordan and Israel to be one indivisible territorial unit - removed its non-claim to sovereignty from the revised 1968 Charter.

In September 1970 the PLO unsuccessfully tried to overthrow Jordan’s Hashemite ruler King Hussein. Israel helped save Hussein.

Israel and Jordan signed a peace treaty in 1994 (Peace Treaty) — which has withstood many events that could have seen its termination.

That Treaty is again under threat — as Jordan has:

1. indicated it is not prepared to renew an expired 25 year lease of Jordanian sovereign territory farmed by Israelis and

2. given the PLO 40% representation on the body charged with administering the Moslem Holy Sites in Jerusalem — breaching the Washington Declaration and the Peace Treaty.

Jordan’s resistance to negotiating with Israel on Trump’s plan could see Trump shelving it and abruptly ending the 2018 five year $1.275 billion America-Jordan Memorandum of Understanding underpinning Jordan’s security and stability.

The PLO — as in 1970 — is waiting in the wings as current ongoing unrest in Jordan is destabilizing continuing Hashemite rule there.

Abdullah might find that spurning Trump and Israel could see him facing the PLO on his own.

Balfour Declaration Centenary Shames Arab and UN Deniers

[Published 23 October 2017]


The continuing Arab refusal — aided and abetted by the United Nations - to recognise the international legitimacy of the Balfour Declaration 100 years after it was first issued on 2 November 1917 - remain the greatest obstacles to resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict.

The current Arab culprits are the Arab League, the PLO and Hamas who unconditionally reject the binding international legal validity of the Balfour Declaration. However their efforts to nullify the Balfour Declaration would have been undermined long ago had the United Nations not lent its support by propagating a fictitious narrative of the Jewish-Arab conflict.

United Nations involvement has occurred through the “Division for Palestinian Rights of the United Nations Secretariat for, and under the guidance of, the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People” which has published “The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem 1917-1988” containing numerous false and misleading facts on the Jewish-Arab conflict which remain uncorrected.

The Balfour Declaration — when issued - was merely a “declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations” having no binding legal effect - since “Palestine” was still then part of Turkey’s Ottoman Empire and had been so for the previous 400 years.

The Balfour Declaration first gained international endorsement following Turkey’s defeat in World War 1 when the Treaty of Sevres - concluding a truce with Turkey - was signed on 10 August 1920 by:

1. The British Empire, France, Italy and Japan (“The Principal Allied Powers”)

2. Armenia, Belgium, Greece, the Hedjaz, Poland, Portugal, Roumania, the Serb-Croat-Slovene State and Czechoslovakia (constituting with the Principal Allied Powers “the Allied Powers”) and

3. Turkey

Article 95 of the Treaty provided for:

“the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

This acceptance of the Balfour Declaration by the Allied Powers was subsequently embraced by all 51 member countries of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922 - when the terms of the Balfour Declaration were incorporated in the preamble to the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Those 51 countries were:

Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, British India, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Italy, Japan, Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, Latvia, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Persia, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of China, Romania, Siam, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Union of South Africa, United Kingdom, Uruguay, and Venezuela

Article 25 of the Mandate was subsequently invoked on 23 September 1922 to restrict the Jewish National Home to just 22% of the territory encompassed by the Mandate - whilst the remaining 78% eventually became an Arabs-only, Jew-free State in 1946 - now called Jordan.

The Jews reluctantly accepted these decisions — but the Arabs never have. The Arabs (with the exception of Jordan and Egypt) still claim 100% of former Palestine by refusing to recognise the Jewish State.

Peace cannot occur until the UN demands Arab recognition of the Balfour Declaration. The UN’s continuing refusal to do so is truly shameful.

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.

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….

UN Security Council and Obama revive Palestine Mandate solution

[Published 25 December 2016]


United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 passed on 23 December 2016 has buried any lingering hopes for the creation of a second Arab State in former Palestine in addition to Jordan (”the two-state solution”).

America’s decision to not veto Resolution 2334 – taken in the dying days of President Obama’s eight years term of office – revives the solution first envisaged in 1922 by the League of Nations.

Pursuant to Article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine - the territory covered by the Mandate was to be divided between the Jewish people and the Arab inhabitants of Palestine – restricting the Jews to reconstituting the Jewish National home in just 22% of the territory whilst the remaining 78% was reserved for the Palestinian Arabs.

The Jews reluctantly accepted that solution even though it contradicted promises made to them in 1920 at the San Remo Conference and in the Treaty of Sevres.

The Arabs however rejected the Mandate solution.

Notwithstanding such rejection – the two successor States to the Mandate – Israel and Jordan – have achieved the Mandate solution in 95% of the territory covered by the Mandate.

Negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) over the last 23 years to allocate sovereignty in the remaining 5% have been stalled since 2014. Resolution 2334 guarantees the failure of any such negotiations – if indeed they are ever resumed.

Resolution 2334 will lead to increasing conflict and violence – as the Palestinian Arabs buoyed by this unexpected change in their diplomatic fortunes seek to continue their declared objective of eliminating the Jewish State of Israel and replacing it with a 23rd Arab State.

Resolution 2334 contains the following language that signals the end of the two-state solution - rather than facilitating and advancing such an outcome:

I. The Security Council still envisions:

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

The Palestinian Arabs have had no elections for the last 10 years and no say in their own future – whilst Hamas and the PLO continue their internecine struggle for power against each other.

II. The Security Council continues to misleadingly claim that:

“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”

There is no binding legal judgement supporting this claim. It is an opinion – not a statement of fact.

To the contrary the right of Jews to “close settlement” on land in East Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes is specifically “encouraged” by article 6 of the Mandate and preserved by article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

The Security Council’s continuing flagrant violation of the Mandate and the UN Charter finally doomed the two-state solution to extinction.

III. The Security Council is concerned that “the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines” is being imperilled.

Favouring this end - game only encourages the PLO to be intransigent in negotiations.

This exact outcome could have been achieved between 1948 and 1967 following the forced eviction of all the Jews living in Jordanian-occupied Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem and Egyptian-administered Gaza.

An even better result was on offer had the Arabs accepted General Assembly Resolution 191 (II) on 29 November 1947.

Such lost opportunities do not re-occur.

The Security Council has apparently learnt nothing in its unseemly haste to pass Resolution 2234.

Drawing new international borders between Israel and Jordan in direct negotiations between their respective States remains the best option to replace the buried two-state solution.

Palestine - European Union Drowns In Sea Of Inconsistencies

[Published 5 January 2016]

The European Union (EU) has concluded an unhappy 2015 with the introduction of racist and discriminatory labelling laws for Jewish goods and products originating from Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem.

EU members Hungary, Greece and the Czech Republic have rejected these laws which have also been condemned in a bipartisan resolution presented to the US Congress.

The EU’s Ambassador to Israel - Lars Faaborg-Andersen - has attempted to justify these labelling laws as being simply an expression of the EU’s longstanding view that such designated territories are not part of Israel.

He omitted to state that EU policy will never support any part of these disputed territories becoming part of the State of Israel because the EU claims that Jewish settlement there since 1967 is illegal in international law.

However there is no binding legal decision in any Court that substantiates this EU claim.

Indeed there is territory-specific legislation to the contrary - article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the UN Charter - that confirms the legal right of Jews to settle in Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem.

Jews lived in these areas for millennia prior to being driven out in 1948 by six invading Arab armies - facts which somehow appear to have escaped the EU’s notice.

Such EU policy also flies in the face of Security Council Resolution 242 calling for secure and recognised borders to be established in negotiations between Israel and her neighbours.

The EU’s anti-Israel stance no doubt encouraged the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) to reject offers by Israel in 2000/01 and 2008 to cede its claims in more than 90% of Judea and Samaria as part of any peace treaty to end the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict.

Why accept 90% when the EU is supporting the PLO’s demand for 100%?

The EU - in so acting - has repudiated the decisions adopted in 1922 by 23 of its current 28 members unanimously endorsing the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - whose terms provided for:

1. Jewish self-determination in 22% of the territory of the Mandate including East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria

2. Arab self-determination in the remaining 78% of the territory of the Mandate - today called Jordan.

Cyprus, Germany, Hungary, Ireland and Malta are the only current members of the EU that were not members of the League of Nations when these fateful decisions were taken.

The Jews had been short-changed by the League of Nations - which reduced the area within which the Jewish National Home was to be reconstituted to just 22% of that previously contemplated by the High Contracting Powers - Great Britain, France, Italy (all current EU members) and Japan - at the April 1920 San Remo Conference and the Treaty of Sevres signed in August of that year.

The Jews nevertheless reluctantly accepted these restrictions. The Arabs rejected them. The PLO deemed them “null and void” in 1968.

Fast forward to 2016 and the European Union continues to backtrack on these internationally binding commitments to the Jewish people made by the overwhelming majority of EU members 94 years ago.

Conditions for entry into the EU require that each applicant:

1. Be democratic

2. Have a free market Government together with corresponding freedoms and institutions and

3. Respect for the rule of law.

The EU does not require the PLO to meet these criteria - yet opposes any claim to the historic and biblical heartland of the Jewish people by Israel - which shares these EU fundamental values.

The EU should hang its collective head in shame as it drowns in this sea of inconsistencies entirely of its own making.