Jordan/West Bank reunification key to peace in Jerusalem

 

Separating Jews and Arabs in former Palestine – first decreed by the League of Nations 100 years ago under article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine and subsequently endorsed by the United Nations in its 1947 Partition Plan - has become even more urgent following:

• the outpouring of rabid Jew-hatred emanating from the Temple Mount in Jerusalem during Ramadan 
• three Jewish fathers being murdered - leaving 16 Jewish children fatherless - and seven more Jews being wounded - in an axe and knife wielding bloodbath perpetrated by two Arabs

Violent Arab riots against Jews first occurred in 1920 and 1921. Secretary of State for the Colonies -Winston Churchill - in his White Paper dated June 3, 1922 - had sought to allay Arab fears of a Jewish takeover of all of Palestine 

"Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the [Balfour -ed]Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded 'in Palestine.'"

As a result - Article 25 was inserted in the Mandate adopted by the League of Nations on July 24, 1922: 

• Restricting the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home after 3000 years in just 22% of Palestine located west of the Jordan River - today called Israel, Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza 
• Granting Arab self-determination in the remaining 78% of Palestine located east of the Jordan River--today called Jordan. 

The Jews accepted - albeit reluctantly - article 25’s inclusion in the Mandate.  The Arabs never did -demanding 100% of Palestine - not the 78% they were allocated under article 25 

100 years later:

• Israel exercises sovereignty in 17% of former Palestine 
• Jordan exercises sovereignty in 78% of former Palestine
• Sovereignty in 5% of former Palestine west of the Jordan River - Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza - remains unallocated.

According to a recent poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research:

• 32% of Palestinian Arabs living in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza support one state west of the Jordan River with equal rights for Jews and Arabs 
• 44% think that armed struggle is the most effective means of ending the "Israeli occupation" 

This proposed one-state solution - bringing Arabs and Jews together - is only agreed to by 10% of Israelis. However an alternative one-state solution that separates Jews and Arabs - reducing conflict- is feasible and involves: Direct negotiations between Jordan and Israel - the two successor states to the Mandate for Palestine - to redraw their current international border - which would result in:

• Gaza plus the heavily-populated Arab areas of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) as existed between 1950 and 1967 - becoming part of Jordan 
• the heavily-populated Jewish areas of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) becoming part of Israel
• no Arab or Jew having to leave his current home
• Jordan being affirmed as Custodian of the Islamic Holy Shrines in Jerusalem
• Freedom of worship in Jerusalem for Jews, Christians and Moslems

The League of Nations and United Nations mutually-agreed destination - one Jewish State and one Arab state in former Palestine - will have finally been reached. 

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.

UN should use Israel-bashing model to oust Russia from Ukraine

The United Nations (UN) General Assembly needs to stop its pious bleating and move to immediately set up a network of Ukrainian-dedicated agencies to try and force Russia to end its invasion and occupation of Ukraine – adopting the same model it has established in trying to force Israel’s withdrawal from Judea and Samaria (West Bank) over the last 50 years.

The General Assembly has failed in Israel’s case – because:

• Sovereignty remains unallocated and still in dispute between Jews and Arabs after 100 years
• Israel has the legal right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home there pursuant to articles 6 and 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the UN Charter
• Any Israeli withdrawal can only occur after secure and recognised boundaries are fixed pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 242.

However Russia’s invasion of the sovereign territory of another UN member state challenges the UN’s continued existence – as UN Secretary-General Assembly Antonio Guterres has pointed out: 

“It is wrong. It is against the Charter. It is unacceptable. But it is not irreversible”

Reversing Russia’s flagrant violation of the UN Charter justifies the General Assembly adopting its Israel-bashing model to establish the following Ukrainian-dedicated agencies to humiliate and bash Russia into withdrawing from Ukraine: 

• Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Ukrainian People (CEIRUP): To institute a programme that will enable the Ukrainian people to exercise their inalienable rights to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty without external interference; to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced. 

• Department for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs’ (DPPA) Division for Ukrainian Rights:To serve as the Secretariat of CEIRUP and provide the following core functions: 

1. Organising the meetings of CEIRUP and its Bureau at UN Headquarters;
2. Monitoring political and other relevant developments;
3. Organising programmes of international meetings, conferences and CEIRUP delegation visits;
4. Implementing a publications programme;
5. Developing and maintaining the United Nations Information System on the Question of Ukraine (UNISUKR) and managing CEIRUP’s outreach efforts including via social media;
6. Cooperating with civil society organizations active on the Russia-Ukraine issue;
7. Organising an annual observance of the International Day of Solidarity with the Ukrainian People;

• United Nations Ukrainian Works and Relief Agency:  To carry out direct relief and works programmes solely for Ukrainian refugees. 

• Special Rapporteur: To assess the human rights situation in the Occupied Ukrainian Territories, report publicly about it, and work with governments, civil society and others to foster international cooperation.

• Special Committee: To investigate Russian practices affecting the human rights of the Ukrainian People and other residents of the Occupied Ukrainian Territories

• United Nations Special Coordinator for the Russia-Ukraine conflict: The Secretary-General’s Personal Representative and the focal point on the ground for UN support in all political and diplomatic efforts related to any peace process, responsible also for coordinating the activities of all UN Russia-Ukraine agencies, funds and programmes on humanitarian and development assistance to be set up to assist the Ukrainian People

These agencies will neutralise any Russian veto in the Security Council and reinforce sanctions and other decisions made by individual UN Member States to force Russia out of Ukraine.

Simultaneously the UN Human Rights Council should establish an ongoing independent, international commission of inquiry - appointed by the President of the Human Rights Council - to investigate in the Occupied Ukrainian Territories all alleged violations of international humanitarian law and all alleged violations and abuses of international human rights law by Russia leading up to and since 22 February 2022.

The UN will cease to have any credibility or relevance if the General Assembly fails to implement these measures. 

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.

UN remembers the Holocaust as it abandons the Jewish People

 

The United Nations (UN) ceremony to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day was held on January 27, 2022 - as the UN was simultaneously continuing its incessant assault on the Jewish People that is once again giving rise to increasing Jew-hatred worldwide.

UN-sponsored Jew-hatred began with the establishment of The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People under resolution 3376 (XXX) and the scurrilous “Zionism is racism” Resolution 3379 (XXX) – both passed by the General Assembly on November 10, 1975.

The following 47 years has seen three totally-fabricated statements formulated and repeatedly propagated by the UN and some of its various agencies: 

• Jews have no right to live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem 
• Jews living there are doing so illegally in flagrant violation of international law 
• Jews are the major obstacle to peace 

Secretary-General of the UN – Antonio Guterres - enunciated these false statements demonizing the Jewish People as recently as December 15, 2021:

“I call on Israel to put a stop to all settlement activities immediately. Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of international law and United Nations resolutions. They undermine the prospect of achieving a two-State solution by systematically eroding the possibility of establishing a contiguous, independent, sovereign and viable Palestinian State”

Guterres was pushing his master’s odious three-point narrative – when he should have been forcefully rejecting it for the following reasons:

• Jews have the inalienable right to live in these specifically-designated areas of former Palestine for the purpose of reconstituting the Jewish National Home (“Inalienable Right) – legally conferred on them by article 6 and article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine and preserved by article 80 of the UN Charter.

• Israel’s first Prime Minister – David Ben-Gurion – then the Representative of the Jewish Agency – emphasised the importance of the insertion of Article 80 into the UN Charter in evidence before the UN Special Committee for Palestine at Lake Success, New York on 7 July 1947:

• Article 80 preserves the Jewish People’s Inalienable Right notwithstanding the demise of the League of Nations on April 19, 1946 and remains as alive and exercisable today as it was when unanimously adopted by all 51 Member States of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922 – (see image following)

The following headline appearing over a media release on January 27th by UN News – the official UN  media outlet - indicates the lengths the UN will go to to bury Article 80:

“The Holocaust “defined the United Nations”, Secretary-General António Guterres told a virtual ceremony marking Holocaust Remembrance Day on Thursday, recalling that the UN Charter was drafted in San Francisco “as the Dachau concentration camp was liberated”.

The Charter defined the UN - giving it the responsibility under Article 80 to ensure the rights of the Jewish People created by the Mandate were preserved.

Excluding any mention of Article 80 contained in that Charter and the reasons for its inclusion continues to be the fuel that enables the UN to falsely condemn 600000 Jews for illegally living in areas where they are legally entitled to do so and from where all Jews were driven out and expelled between 1948 and 1967.

Abandoning the Jewish People by failing to recognise its vested rights under the Mandate for Palestine and the UN Charter brands the UN as the world centre for disseminating and inciting Jew-hatred. 193 Member States need to evaluate their continuing membership. 

“Never again” is threatening to become “Yet again” – whilst the UN continues to act in flagrant violation of article 80 of its own Charter. 

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.

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

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

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

Guterres states:

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

This Security Council Resolution falsely accuses Jews of:

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

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

• Having no right to live in these Territories: 

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

• Acting in flagrant violation of international law

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

Resolution 2334 institutionalized Jew-hatred in the Security Council. 

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

Guterres further points out:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Really?

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

Why couldn’t a similar solution work again?

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

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

Author's note: The cartoon - commissioned exclusively for this article - is by Yaakov Kirschen aka "Dry Bones"- one of Israel's foremost political and social commentators - whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades.

Israel swallows UN, EU and Arab propaganda on Judea and Samaria

•  

United Nations (UN), European Union (EU) and Arab propaganda has perverted the history of the Arab-Jewish conflict. Their heinous conduct enables them to falsely claim that Jews have no legal right to live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank).  Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has seemingly swallowed parts of their disingenuous narrative hook line and sinker. 

Achieving this triumvirate’s sinister agenda has been amazingly simple: Start with the year 1967 —instead of 1920 — when talking about resolving a conflict that has in fact been raging for more than 100 years.

Doing so has seen the UN, EU and Arab propagandists:

• Term the conflict: The “Israel-Arab conflict” or the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” —instead of what it has always been — the “Jewish-Arab conflict”. 

• Ignore that Arabs living in Palestine in 1922 were only regarded as part of the “existing non-Jewish communities” — that “Israelis” and “Palestinians” did not then exist.

• Paper over that the San Remo Conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 decided that: 

(i) Arab self-determination was to occur in 99.99% of the territory captured from the Ottoman Empire in World War 1 — including those territories designated under the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon and the Mandate for Mesopotamia (now Iraq) 

(ii) Jewish self-determination was to occur in the remaining 0.01% — “Palestine” — under the Mandate for Palestine (Mandate) — unanimously adopted by all 51 member states of the League of Nations in 1922 

• Avoid any consideration or discussion that under the Mandate:

(i) The territory of Palestine encompassed what is today called Jordan (78%), Israel (17%), and the West Bank and Gaza (5%) 

(ii) Jews were prevented from reconstituting the Jewish National Home in Jordan under article 25 of the Mandate – but “close settlement by Jews” in Judea and Samaria was to be encouraged under article 6 and that the right of Jews to do so was expressly reserved under article 80 of the UN Charter notwithstanding the subsequent demise of the League of Nations in 1946.

(iii) Self-determination for the Palestinian Arabs was achieved in 78% of Palestine in 1946 when Jordan (then called Transjordan) was granted its independence by Great Britain.

• Not condemn the ethnic cleansing of every Jew living in Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967.  

• Use the 1950 Arab-coined name “West Bank” to replace the 3000 years old UN-recognised name “Judea and Samaria”  

• Cover up that the “Palestinians” were not identified or defined until 1964 under article 6 of the PLO Charter and that they made no claim to regional sovereignty under article 24 to “the West Bank of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” or “on the Gaza Strip”. 

• Disregard that Transjordan was unified with Judea and Samaria between 1950 and 1967 to form a single Palestinian Arab state — renamed Jordan — and that all its residents were Jordanian citizens.

Falsely claiming Jews have no legal right to live in Judea and Samaria reeks of Jew-hatred.

Israel’s MFA website has given some of this revisionist rewrite of history unwarranted credibility: 

“Israel’s territory according to the agreed 1949 Armistice Demarcation Line encompassed about 78% of the Mandate area, while the other parts, namely the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, were occupied by Jordan and Egypt respectively.”

Israel’s territory only encompassed about 17% — not 78% — of the Mandate Area. The remaining 83% comprised Jordan (78%) - and Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and the Gaza Strip (5%). 

Using the stand-alone term “West Bank” expunges recognition of that territory’s Jewish identity as “Judea and Samaria” — part of the Jewish People’s ancient biblical and historic homeland. 

Words count. 

Israel’s Foreign Ministry needs to correct these monumental gaffes. 

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.

Jordan is the Palestinian State: Hussein and Abdullah differ

 

It is rare for CNN host Fareed Zakaria to issue an apology – but he did so after interviewing Jordan’s King Abdullah II last week.

Zakaria had wrongly attributed the following comments to prominent Israeli diplomat Dore Gold when questioning the King:

“Jordan needs to start thinking of itself as the Palestinian state. In other words, there is a two-state solution, the Palestinian state is Jordan.”

Abdullah’s response to Zakaria was dismissive:

“Jordan is Jordan. We have a mixed society from different ethnic and religious backgrounds… it is our country. The Palestinians do not want to be in Jordan; they want their lands, they want their football team, they want their flag to fly above their houses.”

Jordan – then called Transjordan - was founded on 77% of the territory comprised in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - following the San Remo Conference and Treaty of Sevres in 1920 and the 1921 Cairo Conference.

The planned reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in Transjordan was postponed or withheld under article 25 of the Mandate with the result that no Jews live there today – the population being entirely Arab.

Transjordan achieved independence in 1946 – changing its name to Jordan in 1950 after unifying its territory with Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem conquered by Transjordan in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Only Great Britain and Pakistan recognised Transjordan’s decision.

Zakaria’s apology to Gold was unqualified:

“On last week’s show, I asked King Abdullah about the concept that there would be no stand-alone Palestine state in the future that but instead his nation, Jordan, would become the de-facto Palestine state. I said the idea had been recently mentioned by long time Israeli diplomat, Dore Gold. I was wrong. Many have talked about that concept, but not ambassador Gold. I apologize for that error.”

One Arab leader who talked about “that concept” was King Abdullah’s father – the late King Hussein - who in 1972:

• lauded his grandfather King Abdullah 1’s legacy: 

“On 24 April 1950, the new Jordanian National Assembly - with its two chambers, deputies and senators - representing the two Banks held an historic meeting which marked the first real step in modern Arab history towards Arab unity, which the revolution has advocated since its inception. The meeting announced the unity and merger of the two Banks in a single independent Arab State, a parliamentary monarchy known as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.” 

 

• pointed out the memorable period that followed during King Hussein’s reign:

“The primary fact that the unity of the two Banks represented day after day has been that the people in both Banks are one and not two peoples. This fact was manifested for the first time in the reunion of the sons of the East Bank with their emigrant brothers, the sons of the Palestine areas occupied in 1948. It was manifested when the former shared with the latter food and shelter and the sweetness and bitterness of life. This fact became more salient and took deeper roots with every step the State took.

The unity of blood and destiny reached its greatest significance in 1967 when the sons of the two Banks stood together on the West Bank as they have been doing for twenty years and jointly sacrificed their blood on its pure soil. But the struggle was too great for them and its conditions and complexities were too much for their valour. The catastrophe occurred and what happened did happen.”

Abdullah’s repudiation of his ancestors’ reunification of the two Banks of the Jordan River and their Arab populations within one State marks the lowest point in Jordan’s 100 years-old history.


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.

Abdullah-Biden meeting will not help resolve Jewish-Arab conflict

 

The meeting between Jordan’s King Abdullah and President Biden at the White House on 19 July seems set to achieve absolutely nothing towards resolving the 100 years-old conflict between Jews and Arabs.

Biden’s Press Secretary — Jen Psaki – has claimed:

“It will be an opportunity to discuss the many challenges facing the Middle East and showcase Jordan’s leadership role in promoting peace and stability in the region.”

The King has shown no leadership in resolving the conflict between Jews and Arabs over sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) [“Disputed Territory”] and Gaza – comprising the remaining 5% of the territory of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine where sovereignty still remains unallocated (“Unallocated Territories”).

Sovereignty in the remaining 95% of the Mandate territory was divided between:

• Jordan—78% – upon the establishment of the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan in 1946
• Israel—17% – upon its establishment in 1948.

Concerted attempts over the last 25 years to create an additional Arab State in the Unallocated Territories for the first time in recorded history (“two-state solution”) have all failed. Abdullah has been a principal protagonist for this solution.

Jordan’s failure to take a leadership role in agreeing to an alternative solution — division of the Unallocated Territories between Jordan and Israel within the framework of their existing 1994 Peace Treaty – has gone begging during Abdullah’s 22 year reign.

The following historic, geographic and demographic realities bind Jordan with the Disputed Territory:

• Transjordan in 1948 conquered and occupied the Disputed Territory until 1967 – renaming the newly-merged territorial entity “Jordan” in 1950.
• The Arab residents of the Disputed Territory were Jordanian citizens between 1950 and 1988 and elected their own representatives to the Jordanian Parliament in Amman.
• Statements made by Arab leaders over decades have attested to the territorial and population ties between Jordan and the Disputed Territory

“Jordan and Palestine until 1945 were one state, actually. After the Second World War Churchill himself said ‘This is Transjordan and this is Palestine’. Before that, Jordan was an emirate, completely part of Palestine.” – Yasser Arafat New York Review of Books 25 June 1987

“Jordanians and Palestinians are indeed one people. No one can divide us. We have the same fate.”—Yasser Arafat Der Spiegel 1986

“The Jordanians and Palestinians are now one people, and no political loyalty, however strong, will separate them permanently… Small as Jordan is, our country is politically, socially, economically, militarily and historically inseparable from the Palestinian issue” - Crown Prince Hassan of Jordan Foreign Affairs Spring 1982

“Palestine and Jordan were both under British Mandate, but as my grandfather pointed out in his memoirs, they were hardly separate countries. Trans-Jordan, being to the east of the River Jordan, it formed in a sense, the interior of Palestine” – King Hussein of Jordan Uneasy Lies the Head, New York 1962 p. 118

“This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area” – Article 24 Palestine Liberation Organisation Charter 1964

Jewish settlement — prohibited under article 25 of the 1922 Mandate document in what is today’s Jordan – was encouraged under article 6 in the Disputed Territory on State land and waste land not required for public purposes. That right is preserved until today under Article 80 of the United Nations Charter.

Jordan’s return to such part of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) as is agreed with Israel in direct negotiations remains the key to ending the Jewish-Arab conflict.

Jordan — part of the problem — must be part of the solution.

Abdullah will continue to hide behind the two-state solution in his meeting with Biden.

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.

UN should start focusing on the Jordan-Israel two-state solution

 

United Nations Secretary General – Antonio Guterres – was at it again this week repeating the failed decades-old UN mantra supposed to end the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict: 

“I remain committed to supporting Palestinians and Israelis to resolve the conflict and end the occupation in line with relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements in pursuit of achieving the vision of two States – Israel and an independent, democratic, contiguous, viable and sovereign Palestinian State — living side by side in peace and security within secure and recognized borders, on the basis of the pre-1967 lines, with Jerusalem as the capital of both States.”

The Secretary-General’s “vision of two States” — the creation of a new Arab State between Israel and Jordan for the first time in recorded history – is nothing but a mirage.

This UN backed solution is not based on historic, geographic or demographic foundations — but on a fiction invented in 1964 with the creation of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).

Article 24 of the PLO’s founding Charter expressly denied any claims to such an independent state:

“This Organization does not exercise any regional sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or the Himmah Area”

The PLO clearly had no interest in establishing an independent state in any area that had been occupied by another Arab state since 1948 which then included east Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

It was only after the 1967 Six Day War that the concept of an additional Arab State — with Jerusalem as its capital - was dreamt up by the PLO – and promoted at the UN with the formation in 1975 of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People - spewing out a fictitious narrative on the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Even worse — the United Nations seeks to deny the Jewish People’s right to reconstitute their National Home in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) — legally granted to them by article 6 and article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - and preserved by article 80 of the United Nations Charter until today.

The Secretary-General looks on without uttering one word in protest at this continuing flagrant breach by the United Nations of its own Charter and international law.

In referring to the “pre-existing 1967 lines” — the Secretary-General glosses over the fact that they are in fact the “the 1949 Armistice Demarcation Lines” — designated in agreements between:

• The Government of Egypt and the Government of Israel dated February 24, 1949
• The Government of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom and the Government of Israel dated April 3, 1949

Those lines were not set in concrete but were agreed on without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines.

Secretary-General Guterres would do well to start focusing on the realistically-attainable Jordan-Israel two-state solution – so eloquently expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir in the New York Times on August 27, 1972:

The Secretary-General should digest what former Israeli Ambassador to the UN Chaim Herzog wrote in the Wall Street Journal on November 26, 1980 [Ed: my underlining]:



The UN’s continuing pursuit of a third-state solution has reached a dead end.

The Jordan-Israel two-state solution requires two sets of negotiators — armed only with pencils and rubbers — to redraw the existing internationally-recognised boundary between Israel and Jordan to enable the allocation of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza between those two States.

Not one Jew or Arab would need to move from his present home. Jordanian citizenship would be restored to West Bank Arab residents — as existed between 1950 and 1988.

The UN’s continuing pursuit of a third-state solution has reached a dead end and should be consigned to the diplomatic graveyard.


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.

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.

Balfour Declaration and Mandate for Palestine still keys to peace

[Published 29 October 2019]

The Balfour Declaration (“Declaration) issued on 2 November 1917 and the Mandate for Palestine (“Mandate”) issued on 24 July 1922 still remain the keys to resolving the Jewish-Arab conflict.

The Declaration’s call to establish a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine was historic:

November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, 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.”

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,

Arthur James Balfour

Whilst not binding in international law — that was to be reversed when the Declaration was included in the Mandate’s preamble and unanimously adopted by the League of Nations:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should 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;

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine;

The Principal Allied Powers were The British Empire, France, Italy and Japan.

The boundaries of Palestine fixed by them encompassed what is today called Israel, Gaza, Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Jordan (then called Transjordan).

Under article 25 of the Mandate — the Mandatory was entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of the Mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions.

On 23 September 1922, the League of Nations Secretary-General communicated for the information of the Members of the League, a memorandum relating to Article 25 of the Palestine Mandate presented by the British Government to the Council of the League on September 16th, 1922 (“Memorandum”) and approved by the Council.

The Memorandum excluded Transjordan (78% of the territory of Palestine) as a future potential area in Palestine for reconstitution of the Jewish National Home.

The United Nations continuing failure to faithfully implement these League of Nations decisions remains the biggest stumbling block to ending the Jewish-Arab conflict.

The two-state solution contemplated by the League of Nations in 1922 — Israel and Jordan within such final borders as they agree — remains the only viable two-state solution in 2019.

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 recognizes Israel claims in West Bank and East Jerusalem

[Published 12 June 2019]

US Ambassador to Israel — David Friedman — has set a cat among the pigeons with his claim that:

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

Friedman clearly was speaking for the Trump administration — not just himself personally — when he continued:

“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 accused the Obama administration — which in the last month of Obama’s Presidency - allowed passage of a United Nations resolution in December 2016 condemning Israeli settlements as a “flagrant violation” of international law, of giving credence to Palestinian Arab arguments “that the entire West Bank and East Jerusalem belong to them.”

Friedman asserted:

“Certainly Israel’s entitled to retain some portion of it”

Friedman was spot on.

The right of the Jewish people to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in at least some parts of the West Bank and East Jerusalem was recognised by:

1. the 1920 San Remo Conference

2. the 1920 Treaty of Sevres,

3. articles 6 and 25 of the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine (Mandate) and

4. article 80 of the 1945 United Nations Charter

Friedman’s criticism of the United Nations attempt to subvert the Jewish peoples’ legal rights created under the Mandate and preserved under the United Nations own Charter to “close settlement by Jews on the land including State lands and waste land not required for public purposes” located in the West Bank and East Jerusalem — was justified and long overdue.

Friedman postulated:

“The absolute last thing the world needs is a failed Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan.”

He could have also added that:

1. Jordan is a Palestinian Arab state that has occupied 78% of the land comprised in the Mandate for Palestine since 1922

2. Redrawing the international boundary between Jordan and Israel in direct negotiations between those two states as successor States to the Mandate could see parts of the West Bank and East Jerusalem incorporated within each of these two existing states thereby eliminating any danger a failed third state would pose to their security and existence.

Interestingly — Friedman indicated that Trump’s long awaited “deal of the century” might not even be released if Trump believed it would do more harm than good.

Friedman reportedly said the United States would coordinate closely with Jordan — which could face unrest among its large Palestinian population over a plan perceived as overly favourable to Israel.

“We don’t want to make things worse. Our goal is not to show how smart we are at the expense of people’s safety.”

Trump has seemingly anointed Jordan to replace the rejectionist Palestine Liberation Organization as Israel’s negotiating partner on the future of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

It now appears that Trump’s proposals will not see the light of day unless Trump receives an unqualified assurance from Jordan that it is willing to negotiate with Israel before the plan’s details are released.

Recognising Israel has claims in the West Bank and East Jerusalem sends a clear signal to Jordan and the rest of the Arab World that time is not on their side. The opportunity to yet again miss another opportunity to make peace looms large.

Trump has targeted the West Bank and East Jerusalem — as he already has in West Jerusalem and the Golan Heights — with amazing prescience.

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 atDrybonesblog

Ilhan Omar needs to rethink her flawed position on Palestine

[Published 20 March 2019]


For far too long political debate has been reduced to name-calling and identity labeling with facts and reasoned arguments taking second place — consigning civilized discourse and the exchange of ideas and opinions into the trash bin.

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar has taken a positive step in reversing this burgeoning practice of personal denigration and arbitrary dismissal of opinions of those with whom one doesn’t agree — in setting out her opinion on resolving the Arab-Jewish conflict in an op-ed article in the Washington Post on 17 March.

Omar’s opinion is based on factual errors and her failure to take into account other relevant facts — as this sentence by sentence analysis of her position makes clear:.

1. “The founding of Israel 70 years ago was built on the Jewish people’s connection to their historical homeland, as well as the urgency of establishing a nation in the wake of the horror of the Holocaust and the centuries of anti-Semitic oppression leading up to it.”

The founding of Israel pre-dated the Holocaust - back to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War 1. Palestine — within boundaries to be determined - which had formed part of the territory of the Ottoman Empire for the previous 400 years - was designated by the Principal Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference held in April 1920 as the location for the ”establishment of a national home for the Jewish people.” This decision was unanimously endorsed by the League of Nations when granting Great Britain the Mandate for Palestine in 1922. The Mandate’s boundaries comprised what is today called Israel, Jordan, Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza. However the establishment of the Jewish National Home in Transjordan - 78% of Mandatory Palestine - was postponed or withheld under article 25 of the Mandate.

2. “We must acknowledge that this is also the historical homeland of Palestinians.”

The “Palestinians” were not recognized as an identifiable people in 1917. The Mandate for Palestine regarded the Arab residents of Palestine as forming part of the “existing non-Jewish communities” in Palestine - whose civil and religious rights were not to be prejudiced. The “Palestinians” were only defined for the first time in the 1964 PLO Charter — article 6.3.

3. “And without a state, the Palestinian people live in a state of permanent refugeehood and displacement.”

The Palestinian Arabs acquired their own state and independence in 1946 in Jordan - 78% of Palestine. Hamas exercises full administrative control over the Arab residents of Gaza. The PLO exercises full administrative control over 95% of the Arab population of Judea and Samaria (West Bank).

4. “This, too, is a refugee crisis, and they, too, deserve freedom and dignity.”

A refugee crisis exists in Lebanon and Syria because the Palestinian Arabs living there have been denied citizenship for 70 years.

5. “I support a two-state solution, with internationally recognized borders, which allows for both Israelis and Palestinians to have their own sanctuaries and self-determination.”

There are already two such states in 95% of former Palestine — one (78%) for the Arabs called Jordan — one (17%) for the Jews, called Israel.

6. “This has been official bipartisan U.S. policy across two decades and has been supported by each of the most recent Israeli and Palestinian leaders, as well as the consensus of the Israeli security establishment.”

New solutions are required after negotiations spanning 25 years have failed to create a second Arab state in former Palestine between Israel and Jordan. Redrawing the international borders between Jordan Israel and Egypt could be game changers.

Hopefully Congressman Omar will rethink her flawed position and continue this dialogue…

Israel, PLO, Jordan, EU and UN must agree on boundaries of Palestine

[Published 13 February 2019]

Ending the Arab-Jewish conflict over the territory called “historic Palestine” has little chance of success until its territorial boundaries are first agreed between Israel, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), Jordan, the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN).

Rima Najjar — a retired professor of English literature at Al-Quds University - claims in a recent article that the territory of “historic Palestine” has been subdivided into Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but is effectively controlled by the Jewish State.

The following facts contradict her assertions:

1. Jordan comprises 78% of the territory of Palestine under the League of Nations 1922 Mandate for Palestine - and Jews were denied the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in any part of that area of Palestine under article 25 of the Mandate

2. The Old Testament records that two and a half of the twelve tribes of Israel settled in Jordan and cities of refuge were established by the Israelites in Golan, Ramoth, and Bosor - on the eastern side of the Jordan River - and Kedesh, Nablus, and Hebron - on the western side.

3. Jordan, Israel, the West Bank and Gaza form one indivisible territorial unit under Article 2 of the PLO Charter.

4. Under the 1993 Oslo Accords and following Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2006 - the PLO effectively controls 40% of the West Bank and Hamas effectively controls all of Gaza.

5. Many leading PLO, Jordanian, Arab and Israeli leaders have acknowledged that Jordan formed part of Palestine and that Jordanians and Palestinians are one people — not two.

Najjar’s intention is clear: to misleadingly and deceptively allege that Israel effectively controls 100% of historic Palestine - when Jordan effectively controls 78%.

In fact:

1. Israel currently exercises sovereignty in only 17% of historic Palestine whilst Jordan exercises sovereignty in 78% - leaving competing Arab and Jewish claims to sovereignty in the remaining 5% of historic Palestine — the West Bank and Gaza - to be resolved.

2. The Palestinian Arabs already have their own State in 78% of historic Palestine where not one Jew lives.

Najjar has claimed in an earlier article:

“How deep is the historical illiteracy of Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic Party and Donald Trump and his party?

It is so deep, they are even immune to déjà vu, also known as “cryptomnesia”, which is where history is forgotten but nevertheless stored in the brain.”

Najjar, the UN, EU, even Mahmoud Abbas, are the historical illiterates suffering from cryptomnesia when it comes to determining the boundaries of historic Palestine - having written off the biblical history of “Eretz Yisrael” and the modern day history of “Palestine” between 1917 and 1947.

Najjar has form — having falsely stated in 2017:

“Israel now has sovereignty over all of mandate Palestine.”

Najjar also uttered her historic Palestine canard when calling for Israel’s elimination in 2018:

“The Palestinians have never held the bargaining chips in their tragedy and might as well go for broke — ending the Apartheid Zionist colonial regime in all of historic Palestine.”

Najjar lamented in 2017:

“I don’t know what it means to be Palestinian Jordanian, which is how I began my life ...”

Najjar’s identity crisis disappears once she recognizes that Jordan is 78% of historic Palestine.

Until Israel, the PLO, Jordan, the UN and EU all agree on the boundaries of historic Palestine — any hope for ending the 100-years conflict between Arabs and Jews remains a mirage.

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

Britain backs Jordan and Israel to end the Arab-Jewish conflict

[Published 7 November 2017]


Britain’s Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has acknowledged that Jordan and Israel represent the only viable “two state solution” that can end the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph on 29 October — ahead of the centenary of the Balfour Declaration on 2 November — the Foreign Secretary stated:

“I have no doubt that the only viable solution to the conflict resembles the one first set down on paper by another Briton, Lord Peel, in the report of the Royal Commission on Palestine in 1937, and that is the vision of two states for two peoples.”

The Royal Commission had been authorised by Royal Warrant dated 7 August 1936:

”... to enquire into the manner in which the Mandate for Palestine is being implemented in relation to Our obligations as Mandatory towards the Arabs and the Jews respectively; and to ascertain whether, upon a proper construction of the terms of the Mandate, either the Arabs or the Jews have any legitimate grievances upon account of the way in which the Mandate has been, or is being implemented;”

Significantly the Royal Warrant did not mention or identify the “Palestinians” as being a party to the dispute. There were only two parties— the “Arabs” and the “Jews” — not three.

The “two-state solution” - one Jewish, one Arab — first envisioned in article 25 of the 1922 Mandate for Palestine (Mandate) — had restricted Jewish rights to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in just 22% of the territory covered by the Mandate. The Jews had accepted that proposal but the Arabs had rejected it.

The Peel Commission after a lengthy and detailed Inquiry confirmed that the “two-state solution” contemplated by the Mandate — one Jewish, one Arab —remained the only solution to end the grievances between Arabs and Jews — concluding that:

“two sovereign independent States would be established - the one an Arab State, consisting of Trans-Jordan united with that part of Palestine which lies to the east and south of a frontier such as we suggest in Section 3 below; the other a Jewish State consisting of that part of Palestine which lies to the north and west of that frontier.”

Transjordan — renamed Jordan in 1950 - comprised the remaining 78% of the territory contained in the Mandate for Palestine closed to Jewish settlement under the Mandate. Britain still retained full responsibility for Transjordan as Mandatory Power until Transjordan was finally granted independence by Britain in 1946.

The Peel Commission’s “two-state solution” is shown on this map:

The Arabs rejected partition and the creation of any Jewish State. The Jews accepted the principle of partition - but not the borders designated on the map.

Boris Johnson has advanced the resolution of the Arab-Jewish conflict by highlighting that:

1. the only viable “two-state solution” is the partition proposed by the Peel Commission with newly-negotiated borders agreed between Jordan and Israel

2. Jordan remains the Arab key to resolving the Arab-Jewish conflict - which a naive and gullible world continues to ignore.

Trying to create two Arab States and one Jewish State in an area where only one Arab state and one Jewish state is warranted by history, geography and demography has been a diplomatic disaster with horrendous consequences for Arabs and Jews.

Jordan and Israel - the two successor States to the Mandate - currently exercising sovereignty in 95% of former Palestine - need to sit down and resolve Jewish and Arab claims to the remaining 5%.

Britain’s reaffirmation of Peel’s proposed “two-state solution” is long overdue.

The “two-state solution” posited in 1922 and 1937 — Jordan and Israel — still remains the only viable solution to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict in 2017.

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.

Trump won’t swallow Erekat’s PLO-Palestine poison pill

[Published 3 October 2017]


Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Secretary-General Saeb Erekat has managed to grab international headlines to promote yet another PLO canard regarding the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict.

Unabashedly and unashamedly Erekat has declared:

“Israel is internationally recognised as the occupying power over 100 percent of Palestine, including in and around occupied East Jerusalem”

Yet according to Article 2 of the PLO Charter - Jordan is the occupying power over 78% of Palestine.

“Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.”

The British Mandate for Palestine between 1920 and 1946 encompassed what is today called:

1. Israel (17%),
2. Jordan (78%),
3. Judea and Samaria (West Bank) (4%) and
4. Gaza (1%).

The Hashemite dynasty has been the occupying power in Jordan since 25 May 1946 (having rebuffed the PLO’s attempt to overthrow it in 1970).

Hamas has occupied Gaza since 2007.

40% of Judea and Samaria (West Bank) was occupied by the Palestinian Authority between 1993 and 2013 until the Palestinian Authority was disbanded on 3 January 2013 by decree of Mahmoud Abbas - the PLO assuming occupation thereafter.

Erekat’s claim that Israel occupies 100% of Palestine is therefore utter rubbish.

Erekat has revived one of the greatest travesties perpetrated by the United Nations on the Jewish-Arab conflict in its publication “The Origins and Evolution of the Palestinian problem” (“publication”) – omitting any map of the British Mandate for Palestine.

Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations - Yehuda Blum – told the UN General Assembly on 30 November 1978:

“At the end of the first part of the publication, ostensibly dealing with the period of the Palestine Mandate, there appear a number of maps. The one map that is conspicuously absent is the official map of the Palestine Mandate which, until 1946, included Transjordan on the east bank of the Jordan River. This map was omitted because it does not fit into the PLO’s own scheme, as it would show too clearly that a Palestinian Arab state has already been in existence for 32 years on more than three quarters of the territory of mandated Palestine - that is, the state now called Jordan. That embarrassment is eliminated in this purportedly scholarly and impartial publication by the simple expedient of eliminating the map.”

Why then has Erekat chosen to follow the UN and delete Jordan from the map of former Palestine?

It has everything to do with the negotiations between Israel and the PLO – conducted with little success since 1993 and having been stalled since April 2014 – and the current concerted effort by President Trump to resolve this long-running conflict that has defied so many other American Presidents.

Jordan can help resolve that conflict – precisely because Jordan is historically, geographically and demographically 78% of Palestine.

Jordan remains the key to Trump ending the conflict between Jews and Arabs in former “Palestine”.

Whilst Jordan was part of the Mandate for Palestine between 1922 and 1946 - the League of Nations had under article 25 restricted the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home within just 22% of Palestine located between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.

Following Jordan’s independence in the remaining 78% of Palestine in 1946 - Jordan rejected international overtures under the 1978 Camp David Accords and the 1982 Reagan Plan to enter into negotiations with Israel.

Erekat’s outburst signals concerns within the PLO that Trump may be looking to bring Jordan into negotiations with Israel to resolve competing Jewish and Arab claims in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) - whose last internationally recognised occupying power was Great Britain in 1948.

Trump won’t be swallowing Erekat's poison pill.

Trump can broker Israel-Jordan deal but no Israel-PLO agreement

[Published 23 March 2017]


President Trump’s Special Representative for International Negotiations — Jason Greenblatt — has returned from his wide-ranging meetings in Jerusalem, Ramallah, Amman and Jericho with zero prospects of Trump brokering a deal between Israel and the PLO.

However Greenblatt’s belief in the pivotal role Jordan can play in resolving the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict was apparent in his tweet after meeting Jordan’s King Abdullah II:

“We agree on the need for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Jordan an important ally in this effort.”

According to the Jordan Times:

” During the meeting, held at Al Husseiniya Palace, His Majesty stressed the US role in ending the stalemate in the Palestinian-Israeli peace process and reviving negotiations that should lead to a just and comprehensive solution to the conflict, based on the two-state formula.

He asserted that reaching a just deal of a comprehensive peace that includes establishing a Palestinian state will reflect on efforts to achieve peace, security and stability in the region.”

King Abdullah is whistling in the wind in believing another Arab state could still be established — in addition to Jordan — in the territory comprised in the Mandate for Palestine where Israel presently exercises sovereignty in 17% and Jordan 77% — whilst sovereignty remains undetermined in the last 6% - the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and Gaza.

Negotiations between Israel and the PLO to create that second Arab State have extended over the last 24 years and been dormant since April 2014.

Those negotiations have failed because Israel and the PLO have been unable to resolve core demands despite two offers having been made by Israel in 2000/2001 and 2008 to cede its claims in over 90% of the West Bank.

Israel’s unmet demands are that:

1. The PLO recognise Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people
2. The major Jewish settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria be incorporated into the boundaries of Israel
3. Israel retains security control over the Jordan Valley
4. Jerusalem remains the eternal undivided capital of Israel
5. Any such State be demilitarized

The PLO’s unmet demands are that:

1. The Palestinian State be granted sovereignty over all of the territory of the West Bank with its capital being located in East Jerusalem.
2. All Jewish settlements located in the West Bank and East Jerusalem be dismantled and their inhabitants be removed.
3. Palestinian Arab refugees who fled the 1948 Arab invasion of Western Palestine be allowed to return and settle in Israel.

Trumps’s ability to cut a deal in the face of these irreconcilable differences is severely hampered by the written commitments made to Israel’s Prime Minister Sharon by President Bush on 14 April 2004 and overwhelmingly endorsed by the US House of Representatives by 407-9 and Senate 95-3.

Those commitments - given to Israel to secure Israel’s total withdrawal from Gaza and four Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria — back Israel’s above demands in any negotiations with the PLO.

It seems inconceivable that Trump - the master deal-maker — would consider reneging on the Bush-Congress-Sharon deal. If he did — Israel would not resume negotiations with the PLO. If he doesn’t the PLO would not resume negotiations with Israel.

If Trump wants to do a deal — he needs Jordan to come to the party and enter into direct negotiations with Israel to allocate sovereignty in the West Bank between Jordan and Israel - virtually completing the original two-state formula envisaged in 1922 by article 25 of the League of Nations Mandate.

Greenblatt’s meeting with King Abdullah is a possible pointer to getting such negotiations underway. Trump’s undoubted brokering skills can ensure such negotiations happen.

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

[Published 16 March 2017]


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

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

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

Netanyahu’s claim is substantiated by the following facts:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UK and Russia shamefully failed to veto this Resolution.

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

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

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

Palestine - 1922 Two-State Solution Key To Resolving Arab-Jewish Conflict

[Published 22 October 2015]


United Nations Secretary-General Ban-Ki moon has jetted into Jerusalem on a fool’s errand - with tensions continuing to escalate between Arabs and Jews as their conflict spanning almost 100 years remains unresolved.

The Secretary-General observed:

“Beyond the immediate tensions, what is missing is the resolve to restore a political horizon for talks, and a political process that delivers real results and hope… We must, for the future of our children, turn back from this dangerous abyss, safeguard the two-state solution and lead people back onto the road towards peace,”

Safeguarding this “two-state solution” – code words for creating a second Arab State in Mandatory Palestine in addition to Jordan – is a lost cause. Restoring talks on this failed political process after twenty years of fruitless negotiations is meaningless United Nations babble speak.

The Secretary-General needs to focus on the “two-state solution” actually existing in 2015 – Israel and Jordan – the two successor States to the 1922 Mandate for Palestine – which eventually emerged after:

1. the 1920 Arab riots and

2. the political machinations of France and Great Britain between 1920 and 1922.

The riots were intended to pressure decisions affecting the fate of Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Mesopotamia (Iraq) at the San Remo Conference starting on 19 April 1920 - following the liberation of those territories from 400 years of Ottoman Empire rule in World War 1.

The Arabs opposed a Jewish homeland in Palestine – and went on a murderous rampage to express their rage. 5 Jews and 4 Arabs were killed and hundreds wounded between 4 April and 7 April 1920.

However,the riots had little impact on the decisions taken at San Remo and the subsequent signing of the Treaty of Sevres.

The resulting Mandate for Palestine – adopted unanimously by all 51 member States of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922:

1. Gave recognition to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country

2. Empowered Great Britain as the Mandatory Power to be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as would secure the establishment of the Jewish national home whilst safeguarding the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine and the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The Mandate, however, contained Article 25 – a provision used to deny the Jews the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Transjordan - 78% of the territory of Mandatory Palestine.

The inclusion of Article 25 followed French pressure on the British to stop Abdullah – the second son of the Sharif and Emir of Mecca Hussein bin Ali – leaving Transjordan whilst en route to Damascus with an armed force of 400 Arabs to help his brother Feisal resist French attempts to remove him from power in Syria.

Britain obliged by appointing Abdullah Emir of Transjordan on 11 April 1921. This Emirate became the independent Jew-free Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan in 1946 – today’s Jordan.

Achieving these British and French objectives closed the door firmly on any right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in Transjordan - confining that right within the remaining 22% of Mandatory Palestine – today’s Israel, the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and Gaza.

Redrawing the current boundaries of that fateful 1922 decision - taking into consideration today’s changed circumstances on the ground - remains the key to ending the Arab-Jewish conflict.

Pencils and rubbers wielded by Israeli and Jordanian negotiators can end the indiscriminate murder and maiming of Jews by Arab gun-toters, knife-stabbers, stone-throwers and car-rammers - and the inevitable Jewish response.