Is Obama Ready To Speak His Mind?

[Published September 2009]

President Obama’s address at the United Nations on 23 September gave some indication that he would soon be releasing his own plan for achieving the creation of a new Arab State between Israel and Jordan - the so called “two state solution - that has avoided the best efforts of previous American Presidents for the last sixteen years.

In his carefully crafted address he made the following statement:

“The time has come to re-launch negotiations - without preconditions - that address the permanent-status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians; borders, refugees and Jerusalem. The goal is clear: two states living side by side in peace and security - a Jewish State of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people.”

The insistence that such negotiations be opened “without preconditions” was a slap in the face for Palestinian Authority president - Mahmoud Abbas - who has so far refused to enter into such negotiations with Israel until Israel totally freezes all construction activity in the West Bank.

No doubt Obama had hoped that his fruitless trilateral meeting with Abbas and Israel’s Prime Minister - Benjamin Netanyahu - the previous day would have enabled him to tell the United Nations that negotiations were soon to resume. That was not to be.

To compound Abbas’s irrational stance he has now insisted that he would not enter into any negotiations unless their end result would be the withdrawal by Israel from every inch of territory occupied by it since the Six Day War in 1967. [Wafa Palestine News Agency 22 September 2009].

Netanyahu - and previous Israeli Governments - have made it clear Israel would not be obliging Abbas in this demand.

President Obama appears to have supported Netanyahu on this issue by pointedly not calling for an Israeli return to the territorial position that existed at 4 June 1967 - but merely an end to the occupation that began in 1967.

Obama’s insistence that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state also is completely at odds with Abbas’ long standing refusal to accept such a proposal.

Given the above - it is extremely unlikely that Abbas is politically strong enough to get off his high horse, lose face and resume negotiations with Israel without preconditions. Hamas - and his own faction Fatah - will ensure this does not happen.

His preferred course will be to employ the tactics of the past and engage in rhetoric accusing the Israel lobby of controlling President Obama and the Congress and totally ignoring the victims of the conflict and their ongoing suffering.

He will prefer this course and the strong support he expects to receive in his stance from a majority of the morally bankrupt member states of the United Nations who control the affairs of the General Assembly and its Human Rights Council and can pass resolutions ad infinitum excoriating Israel and pursuing a program of delegitimizing Israel as the Jewish National Home.

President Obama has signalled he is not prepared to accept that tactic and allow the question of resuming negotiations and bringing an end to the conflict to meander aimlessly along the road to nowhere.

Slotted into his speech to the United Nations was this clear warning to both Israel and the Palestinian Authority:

“I am not naïve. I know this will be difficult. But all of us must decide whether we are serious about peace, or whether we only lend it lip-service. To break the old patterns - to break the cycle of insecurity and despair - all of us must say publicly what we would acknowledge in private.”

The President was politely laying down an ultimatum - resume negotiations immediately “without preconditions” or he would publicly speak out and lay down his proposals for achieving the two state solution. If those proposals were not finally acceptable to both sides then America would not become further involved in pursuing the two state solution.

One does not need to gaze into a crystal ball to know that no plan the President publicly reveals will ever be acceptable to the Palestinian Authority.

President Obama will not resile from the demand that Israel be recognized as the Jewish State. He will not stipulate that 500000 Jews living in the West Bank will all have to be kicked out of their homes and businesses. The President won’t insist that millions of former Arab residents and their descendants be given the right to live in Israel.

What President Obama has done at the United Nations has made it very transparent that America is not prepared to be dragged along ignominiously for any further length of time in pursuing an objective that is all but totally unattainable.

Crunch time is fast approaching and for America the two state solution is all but dead and buried.

Other solutions and options need to be explored and pursued to separate the warring parties and allow each to live with one another as President Obama so eloquently expressed in his address:

“And after all of the politics and all of the posturing, this is about the right of every human being to live with dignity and security. That is a lesson embedded in the three great faiths that call one small slice of Earth the Holy Land. And that is why - even though there will be setbacks, and false starts, and tough days - I will not waiver in my pursuit of peace. “

America will not depart the scene but it certainly is ready to abandon the two state solution if the parties cannot get down to business very soon and enter into negotiations to try and agree on its parameters.

“Dignity” and “Security” will soon become the diplomatic catchwords that replace “the two state solution”. After sixteen years of trying to achieve the impossible - the new direction being charted by President Obama at least offers some realistic hope of succeeding.

Abbas Only Tells Half The Story

[Published September 2009]

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has put paid to any prospects of the Palestinian Authority resuming negotiations with Israel after the proposed trilateral meetings to be held with President Obama, Abbas and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House today.

Abbas said at a press conference on 19 September after meeting with his Egyptian counterpart Hosni Mubarak that as there was no agreement on halting settlement so there could be no agreement on re-launching negotiations because there was no basis. He continued :

“The basis [ for resuming negotiations] we know is the one stated in the Road Map plan,’ ‘Americans are required to continue their commitment of the first article of the Road Map plan, which clearly states that there must be complete settlement freeze including the natural growth,’.

What Abbas failed to tell the assembled media was that Israel had not accepted that proposal in the Road Map.

When President Bush released his detailed Road Map on 30 April 2003, Israel had then sent a letter to President Bush on 23 May 2003 containing 14 reservations it had before it could accept the plan as a basis for negotiation.

Reservation 9 made by Israel to President Bush stated in part:

“There will be no involvement with issues pertaining to the final settlement. Among issues not to be discussed: settlement in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (excluding a settlement freeze and illegal outposts); “

Israel thus made it clear that whilst it was prepared to discuss a settlement freeze (no mention being made by Israel of restricting natural growth) it was not prepared to accept that there be a complete settlement freeze including natural growth per se.

On 23 May 2003, then Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice made the following statement from the White House:

“The roadmap was presented to the Government of Israel with a request from the President that it respond with contributions to this document to advance true peace. The United States Government received a response from the Government of Israel, explaining its significant concerns about the roadmap. The United States shares the view of the Government of Israel that these are real concerns,and will address them fully and seriously in the implementation of the roadmap to fulfil the President’s vision of June 24, 2002.”

On 25 May 2003, the Israeli Cabinet met and by a majority resolved:

“Based on the 23 May 2003 statement of the United States Government, in which the United States committed to fully and seriously address Israel’s comments to the Roadmap during the implementation phase, the Prime Minister announced on 23 May 2003 that Israel has agreed to accept the steps set out in the Roadmap.

The Government of Israel affirms the Prime Minister’s announcement, and resolves that all of Israel’s comments, as addressed in the Administration’s statement, will be implemented in full during the implementation phase of the Roadmap.”

Nothing could be clearer or more unambiguous - President Bush had accepted Israel’s position that there would be no settlement freeze without it first being discussed and agreed by Israel.

Abbas told Haaretz on 28 May 2003 that the 14 reservations made by Israel had nothing to do with him. He said:

“They don’t interest me,”

Haaretz reported that as far as Abbas was concerned, the only document that mattered was the road map that was finalized in December 2002 and handed over to the parties at the end of April 2003 Nothing more, nothing less. He continued:

“We do not accept each side picking and choosing only those specific elements that are convenient for them in the road map.

The map was prepared last December and we accepted it, despite our own comments and reservations. We wanted to give this initiative a chance, but it’s impossible to continue inventing comments and reservations after it was submitted.”

This was a very aggressive and intransigent - indeed foolish and naive - attitude to adopt in the face of President Bush having specifically invited both sides to comment on the Road Map.

The response from the President to Israel’s reservations acknowledged that Israel’s concerns were real and they would be fully and seriously addressed during the implementation phase.

The past months’ discussions between George Mitchell, Benjamin Netanyahu and President Obama in relation to a settlement freeze must be seen and be understood to have taken place within the framework of America’s previous acknowledgment that no such freeze could be imposed on Israel under the Roadmap unless Israel agreed to the terms of any such proposal.

Israel has responded to America’s request by agreeing to curtail - but not totally freeze - settlement activity for some as yet unspecified period whilst negotiations are being held between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. This apparently is not acceptable to Abbas. Unless he has a change of heart he intends to spit the dummy and walk away from any further negotiations.

Abbas needs to really take a cold shower and cool down and not tell half the story - especially the half that he does not like.

Gaza,Goldstone and Gallstones

[Published September 2009]

From a legal perspective Israel is not subject to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court nor do the provisions of the Geneva Convention apply to Gaza since it is not part of the territory of any state signatory - called a “High Contracting Party” - to the Convention.

Gaza still is “no mans’ land” under international law where sovereignty is yet to be decided.

It should be remembered that Israel officially only evacuated Gaza in 2005. It has not ceded any claim to Gaza or parts of Gaza under the rights conferred on the Jewish people pursuant to the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in any part of that territory.

Israel had the inherent right of self defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter if an armed attack was made on it. That it absorbed 7000 rocket and mortar attacks after evacuating Gaza in 2005 before undertaking the invasion of Gaza last December would not have been endured for such a lengthy period by any other member of the United Nations had they been the recipient of such a barrage of rockets and mortars indiscriminately fired into civilian population centres.

There may well be some rotten eggs in Israel’s basket. War is a great dehumanizer and soldiers can act in inhuman ways under the stress of war - and can be very trigger happy especially when the enemy you are confronting does not wear uniforms and hides among the civilian population.

Israel has and is still continuing its ongoing investigations into the invasion of Gaza and will no doubt bring to justice those whose conduct is found to be unacceptable. The Goldstone Commission’s dismissal of these investigations as “pusillanimous” is made without a scintilla of evidence in support.

The Report will be extensively used and quoted to beat Israel over the head in a multitude of UN forums and in the General Assembly as part of the campaign by the 56 members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to delegitimize Israel.

The Report will be used to support new calls for:

(i) economic and political boycotts of Israel
(ii) disinvestment in Israel and
(iii) for outlawing Israel as a pariah state in the international community

The Goldstone Commission came about as a result of a Mandate given to it by the UN Human Rights Council on 12 January 2009 by a vote of 33 to 1 with 13 abstensions. 15 of the 33 affirmative votes were from members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the remainder included countries with disgraceful human rights records like Angola, Cuba, China, Nigeria, the Russian Federation and Nicaragua.

The Commission was appointed on 3 April 2009 and its members comprised Richard Goldstone, Christine Chinkin, Hina Jalani and Desmond Travers.

Goldstone, Jalani and Travers had signed an open letter, published 16 March 2009, addressed to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the United Nations Security Council Ambassadors. It stated:

“...we believe there is an important case to be made for an international investigation of gross violations of the laws of war, committed by all parties to the Gaza conflict…A prompt, independent and impartial investigation would provide a public record of gross violations of international humanitarian law committed and provide recommendations on how those responsible for crimes should be held to account…We urge world leaders to send an unfaltering signal that the targeting of civilians during conflict is unacceptable…The events in Gaza have shocked us to the core…We must also establish the truth about crimes perpetuated against civilians on both sides."

Christine Chinkin had signed a letter dated January 11, 2009, which appeared in The Times, stating:

“Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is not self-defence - it’s a war crime.”

In addition, the letter stated:

“The rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas deplorable as they are, do not, in terms of scale and effect amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence …Israel’s actions amount to aggression, not self-defence”.

All of the appointed Commissioners had therefore begun this inquiry with their minds made up. Israel was to be hung drawn and quartered. Any semblance of impartiality or lack of bias among the Commission members went out the window before the Commission had even started its proceedings. In failing to disqualify themselves they totally negated the validity of their findings.

Hamas violence against its own Gazan citizens during Israel’s invasion was apparently not deemed to be part of the Commission’s mandate.

A report prepared by Human Rights Watch dated 9 April 2009 alleged that during Israel‘s invasion:

“Hamas security forces or masked gunmen believed to be with Hamas extra-judicially executed 18 people, mainly those accused of collaborating with Israel. Masked gunmen also beat and maimed by shooting dozens of Hamas’s political opponents, especially members and supporters of its main political rival, Fatah.

The internal violence in Gaza has continued since Israel withdrew its forces. Palestinian human rights groups in Gaza have reported 14 more killings between January 18 and March 31, 2009.

So far, this violence has gone mostly unpunished. Despite promises to investigate unlawful killings and other abuses, Hamas authorities, to Human Rights Watch’s knowledge, have only investigated one alleged killing by members of their security forces or armed wing…

Hamas security forces have also used violence against known Fatah members, especially those who had worked in the Fatah-run security services of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Of particular concern is the widespread practice of maiming people by shooting them in the legs, which Hamas first used in June 2007, when it seized control inside Gaza from Fatah. According to the Independent Commission for Human Rights (ICHR), the human rights ombudsman organization of the Palestinian Authority, unidentified gunmen in masks deliberately inflicted bullet wounds to the legs of at least 49 people between December 28, 2008 and January 31, 2009. [http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0409web.pdf]

The Goldstone Report will not have anything like the political affect that the infamous “Zionism is Racism” resolution had in the aftermath of its passing by the UN General Assembly on 10 November 1975 until it was subsequently revoked on 16 December 1991.

Israel’s then Ambassador to the United Nations - Chaim Herzog described that resolution in the following terms:

“For us, the Jewish people, this resolution based on hatred, falsehood and arrogance, is devoid of any moral or legal value. For us, the Jewish people, this is no more than a piece of paper and we shall treat it as such.”

Israel should adopt the same view in relation to the Goldstone Report.

Israel’s response should be to proceed apace to build up the state by the ingathering of Jews from around the world and to continue with its brilliant technological , medical and scientific successes, whilst holding its head high among the nations of the world as a true democracy among a sea of repressive and oppressive regimes. It should make sure that the security of its 7.5 million citizens (including 1.5 million Arabs) is guaranteed from anyone who would seek to attack it and ensure it maintains defensible borders to enable this to happen.

This is the best route for Israel to take to avoid any attack of gallstones caused by Goldstone and his kangaroo court.

Obama Reaches Boiling Point On Settlements Freeze

[Published September 2009]

The announcement by Israel’s Defence Minister - Ehud Barak - on September 7 that Israel will proceed to complete 2500 housing units in the West Bank - and commence building another 455 units there - is Israel’s response to the demand by President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Israel freeze all settlement activity in the West Bank including “natural growth”.

It is also an answer to the Palestinian Authority whose chief negotiator - Saeb Erekat - said on 31 August:

"There can be no middle ground ... He [Netanyahu] needs to stop settlement activities including ‘natural growth’,”

Israel has thus made it abundantly clear that :

1. there will be no “freeze”,

2. that building activity will continue at a rapid pace and

3. that there is no restriction on planning and development approvals being put in place to ensure that building activity is immediately resumed if negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority fail to reach any concluded agreement within a time frame - possibly six months - expected to be announced by President Obama later this month.

Continuing Palestinian Authority intransigence in refusing to concede one square meter of land in the West Bank to Israel - let alone agree to moderate or concede other claims infinitely far more difficult to resolve - ensure that the resumption of negotiations will yet once again lead to a dead end.

This intransigence has been exacerbated as the Palestinian Authority and Hamas find themselves locked in a bitter power struggle for the hearts and minds of the West Bank and Gazan Arabs.

Indeed the urgent need to patch up their presently irreconcilable differences was endorsed at a meeting of the Quartet - America, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations - held at Trieste on 26 June 2009.

The communique issued by the Quartet on that occasion contained the following plea:

“Noting the detrimental effect of Palestinian divisions and underscoring its desire for these divisions to be overcome, the Quartet called on all Palestinians to commit themselves to non-violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations. Restoring Palestinian unity based on Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) commitments would be an important factor in this process. while facilitating reconstruction of Gaza and the organization of elections. The Quartet expressed support on this basis, for the ongoing mediation efforts of Egypt and the Arab League for Palestinian reconciliation behind President Abbas and appealed to all States in the region to play a constructive role in supporting the reconciliation process”
http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/middle_east/quartet-26jun2009.htm

Clearly the Quartet itself had come to the conclusion that the Palestinian Authority under President Abbas was a toothless tiger incapable of negotiating and concluding any form of binding peace treaty with Israel whilst Fatah and Hamas remained engaged in their deadly and divisive end game struggle.

That struggle has continued unabated since June despite the most intensive efforts of Egypt and the Arab League to effect a reconciliation.

President Obama was therefore seriously in error in ever suggesting that Israel should freeze settlement activity in these circumstances whilst complete Palestinian chaos and disunity prevailed.

The Quartet was talking pie in the sky if it believed Hamas would reconcile behind President Abbas. Hamas regards itself as the legitimately elected Government of the Palestinians. Hamas will not abandon that position in favour of anyone - especially President Abbas.

In this politically charged and uncertain environment there is simply no credible negotiating partner to sit down with Israel to implement the obligations under the Road Map or any other proposal President Obama may be contemplating. President Obama’s belief that any negotiations in this current atmosphere can have any possible chance of success is pure folly.

Indeed this view is supported and highlighted by the Quartet’s own statement that:

“these negotiations must result in the end of all claims.”

Neither Hamas nor Fatah will ever be able to abandon their claim for millions of Arabs and their descendants to emigrate to Israel. It is written into their respective constitutions and forms the very essence of their continued functioning and existence . To concede that right in negotiations would be political suicide and impossible to abandon by either Fatah or Hamas.

The Quartet persisted with the simplistic notion affirmed in its statement that :

“the only viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one that ends the occupation began in 1967 and fulfils the aspirations of both parties for independent homelands through two states for two peoples, Israel and an independent, contiguous and viable State of Palestine, living side by side in peace and security”

This solution was first proposed in 1937, again in 1947 and could have been achieved at any time between 1948-1967 after Jews living in the West Bank and Gaza were driven out by the invading Arab armies of Jordan and Egypt.

Tried again in 1993, 2000 and now under the Road Map since 2003 - the Quartet have backed themselves into a corner in persisting with the claim that this is

“the only viable solution.”.

There are other alternative solutions to “ending the occupation” of West Bank and Gazan Arabs that remain unexplored and unaddressed which do not have to involve the creation of a new Arab State between Israel and Jordan.

The Quartet’s stubborn insistence on its solution being the only viable solution indicates the bankruptcy of its own thinking. It exposes the Quartet’s inability to adjust to the current political void in the Palestinian leadership that has totally destroyed any prospects of the Quartet’s solution even remotely occurring whilst the reconciliation process urged by the Quartet remains unfulfilled.

To expect any other outcome in negotiations whilst the West Bank and Gaza remain split into separate Fatah and Hamas fiefdoms is naive in the extreme.

In these circumstances President Obama’s demand to freeze Israeli settlements was misdirected and totally mistimed.

Freezing building in existing Jewish settlements in an attempt to induce the political eunuch that the Palestinian Authority presently represents to enter into meaningless and ineffectual negotiations would have been a grave error of judgment on Israel’s part.

Israel’s agreement to resumption of negotiations with the Palestinian Authority at this point of time will therefore only be a sop to President Obama. Nothing will come from such negotiations.

The Palestinian Authority now need to decide whether they will take part in such negotiations.

Saeb Erekat has toned down his rhetoric of just one week ago telling Haaretz on 7 September

“Israel’s decision to approve the construction of over 450 new settlement units nullifies any effect that a settlement freeze, when and if announced will have”

Given that there will not be any announcement of a freeze - the ball is now firmly in the Palestinian Authority’s court.

To decide whether to negotiate in the absence of any freeze is rapidly coming to the boil - both for President Obama and the Palestinian Authority.

Both are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

Will Sharon's Legacy Be Obama's Downfall?

[Published September 2009]

Israel’s former Prime Minister - Ariel Sharon - has been in a coma since 4 January 2006 but his legacy hangs like a heavy cloud over the plans of President Obama to oversee the creation of a new Arab State between Israel and Jordan.

President Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton certainly have a lot on their minds as they grapple with a multitude of the world’s current conflicts which - no doubt - have caused massive overloading of their respective memory banks.

Yet this would be a lame excuse for them forgetting about - or seeking to minimize the existence and crucial importance of the letters exchanged on 14 April 2004 between President Bush and Israel’s then Prime Minister - Ariel Sharon.
[http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Reference+Documents/Exchange+of+letters+Sharon-Bush+14-Apr-2004.htm]

This correspondence enabled courageous and highly dangerous decisions being taken by Israel to kick start President Bush’s stalled 2003 Road Map - which had been enthusiastically endorsed by Russia, the European Union and the United Nations as the key to resolving the Israeli-Arab conflict by 2005.

The President’s letter provided the catalyst - and the political justification - for Israel unilaterally evacuating the entire Jewish population of 8000 from Gaza and withdrawing Israel’s army totally from there without any preconditions or undertakings being given or sought from the Palestinian Authority.

The Presidential letter set out in detail the framework that President Bush would support as Israel attempted to progress his Road Map towards the creation of this new Arab State between Israel and Jordan for the first time ever in recorded history.

President Bush’s letter clearly - and unambiguously - assured Israel that;

1. The borders of this new Arab State would not encompass the entire West Bank despite successive Arab leaders having demanded this outcome for the previous 37 years,

2. Jewish towns and villages in the West Bank would be incorporated into the borders of Israel

3. The Arabs would have to forego their demand to be given the right to allow millions of Arabs to emigrate to Israel and

4. Israel’s existence as a Jewish State would be non-negotiable

Jerusalem Post Editor David Horovitz joined a group of Israeli journalists who met with President Bush in the Oval Office prior to the President’s visit to Israel to take part in its 60th Anniversary celebrations in May 2008.

In his editorial - published on 14 May 2008 - Mr Horovitz revealed the extent of the American loss of memory - even at that time - concerning the President’s 2004 letter in the following terms:

“Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, however, has been known to minimize the significance of this four-year-old letter. Just last week, for instance, she told reporters that the 2004 letter “talked about realities at that time. And there are realities for both sides….

Bush’s National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley has also given briefings to the effect that Israel had tried to overstate the importance of a rather vague letter, which was issued at a time when Sharon was seeking to bolster support for the pullout from Gaza.

And in answering my question, Bush did not at first even realize that I was referring to the 2004 letter. Hadley, who was also in the Oval Office, had to prompt him. “Okay, the letters,” the president then said, remembering.”

This was not simply memory loss but something far worse and more sinister. An attempt was being made - even in 2008 - to downplay America’s clear and unequivocal commitments given to Israel as the price for Israel’s total evacuation of Gaza;

Israel has paid a high price in relying on President Bush’s letter.

Gaza has become a de facto terrorist Palestinian State with Hamas now firmly entrenched as the governing authority.

Israel has - since its evacuation of Gaza in 2005 - sustained a never ending barrage of rockets and mortars fired indiscriminately into Israeli population centres from Gaza by a bewildering variety of terrorist groups and sub-groups who would have had no chance of operating so freely from Gaza if the Israeli Army had remained there.

Gaza eventually paid the price for these gross acts of terrorism with Israel’s invasion of Gaza between December 2008-January 2009. However Gaza still remains defiant and unbowed.

Israel now needs to make it perfectly clear to President Obama and his Secretary of State - Hillary Clinton - that any attempt to resile from President Bush’s letter to Ariel Sharon will torpedo the prospects for any further negotiations - that President Obama then will have no one but himself to blame for bringing his own plans to a premature and ignominious end.

Israel’s former Prime Minister - Ehud Olmert - neither forgot - nor overlooked - the critical significance of President Bush’s letter to permitting the resumption of any ongoing negotiations.

President Bush and Ms Rice were quick to claim credit for bringing Israel and the Palestinian Authority together at the international conference held in Annapolis in November 2007 to announce the breakthrough in the resumption of those negotiations.

Maybe President Bush and his former Madam Secretary were so flushed by their apparent success that they failed to hear - or perhaps hoped everyone might overlook - what Prime Minister Olmert told the gathered world leaders at Annapolis about the course of those future negotiations:

“The negotiations will be based on previous agreements between us, U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the road map and the April 14, 2004 letter of President Bush to the Prime Minister of Israel.”

The subsequent failure of the negotiations at Annapolis can be directly attributed to Israel’s insistence that America remain committed to the terms of President Bush’s letter to Ariel Sharon - terms that the Palestinian Authority was not prepared to countenance and which led to the breakdown of those negotiations.

As President Obama gets ready to lay out his own proposals for achieving the two state solution, he needs to be reminded of the commitment made by his predecessor to Ariel Sharon. Israel’s Prime Minister - Benjamin Netanyahu - must insist on President Obama remaining committed to supporting the outline of any proposed resolution to the conflict as clearly laid out in President Bush’s letter.

Jews have accumulated many memories - both pleasant and unpleasant - since losing their State, being expelled from there 2000 years ago and being dispersed to all corners of the globe. The Jews steeled themselves to ensure they never forgot who they were, where they came from and to where they would one day return.

Strength comes from remembering - not forgetting.

President Obama and his Secretary of State would do well to remember - and heed - this lesson as they strive to develop their own plan for ending the conflict.

What Is There To Talk About?

[Published August 2009]

Excitement mounts and expectations are raised as speculation increases that the man simultaneously wearing three hats as Palestinian Authority President, Fatah Chairman and PLO Chairman - Mahmoud Abbas - might be possibly meeting at the United Nations with Israel’s Prime Minister—Benjamin Netanyahu - around September 23.

They will no doubt be locked in a smiling and happy three-way embrace with President Obama - flanked by as many Quartet and Arab leaders as President Obama can cajole to join in this historic photo opportunity.

Like the failed Annapolis meeting less than two years ago with President Bush - there will supposedly be an announcement by his successor - President Obama - that sixteen years of failed negotiations to create a new Arab State between Israel and Jordan - the so-called “two state solution” - are going to once again be resumed.

Perhaps the announcement will be accompanied by the intention to hold an international gathering in Moscow to formally open the resumption of those negotiations.

However before this chain of events can happen it will certainly be necessary for Abbas to declare he is ready to recognize Israel as a Jewish State - something he has consistently and steadfastly refused to acknowledge.

As President of the Palestinian Authority Abbas is notionally committed to the “two state solution” accepted both by him and his predecessor the late Yasser Arafat- albeit the terms demanded by both of them have ensured the failure of this initiative since 1993.

As Chairman of the PLO Abbas is however committed to advocating the provisions of Article 20 of the PLO Covenant which states:

“The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism being a divine religion is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own: they are citizens of the states to which they belong”

As Chairman of Fatah he is sworn to uphold Article 22 of its separate Charter:

“Opposing any political solution offered as an alternative to demolishing the Zionist occupation in Palestine … “

It is no wonder then that Abbas has been loath so far to accept the reconstitution of the Jewish National Home in 17% of former Palestine pursuant not only to the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - but also pursuant to the United Nations Charter.

He still continues to head two organizations that are hell bent on consigning the six million Jews now living in Israel into national oblivion - either by armed struggle or by changing the demographics of Israel’s population from its present ratio of 80% Jews/20% Arabs by continuing to demand the right for millions of Arabs to be allowed to emigrate to Israel.

Abbas is too weak to resist these plans to eliminate Israel as the Jewish National Home for all present - and future - generations of Jews no matter where they might happen to be born or to be living.

He is certainly frank about where his loyalties presently reside.

On 27 April 2009 he told a preliminary conference of the Palestinian Youth Conference at Ramallah:

“A Jewish State, what is that supposed to mean? You can call yourselves as you like, but I don’t accept it and I say so publicly. All I know is that there is the state of Israel, in the borders of 1967, not one centimeter less. Anything else I don’t accept ” [YNet - 27 April 2009]

Abbas had no compunction or embarrassment in accepting a large framed map of “Palestine” covering the entire area of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea after this address. The picture later appeared on the front page of both daily publications of the Palestinian Authority. [Israelinsider - 28 April 2009]

Perhaps Mr Abbas needs reminding that
1. There are no 1967 borders - only armistice lines
2. The United Nations had no trouble in understanding what the term “Jewish State” meant when passing Resolution 181 on 29 November 1947 which declared:

“Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in Part III of this Plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in Parts II and III below.”

The Jewish people did not struggle for 2000 years to return to their ancient homeland only to then be delegitimized and categorized as a “non-nation” - not entitled to enjoy in 0.01% of the former Ottoman Empire precisely the same rights of self determination as have been conferred on the Arab nation extending over twenty one sovereign states in the remaining 99.99% of the liberated Ottoman Empire.

Given his intransigent attitude - what will Abbas possibly have to talk about with Netanyahu at the United Nations unless Abbas has a life transforming change within the next three weeks? And why should Netanyahu be a party to such a farce unless Abbas accepts that Jews have the same rights as Arabs to determine their own future in at least some portion of the land where their national identity and destiny was forged more than 3000 years ago.

Pressure And Purges Panic Jordan

[Published August 2009]

Jordan’s King Abdullah is fast beginning to realise the serious ramifications threatening the continued rule of the Hashemite family dynasty in Jordan resulting from the failure of negotiations over the last 16 years to create a new Arab state between Jordan and Israel - “the two state solution“.

Jordan’s intensive diplomatic support for the “the two state solution” has come apart at the seams as Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas - emboldened by comments made by President Obama - now refuses to contemplate re-opening negotiations with Israel until Israel ceases all construction and building activity in the West Bank including the provision of residential housing to accommodate natural growth.

Apparently Abbas regards adding a bedroom, a family room or a parent’s retreat to an existing house as an obstacle to resuming negotiations. Completing partly constructed houses to lock up stage is apparently anathema to the Palestinian Authority. Israel has made it clear that it will not be accommodating Abbas’s farcical demand for a total freeze on all construction in the West Bank.

Some very neat diplomatic footwork will now have to be negotiated by President Obama - if Abbas - and Obama - are to save face and if Abbas is to be persuaded to resume the stalled negotiations.

This process has already begun with President Obama stating on 18 August:

“The Israeli government has taken discussions with us very seriously,” adding that he “was encouraged by what I am seeing on the ground.”

Abbas however now also finds himself embroiled in a serious conflict of interest - negotiating for the “two state solution” as the head of the Palestinian Authority whilst simultaneously chairing Fatah which calls for a “one state solution” - the total destruction of Israel.

Israel needs to seriously consider whether it should resume negotiations with Abbas whilst he retains both positions following his re-election as Chairman of Fatah in Bethlehem last week.

The long running power struggle between Hamas and Fatah continues unabated. The intrusion of a new terrorist movement into Gaza politics - Jund Ansar Allah - has seen 30 Gazans killed and more than 100 wounded in fratricidal blood letting last weekend. Gaza and the West Bank remain divided into separate Hamas and Fatah fiefdoms with no end to that confrontation in sight.

The prospects for the Palestinian Authority ever again being a credible and reliable negotiating partner with Israel in these chaotic circumstances has descended to rock bottom. Further negotiations with the Palestinian Authority have become pointless and have no prospects for success.

For these reasons it has become imperative that a new Arab negotiating partner or partners be found to sit down with Israel to determine the future sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza.

Jordan - as the last Arab State to occupy the West Bank between 1948-1967 - is perfectly suited to fill the role left by the castration of the Palestinian Authority‘s power and influence as a solid and reliable negotiator able to reach an agreement and more importantly ensure that it is enforced.

Jordan has begun to panic as its role in resolving the West Bank sovereignty issue is now being more frequently discussed - as events of the past few weeks have indicated.

Sarah Honig writing in the Jerusalem Post on 6 August - “Another Tack (Trans) Jordan Is Palestine”- highlights Jordan’s origins as one of the two successor States - with Israel - in former Palestine.

A flurry of diplomatic activity reportedly occurred this week as Israeli envoys secretly travelled to Jordan:

“to assuage concerns that Israel plans to transfer Palestinians from the West Bank to the Hashemite Kingdom”

Jordan’s decision to withdraw citizenship granted to those Arab residents who originated from west of the Jordan River seeking a new life and future in Jordan has provoked much resentment and unrest from those affected by that decision.

King Abdullah has now taken the extraordinary action of dismissing dozens of senior officers, including major and brigadier generals who were reportedly forced to agree to early retirement. In an address to the General Staff a few days before undertaking the purge of the generals, the king warned of internal and external plots designed to spark unrest among the Palestinian majority of Jordan‘s population:

“I clearly reiterate that no force can compel us to do anything against the interests of Jordan and Jordanians. The one who speaks about threatening Jordan, its identity and stability, and threatening our national unity, does not know Jordan or Jordanians and has not read their history.”

King Abdullah however needs to pay heed to the following resolution passed at the 8th conference of the Palestinian National Council of the PLO (now also headed by Abbas) in February-March 1971:

“Jordan is linked to Palestine by a national relationship and a national unity forged by history and culture from the earliest times. The creation of one political entity in Transjordan and another in Palestine would have no basis either in legality or as to the elements universally accepted as fundamental to a political entity. It would be a continuation of fragmentation by which colonialism shattered the unity of our Arab nation and our Arab homeland after the First World War.

But this fragmentation has not prevented the masses, either west or east of the River Jordan, from feeling that they are one people, or from remaining united against the conspiracy of imperialism and Zionism.

In raising the slogans of the liberation of Palestine and presenting the problems of the Palestine revolution, it was not the intention of the Palestine revolution to separate the east of the River from the west, nor did it believe that the struggle of the Palestinian people can be separated from the struggle of the masses in Jordan..."

This resolution - whilst posing a direct threat by the PLO to the Hashemite family’s continuing rule in Jordan - can also be used to political advantage by King Abdullah - if he is prepared to rise to the challenge.

Reunifying the heavily populated Arab areas of the West Bank with Jordan in an enlarged Jordan with newly created boundaries would allow all its West Bank residents to enjoy Jordanian citizenship and equal rights with the rest of Jordan’s residents totally freed from Israeli occupation and control.

Jordan has enjoyed a signed peace treaty with Israel since 1994. Jordan is therefore uniquely placed to negotiate the future sovereignty of the West Bank with Israel by agreeing to a new internationally recognized border that will be mutually respected and observed by both Israel and Jordan.

The sooner King Abdullah steps up to the plate - the easier he will sleep at night.