On December 21, 2020, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) spoke about Israel building houses for Israeli Jews in an area it calls “East Jerusalem,” an entity that had a shelf life of just eighteen years (1949-1967) in the city’s 4,000+ year history. The stale name recalls the period when Jews were evicted and barred from the eastern half of the city is both non-factual and insulting to Jews.
The insults and hypocrisy continued throughout the discussions.
Nickolay Mladenov, Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process stated “that a two-State solution is not only necessary, but still possible. There is no other way to resolve the conflict in a way that is just for both peoples. Israel must preserve its nature as a Jewish State, while ‘the Palestinian people will not go anywhere, this is their home.‘” But he then went on to call for additional funds to UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, which is caring for 5.7 million Palestinian Arab “refugees” until they move into Israel. How Mladenov squares the circle of encouraging nearly 6 million Arabs to move into Israel while simultaneously wishing for Israel to “preserve its nature as a Jewish State” is beyond comprehension.
Several countries spoke about Israeli “settlement” activity and bemoaned Israel’s building homes for Israeli Jews, even in “East Jerusalem.” The inanity is despite the fact that the Arab population in Jerusalem was only 26% of the city in 1967 when Israel reunited the city and grew to 36% of the population by 2016. If the 1967 “status quo” is the most important dynamic for the UN, perhaps the UNSC should demand that no new Arab housing be permitted in the city until a peace agreement is signed by the two parties.
Mladenov and several countries also voiced concern that more settlements “undermine the prospect of a two-State solution.” It is a curious proposition. If the concern is about territory, the 1949 Armistice Lines/ The Green Line left Israel with a strip of land even more narrow than a new Palestinian state would have if Israel annexed an area called “E1” up to, and including Ma’ale Adumim. If the concern about “viability” is related to the number of Jews living in an Arab State, why do these same UNSC countries continue to fund UNRWA and encourage Arab “refugees” that they will move into Israel which already has 25% non-Jews living in the country? Why is viability of a Palestinian State surrounded by tens of millions of Arabs a greater concern than a small Jewish State?
Further, Mladenov finally began calling out the “indiscriminate launching of rockets and mortars towards Israeli civilian population centres by Hamas [and] Palestinian Islamic Jihad,” but the speakers (with the exception of Niger) refused to speak about the attacks. Each country picked up the Mladenov themes about settlements, UNRWA and Gaza, but fell silent on the massive attacks against Israel.
The United Nations continues to show it has no concerns about the security and basic human rights of Israelis. Until it can clearly condemn HAMAS and discuss the rights of Jews to live and pray in Jerusalem, there is no reason for the Jewish State to heed an iota of criticism as the global body has shown it has no interest in the peace or security of Israel.
Related First One Through articles:
750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem
The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel
The Green Line Through Jerusalem
Ramat Shlomo, Jerusalem and Joe Biden
“Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”
The US State Department’s Selective Preference of “Status Quos”
Considering Carter’s 1978 Letter Claiming Settlements Are Illegal
Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough
Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough