After UNRWA

Posted on February 16, 2024 by First.One.Through

People are trying to figure out what to do with UNRWA, the troubled United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. The organization has long perpetuated the Arab-Israeli conflict, fomenting hatred for Jews in its schools, and promising millions of Arabs that their future is in Israeli towns and villages where grandparents who had wished for the destruction of the Jewish State once lived.

The temporary agency is funded by voluntary contributions from UN member states, so can be dissolved very quickly, as was always intended. The issue at the moment is that the hospitals and schools still need to operate, with or without the existence of UNRWA. The five regions where UNRWA operates – Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon – all have different dynamics, politics and infrastructure, and the future will be different for each.

The best solution is for UNRWA to be dissolved and its personnel and infrastructure to be handed to proper authorities: operations in Lebanon and Syria would shift to the UNHCR, the UN Refugee agency; Jordanian operations to the government of Jordan; and operations in the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinian Authority, in a staged process.

Syria and Lebanon to UNHCR

There are approximately 581,000 descendants of 1948 Palestinian Arabs in Syria being cared for by UNRWA in 2022, and another 93,000 people for whom the agency also gives free services. The numbers are 487,000 and 70,000 in Lebanon for refugee descendants and other wards, respectively. All of them have been denied citizenship by their host countries.

These people and the associated infrastructure should be handed over immediately to UNHCR which cares for over 89 million people as of 2022. UNHCR would try to settle the 1.23 million people either in those host countries or find them citizenship elsewhere, just as it does with millions of other stateless people.

Jordan

Jordan was part of the original Palestine Mandate of 1922, and England separated the land east of the Jordan River to become a new country known as Transjordan in 1923. After Transjordan attacked Israel at its founding and illegally seized the eastern part of what remained of Palestine, it illegally annexed that land and renamed itself “Jordan.” It ethnically cleansed all Jews from the region, including eastern Jerusalem, and granted citizenship to everyone in 1954, as they long as they weren’t Jewish (Nationality Law Article 3).

Not surprisingly with such deep history with the land “between the River and the Sea,” roughly half of Jordan is “Palestinian”, approximately 2.6 million people including Queen Rania. These “UNRWA refugees” in Jordan have Jordanian citizenship and have zero need to collect global charity under the false notion that they are stateless and lack self-determination.

The schools and hospitals should be transferred to the government of Jordan’s control immediately. Some countries may want to continue to voluntarily contribute to the Jordanian king for some time to help absorb the hit to the country’s budget, and then slowly wean the king from the global money teat.

West Bank to the Palestinian Authority

Palestinians declared a state in 1988, and most non-western countries have recognized its independence. It is ruled by the Palestinian Authority, which elected a president from the Fatah Party in 2005 and a parliament in 2006 with a majority from Hamas.

The PA operates from the West Bank city of Ramallah and has responsibility for the vast majority of Palestinian Arabs living in the West Bank. The Authority is viewed as weak and corrupt by Palestinians and others. It supplies money to terrorists and their families in a program alternatively called a Martyrs’ Fund / Pay-to-Slay program, which is popular amongst Palestinians and detested by civil societies for directly supporting terror. The PA has failed on all fronts, not being able to show the ability to govern internally nor to advance a future of coexistence with the Jewish State.

Alas, it’s much better than the alternative Hamas which has ruled in Gaza since 2007 when it seized control of the region from the PA. Perhaps with greater focus on good governance with western oversight, the PA can be reformed.

Handing the 96 schools and 43 health facilities operating in the West Bank to the PA should happen immediately. Funding for the operations should cover only six to nine months and a cohort of countries led by the United States, which is UNRWA’s principle benefactor, should use the time to stabilize the transition. That includes ensuring that no hatred for Jews or teaching about the destruction of Israel is found anywhere in the facilities or educational materials.

Continued funding for the schools and hospitals after the initial transition period should be captured under the United States Taylor Force Act. Just as the PA is denied getting any US monies as long as it pays terrorist salaries in the Pay-to-Slay program, it would also lose funding that used to come through UNRWA for the schools and hospitals. The historic backdoor circumventing American laws would be sealed closed, and the US and PA would need to work together to ensure that supporting terrorism comes to a definitive end for any monetary support to come to the PA.

Gaza, At Some Point, to the Palestinian Authority

While UNRWA’s West Bank operations should move to the PA immediately, UNRWA in Gaza is a different story. Not only must the PA prove it can absorb the many facilities and cleanse them of their toxic hatred, the PA will be tested as to whether it can take control of Gaza after 17 years of Hamas rule.

Hamas’s complete rule of Gaza since 2007 brought the region complete destruction. It focused all of its energies on building a war infrastructure to destroy the Jewish State next door, rather than build a functioning economy and society. It left the schools and hospitals for the world to fund and run, so cared little about letting them get destroyed while its leaders hid like cowards underground.

Neither Hamas nor the PA can take over the rebuilding of the schools and health care facilities. Over the next several years, another global cohort, perhaps similar to the one easing the UNRWA transition in the West Bank, should be tasked with building institutions anew. Basic humanitarian values and rights must be incorporated into the very foundations to chart a path for a future when the PA may be able to take over Gaza as well as the new former-UNRWA infrastructure.

*UNRWA camp with a keyhole and key on top symbolizing the false promise that through UNRWA, Palestinian Arabs will get to move into homes in Israel*

These actions, if properly executed, should empower and moderate a new Palestinian Authority which can take over Gaza at some point, and ultimately negotiate peace with Israel.

The first step in ending the Arab-Israel conflict is for the United Nations and Saudi Arabia to clearly state that there is NO RIGHT OF RETURN FOR PALESTINIANS TO GO TO GRANDPARENTS’ HOMES IN ISRAEL. Immediately thereafter, the dismantling of UNRWA should commence.

There is a pathway to coexistence, and it must be built on truths and respect which Arabs and Jews fully acknowledge and internalize.

Speaking Honestly About Lies In The Israel-Palestinian Conflict (November 2023)

“Two States For Two People” And An Arab “Right Of Return” Are Mutually Exclusive (September 2023)

UNRWA Is A Prison (November 2021)

Help Refugees: Shut the UNRWA, Fund the UNHCR (September 2014)

The Three “Two-State Solution”s

Posted on December 27, 2023 by First.One.Through

There is a fantastic idea that has been floated around the Middle East for many decades: two states for two peoples, one Jewish and the other Arab. Even though the notion continues to be bantered in political circles, few details are understood about what that plan means.

The pro-Palestinian camp talks about “THE” two state solution, meaning the Arab Peace Initiative proposed in 2002. The United States and other governments talk about “A” two state solution, which could mean a wide variety of negotiated outcomes. The United Nations has a third alternative, which is the most toxic and has directly led to permanent hostilities between Israel and its neighbors.

“THE” 2 State Solution: Arab Peace Initiative

There are three primary matters which stand between Israel and the Palestinian Authority: land/borders; capital city; and the future of Palestinian refugees.

Land: The API calls for Israel to withdraw from ALL territories taken in its defensive war of June 1967. This would include Gaza, the West Bank, the Sinai, Golan Heights, and areas of southern Lebanon still under dispute. Israel has already withdrawn from some of those lands including Sinai, Gaza and many areas of the West Bank. The API seeks the remainder.

Capital: The API calls for East Jerusalem to be the capital of a new Palestine. An early draft of the API called for “al-Quds al-Sharif as its capital,” seemingly softening the stance to something Israel could accept.

Refugees: The API states that Palestinian Arabs outside of Israel will seemingly not move to the Jewish State. The final language of “Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries,” may only be in reference to UNRWA Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan whom the API thinks should not have to settle them. The API language was in sharp contrast to an earlier version which stated “To accept to find an agreed, just solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees in conformity with Resolution 194,” which would have given Palestinians wishing to live in peace with Israel the option of either moving there or getting compensation.

“A” Two State Solution

The United States and Israel see the end of the conflict differently. Through the Madrid Conference and Oslo Accords, as well as other efforts made by the Obama Administration in 2014 and the Trump Administration’s “Deal of the Century,” the three major matters had different contours.

Land: Israel believes that it has already given back some of the territory it took in June 1967. It returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt and handed Gaza and major population centers in the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority. UN Resolution 242 (1967) called for “withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict” which does not call for ALL territory to be abandoned.

The United States agrees. The Obama Administration tried to broker a series of land swaps which would have essentially given Palestinians a state on the same amount of land but in different locations than came about from the 1949 Armistice Lines (49AL). The Trump Administration started with the same concept that the 49AL were arbitrary and not conducive to long-term peace and that Israel has already complied with the land provision of Res. 242. Team Trump did not try to match a certain number of square kilometers with history, and instead sought to create borders which accounted for current reality on the ground and a dynamic to forge an enduring peace.

Capital: Israel annexed the section of Jerusalem that was divided for nineteen years between 1949 and 1967, and further extended the municipal boundaries. It considers the city its eternal capital, but has offered sections of the city to be part of a Palestinian State as part of the peace efforts, with American prodding.

Refugees: Israel has offered some limited number of Palestinian Arabs to move to Israel. The figures have ranged from 10,000 to 100,000 over time under different plans. The US position has long been that Palestinian Arabs should move to the new Arab State, as the basic principle of two states for two people.

The United Nations’ Two State Solution

The UN’s plan is the most aggressively pro-Palestinian of the three.

The UN agrees with the API regarding a new Palestinian State on all of the land in Gaza and the West Bank being part of Palestine, as well as East Jerusalem being the capital of the country. However, it continues to insist on the full “right of return” for six million “Palestine Refugees” who are registered with UNRWA in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

The UN’s promise to Palestine Refugees has caused them to be frustrated by the failure to move to neighborhoods where grandparents used to live. It has led them to build terrorist tunnels to penetrate the land which the UN promises to them, rather than build an economy. It has kept them in a restive state for generations, not accepting the existence of the “Zionist entity” which they believe will soon cease to exist according to recent polls.

The United Nations’ adoption of Palestinians as their perennial wards has harmed peace in the region. It has a position on refugees which it knows Israel cannot accept, deliberately putting the Jewish State as the obstacle to peace rather than a counterparty with whom to find a solution. Permanently putting Israel on the defensive with one-sided resolutions makes Israel unwilling to seriously consider the UN on any matter.

It is destructive to any peace process for the United Nations to call for a “two-state solution” without clearly articulating that there is no “right of return” to Israel. The death toll in the region will certainly rise while Palestinian Arabs believe their future is in Israeli homes.

The Israeli Peace Process versus the Palestinian Divorce Proceedings

The Left-Wing’s Two State Solution: 1.5 States for Arabs, 0.5 for Jews

Palestinian Arabs Do Not Want Negotiations or a Two State Solution

“Two States For Two People” And An Arab “Right Of Return” Are Mutually Exclusive

What Palestinians Talk About When They Talk About Hamas

Posted on October 27, 2023 by First.One.Through

As of October 7, 2023, Hamas became the official poster child of evil in the civilized world. The death toll of 1,400 people was appalling in itself, but the butchery of civilians, ripped from their homes and burned alive will be scorched in the minds of this generation.

So imagine being a Palestinian on global television and asked about Hamas and the events of October 7.

If one wanted to distance oneself from the savagery, one could clearly condemn the group and the actions unequivocally. Say that the group is disgusting and doesn’t speak on behalf of Palestinians.

Queen Rania of Jordan, a descendant of Palestinians, took a different course. She took ownership of Hamas as part-and-parcel of the Palestinian people, essentially the rag-tag army against a powerful Israeli military. She said that while Hamas shouldn’t have killed civilians, Israel has killed many more and sees the Western press buying into Israel’s “right to defend itself” as a form of Islamophobia which may result in the Muslim world coming for them next.

Watch her entire interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. Since Amanpour loves the queen, she was loathe to interrupt and correct her lies. When Amanpour asked her pointedly about Hamas and October 7, Rania pivoted the discussion to suffering in Gaza from Israel’s air strikes.

*Jordan’s Queen Rania was given almost 20 minutes to air her grievances on CNN with Christiane Amanpour*, October 2023

Some lowlights from Rania’s talk to consider before you watch the interview:

To start, Rania discussed the difficult situation in Gaza for Palestinian mothers but said nothing about Israeli mothers who had their children ripped from their arms and shot intentionally before them.

At 1:30, Rania noted that “October 7th happened”, in passive language borrowed from the pages of Rep. Ilhan Omar who described the attacks on 9/11 as “some people did something.” She distanced the Palestinian political-terrorist group Hamas from the deliberate unprovoked slaughter.

At 2:20, Rania made a veiled warning (or threat) to the western world for backing Israel in defending itself after the Hamas massacre, saying that the west was “complicit” and was “aiding and abetting” Israeli attacks against Gaza.

Amanpour, after giving Rania nearly three minutes to rant freely, asked a pointed question: “what did you feel on October 7th?” The response was a bland “we condemn the killing of any civilians, whether Palestinian or Israeli.” Rania then described the views of Islam, arguing that it had an ethical code when fighting war which prohibits the killing of children, women and elderly. Amanpour never asked about Islam. She asked the queen a personal question about how she felt, but Rania offered a bland ALL lives matter, coupled with a defense of Islam. Perhaps the queen’s deflection was understandable, as Hamas is a devout Islamist group which clearly doesn’t have religious views which dovetail with Rania’s version.

At 4:15, Rania moved the conversation that “this conflict did not begin on October 7th.” This was the crux of Rania’s interview. After implying that the militant Islamist group Hamas doesn’t represent Islam, she implied that it very much represents the Palestinian people. Rania said that for Palestinians “war has never left. This is a 75 year old story,” meaning from the founding of Israel. At 7:30 she leaned in completely saying “this is a fight for freedom and for justice,” which Hamas launched on October 7.

After Amanpour failed to get Rania to offer any emotion about Hamas’s butchery, she asked the question differently, as to whether Hamas’s barbaric attacks hurt the Palestinian cause. Rania offered the same responses as before, that she does not favor the killing of civilians but that “this is a story of violence that has been going on now for so long.” She somehow conflated Jews building homes in Judea and Samaria with Palestinians yanking people out of their homes and raping them, then dragging them through the streets; Israelis building a security wall to stop Palestinian terrorists with Hamas decapitating babies in front of their parents; Jews visiting the Jewish Temple Mount with Arabs burning families alive.

Rania then moved her comments to the situation in Gaza, again refusing to clearly condemn and distance herself – and Palestinian Arabs generally – from Hamas.

She said the Israel is engaged in war crimes and is targeting hospitals and mosques. She didn’t seem to mind that the hospital bombing was proven to be from Palestinian terrorists and the mosque had a weapons cache stored beneath it when leveled by Israel.

At 9:40, Rania asked “why is it that whenever Israel commits these atrocities it comes under the banner of ‘self-defense’ but when there’s violence by Palestinians it is immediately called ‘terrorism?’ Is the word ‘terrorism’ only reserved for Muslims and Arabs?” Quite a but of political trickery, in calling Hamas’s massacre “violence by Palestinians” while Israel commits “atrocities.” She followed that with smearing anyone who called out the barbarity of Hamas as an Islamophobe.

By 10:10, Rania attempted to reframe the entire situation: “These are not two equal people in the conflict. One is an occupier and one is the occupied. One has a military, one of the mightiest in the world, and the other doesn’t have a military at all.” Well, not quite. In saying that Hamas speaks for the Palestinians she offered that it is the Palestinian military at this moment in time.

At 11:00, she summed up her feelings that the current situation should be focused on Israeli “violations” and “not this hyper-fixation on Hamas.” Somehow Rania missed the point that the West has a “hyper-fixation on Hamas” to distance the massacre from Palestinian Arabs to show there is a pathway to peace. The west will never push Israel into compromising with genocidal maniacs.

Rania’s anger bubbled and her voice quivered but the interview was not quite over.

At 12:20, Rania expressed how upset she was that the October 7 massacre was described in the press as “savagery, barbaric, blood-thirsty, cold-blooded, but we’re not seeing that terminology describing that situation [in Gaza]” She questioned media bias against Palestinians and the unwarranted defense of Israel, in light of many more Palestinians being killed since October 7.

Again, she refused the opportunity to distance herself and Palestinians from the massacre.

At 16:40 Rania added that she was angry that Arabs are asked to show their “humanity bona fides” in condemning the October 7 massacres but Israelis are not asked about the current campaign against Hamas. She bemoaned that western leaders don’t say that “Palestinians have a right to defend themselves.” She added that western countries should allow people to protest “for Palestine” without being called “terrorist sympathizers and antisemites.” Perhaps the queen is unfamiliar with the chants at those “protests” of ‘Globalize the intifada’, ‘from the river to the sea’ and ‘gas the Jews‘. But I doubt it

Towards the end of the interview at 18:10, Rania said that even if Israel kills every member of Hamas, it will just “create a new generation of resistance that is fiercer and more violent.” Rania’s comment embraced Hamas as a “resistance” movement against Israel. Somehow, even after October 7, she thinks the next generation of Palestinians can have even more evil intent.

So what do we learn from the Palestinian queen who rules in Jordan? A woman who is more polished after decades of interviews than the man-on-the-street, perched on a pedestal at news media which adores her.

Asked to comment on Hamas and its attack on October 7, Rania did the opposite of disowning the group. She let it be known that:

Hamas is Palestinian. It is the military arm of Palestinians who are still fighting the 75-year old war of Israel’s creation.
Hamas’s brutality is understandable and the Palestinian people will not distance themselves from the group nor the actions, but offer “all” civilian lives matter statements.
The Arab world considers the condemnation of Hamas’s actions to be a sign of Islamophobia, even though they admit that Hamas’s actions are against Islam.
The Arab street is judging the western world now, not just Israel. Terrorist attacks may spread as part of the ‘globalize jihad’ and ‘globalize intifada’ movements.
The Palestinian war against Israel is 75 years and counting and will not end until every Jew gets out of the West Bank and a new Palestinian State can have full autonomy, including a proper military to “defend itself” against Israel, ensuring much more bloody wars in the future.

It’s the same message from Turkish President Recep Erdogan who said “Hamas is not a terrorist organization, it is a liberation group, ‘mujahideen’ waging a battle to protect its lands and people.”

The Muslim and pro-Palestinian narrative is the opposite of that held by western politicians who are attempting to demonize Hamas and its Iranian-sponsors, so as to enable the notion of peaceful and moderate Palestinian Arabs on the whole, who will be willing to live side-by-side in peace with the Jewish State. If Hamas is essentially the Palestinian military, backed and supported by everyday Palestinians, how could such a people be enabled to have an independent country with a full blown army living next to Israel?

The West NEEDS to demonize Hamas to advance a two-state solution, deaf to the comments of Palestinians and their supporters, who make clear that Hamas is their military “resisting” Jews living in their land. Palestinians hope that the West will feel so committed to “two states for two people” like the United Nations, that the West will be compelled to adopt the Palestinian narrative inverting cause-and-effect of October 7, and place the 100 years of modern Zionism in the crosshairs for attack.

Palestinian Arabs Are Fighting For All of Israel, Not A New State In West Bank and Gaza

Palestinians View Jews Like The French Viewed Nazis

Abbas Pays Tribute To Murderers Of Jews Before The United Nations General Assembly, To Applause

Terrifying Trifecta Of Anti-Zionism

The Anti-Semitism In Anti-Zionism

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

Gazans Have Always Wanted To Kill Jews Inside Of Israel

CNN Willfully Whitewashes Palestinians Thirst For Jewish Blood

“Two States For Two People” And An Arab “Right Of Return” Are Mutually Exclusive

Posted on September 20, 2023 by First.One.Through

Different formulas for striking a resolution to the Arab-Israeli Conflict have been advanced for decades. One sticking point seems banal on its surface, with ambiguous language which whitewashes the implausibility of implementation.

“A” Two State Solution Versus “The” Two State Solution

The United States has called for “A” two state solution, which is “two states for two peoples,” as President Biden has often said. One country is the Jewish State of Israel and the other country will become an Arab State of Palestine.

This is very different from the similarly named Arab-preferred “The” two state solution, which is the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002. That plan calls for an Arab State of Palestine and a bi-national state of Israel. That is not a formula for “two states for two people” but “one purely Arab state of Palestine and one state where Jews are allowed to live in Israel.”

The Arab two state plan calls for a “Right of Return” of 14 million Arabs who have some roots in Palestine to enter either Israel or Palestine, depending where ancestors had lived. Israel now has roughly 7.2 million Jews, so the clear goal is to end Jewish sovereignty in their homeland.

The difference is stark and both Republicans and Democrats in the United States fully understand the nature of the Arab claim for a “right of return” to end the Jewish state.

In a April 14, 2004 letter from U.S. President George W. Bush to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Bush wrote “It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.”

The Democrats had an almost identical clause in its platform (until President Barak Obama removed it) which stated “the creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel.“

A return for refugees would end Israel’s existence as a Jewish state.
BDS Leader, Omar Barghouti

The principle of “Two states for two people” and an Arab “Right of return” are mutually exclusive, and must be stated clearly by those pretending to advance an end to the conflict.

The Left-Wing’s Two State Solution: 1.5 States for Arabs, 0.5 for Jews

Palestinian Arabs Do Not Want Negotiations or a Two State Solution

Two Views Of Justice, One American, Another Palestinian

There Is No Backing For A Palestinian “Right Of Return”

Should A Palestinian State Have Hebrew As An Official Language?

Posted on May 5, 2023 by First.One.Through

A popular discussion about creating a Palestinian Arab country runs rampant around the United Nations and political outlets. The reality is local Arabs have no interest in the “two state solution” and the majority favor killing Jewish civilians, so there is no possibility of advancing such a new Arab state currently.

But that doesn’t keep the U.N. and various capitals busy talking about it anyway.

So let’s add an idea which may foster good will and coexistence: should that imagined Palestinian Arab state have Hebrew as an official language?

The idea seems to have merit based on comments made by United Nations Secretary General Antonio Gutteres on “World Portuguese Language Day” celebrated on May 5. In discussing languages, he said they are an “indispensable vehicle of understanding and hope. They are also a place of resistance against those who intend to spread hatred, exclusion, violence, extremism, misogyny and discrimination…. Portuguese language is also a good example of this, being shared and constructed by populations on all continents. Marked by diversity, it is a language that promotes understanding and conciliation.”

There is nothing more sorely needed in Palestinian society than removing “exclusion, violence and extremism” and promoting “understanding and conciliation” with their Jewish neighbors.

It is estimated that English is the official language of 67 countries, while French has 29, Arabic has 26, Spanish has 21, Portuguese 10, and German 6. Hebrew is the official language of only a single country, Israel. Perhaps a Palestinian state should be the second.

There are over half a million Israeli Jews and an unknown number of Israeli Arabs living in the West Bank. Presumably, all speak Hebrew already. While many of those Israelis will likely fall inside of Israel if and when borders are defined, it is likely that hundreds of thousands of Hebrew speakers would become Palestinians in a theoretical state. It is natural to include them into the fabric of the country, and to foster a good relationship with Israel.

Today, Palestinian Arabs mostly learn Hebrew so they can work inside of Israel. In the future, all Palestinian Arab people should learn Hebrew to reject the current strain of “violence and extremism”, and to promote “understanding and hope” with their Jewish neighbors.

Settlements For Peace

Enduring Peace Requires Unity AND Tolerance

Importing Peaceful Ideas to the West Bank

A Step Towards MidEast Peace: Shedding Ilhan Omar

NY Times Recognizes Palestinian State

Posted on August 23, 2021 by First.One.Through

The Palestinian Liberation Organization declared an independent State of Palestine in 1988. Only Arab and Muslim countries recognized it, while about a decade ago, countries in Latin America also chose to recognize it. The United States and much of the western world has refused to recognize such entity, in the hopes that the contours of such state will be negotiated between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

But The New York Times is not waiting for the U.S. government, and has now recognized the entity as a state throughout the paper.

On August 23, 2021, Will Shortz, long-time editor of the crossword puzzle, added a clue which specifically called Palestine an actual country.

*August 23, 2021 New York Times crossword puzzle claiming there is a “Palestinian State.”*

This is part of an ongoing initiative of the paper. On April 24, 2021, the Times wrote about “Palestinian East Jerusalem,” which compounded multiple layers of fiction: there hasn’t been an entity called “East Jerusalem” since 1967 and it certainly isn’t part of a State of Palestine.

The New York Times deliberately does not call HAMAS, a U.S. designated foreign terrorist organization, with such designation as it tries to sanitize the genocidal anti-Semitism of the group. The paper is now further breaking with official U.S. foreign policy in recognizing a Palestinian State as it attempts to mainstream the Palestinian narrative to its far-left readership.

The Palestinian Maps of 1995, 1997 and 2005

Posted on July 2, 2020 by First.One.Through

Palestinian Arabs often share a series of maps which show that “their land and country” are in a perpetual state of shrinking when the opposite is the truth.

Local Palestinian Arabs never had self-rule until 1995. The Ottomans ruled the region from 1517 to 1917 and then the British until 1948. Israel’s War of Independence of 1948-9 saw the area west of the Jordan River split into three distinct parts: a Jewish State of Israel which gave citizenship to all the local Arabs, an Egyptian-controlled Gaza and a Jordanian region which it illegally annexed in 1950, which later became known as the “West Bank.” Jordan lost control of that land after it attacked Israel in 1967 and Egypt lost Gaza (and the Sinai peninsula which Israel returned in 1980) at the same time. Neither the Egyptians nor Jordanians made any attempt to give local Palestinians autonomy during the duration of their control of lands from 1949 to 1967.

It was only with the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1995 that local Palestinian Arabs got to rule themselves, as Israel handed over six cities and 450 villages to the Palestinian Authority (PA). The six major cities were Jericho, Jenin, Tulkarem, Nablus (Shechem), Qalqilya and Bethlehem.

Areas A and B in the West Bank handed by Israel to the Palestinian Authority. Area A has full PA control

Israel continued to give the PA additional land to administer in 1997, giving almost the entirety of the city of Hebron, in an Area called H1.

Area H1 handed to the Palestinian Authority by Israel

Additional land was negotiated to be handed to the PA in September 2000 but the PA rejected the transfer of less than 100% of their demands and launched the Second Intifada, killing hundreds of Israeli civilians in numerous bombings.

In 2005, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdrew all Israelis from Gaza and left the region for the Palestinians to administer, subject to the understanding of the 2004 Bush letter which clearly articulated that Israel would NOT be expected to give into 100% of the PA’s land and refugee demands. This third installment was quickly met with yet additional rounds of Palestinian violence with a Hamas takeover of the area in 2007 and subsequent battles with Israel in 2008, 2012 and 2014.

No additional transfers of land from Israel to Palestinians has taken place in light of the Palestinians refusal to engage in a peace process after the 2014 process collapsed when the PA agreed to let the terrorist group Hamas into a power-sharing agreement.

Palestinians argue that their land has been shrinking for 100 years when the truth is that they continue to live throughout the land. The local Palestinian Arabs became self-governing for the first time when Israel gave them land in 1995 and subsequently handed them additional territory to administer in 1997 and 2005. If Palestinians come to the negotiating table it is possible for them to gain more land to govern, but their actions make that increasingly unlikely.

The Best Palestinian Response to the Trump Initiative is Welcoming Jews to Palestine

Posted on February 4, 2020 by First.One.Through

US President Donald Trump put forward a new Middle East Framework called “Peace to Prosperity” (P2P). It was the first Middle East framework offered since the Arab Peace Initiative in 2002 (API). The API was, not surprisingly, heavily biased towards the Palestinian Arabs’ demands and not Israeli security. It did not advance peace but rather ushered wars from Gaza in 2008, 2012 and 2014, a war from Lebanon in 2006 and a “stabbing intifada” from the West Bank in 2015.

Unlike the API, Trump’s P2P plan was focused on Israel’s security (and Palestinians’ prosperity), and the Palestinian Authority considered it a non-starter before they even saw it. The acting-President of the PA Mahmoud Abbas has refused to even entertain discussing it.

That is a mistake.

The underlying issue of Israel’s security manifests itself in the plan in a few ways, most notably, that all Palestinian border crossings must be managed by Israel and that a future State of Palestine must be demilitarized. If the PA were to refuse to accept those two principles, there is indeed nothing to discuss regarding any of the other key items for Palestinians such as land, refugees and Jerusalem.

However, if Abbas accedes to those two Israeli security points, he will likely be able to gain much on the other issues that matter to him and to the Palestinians.

Consider the land.

The P2P plan has Israel assuming sections of the West Bank including the entirety of the Jordan Valley. It leaves the Palestinian territory as a patchwork of parcels, with the towns in which Jews reside being annexed by Israel dotted, in between.

However, the Palestinians might be able to obtain almost the entirety of the West Bank if it grants Palestinian citizenship to all of the inhabitants of the Jewish towns. This action would be much like the Jewish State’s in 1948 when it granted Israeli citizenship to all of the Arabs. The Jews would make up a much smaller percentage of Palestine than Arabs’ in Israel today.

As the border would be controlled by Israel, only a sliver of land between Palestine and Jordan would be required to be Israeli instead of the whole Jordan Valley, much like the plan assumes Israel having a thin sliver of land buffering Palestinian territory in the Negev and Egypt. The net result would be the Palestinians gaining almost the entirety of the West Bank other than a sliver along the Jordan River.

The willingness to accept Jewish citizens into Palestine might also open a window for Israel to accept many Arab refugees into Israel, rather than just giving them compensation as mapped under the P2P plan. A new Arab spirit of coexistence might stimulate Israel to take as many as 50,000 Arab refugees per year for a number of years, with the balance receiving compensation and settling in a new Palestinian State.

The capital of a Palestinian State could also become more dynamic, with Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem becoming parts of a Palestinian capital.

In short, Palestinians can gain a lot on all of their key negotiating points by working off of the Trump peace initiative if they endorse coexistence and welcome Jews into a new state. In contrast, the current path of continued demonization of Israel and the denial of Jewish history and rights will only further cement the stagnation for Palestinians in regards to both peace and prosperity.

Palestinians should call the Israeli bluff, and see if hundreds of thousands of Jews are willing to live as a minority in Palestine. If the Israelis balk, then the BDS movement will likely advance globally. However, if the Israelis endorse the principle, Israel will be blocked from annexing any land (pro-Arab), while United Nations Resolution 2334 will be deemed moot and the global BDS movement will come to an end (pro-Israel).

Israel’s Nation-State Basic Law Advances a Two-State Solution

Posted on August 7, 2018 by First.One.Through

In November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly approved a plan (UNGA Resolution 181) to be implemented in the Holy Land for when the British ended their administration of Palestine. The resolution proposed that two states be established in the area west of the Jordan River: a Jewish State and an Arab State. The resolution mentioned the term “Jewish State” a full 27 times.

But the world never quite understood what a “Jewish State” meant. The modern world never had witnessed such a thing.

Conversely, an “Arab State” seemed clear. There already were many Arab countries in the world. There were also many Muslim countries. People had a pretty good understanding of what such countries looked like and how they operated. The number of both Arab and Muslim countries would grow over the following decades.

After the Oslo Accords of 1993 and 1995, the Palestinian Arabs would begin to define what their proposed Arab State would look like. In the waning days of the five year transition period that began in September 1995, Yasser Arafat (fungus be upon him), ordered a draft Palestinian Constitution be prepared. The initial draft Palestinian constitution was completed in 2001.

It made a few points abundantly clear: a State of Palestine would be Arab and be Muslim.

“This constitution is based on the will of the Arab Palestinian people.” (Article 1)
“The Arab Palestinian people believe in the principles of justice, liberty, equality, human dignity, and their right to practice self-determination and sovereignty over their land.” (Article 2)
“The Palestinian people are a part of the Arab and Islamic nations.” (Article 3)
“Arabic shall be the official language.” (Article 5)
“Islam shall be the official religion of the state. The monotheistic religions shall be respected.” (Article 6)
“The principles of the Islamic Shari`a are a primary source for legislation. The legislative branch shall determine personal status law under the authority of the monotheistic religions according to their denominations, in keeping with the provisions of the constitution and the preservation of unity, stability, and advancement of the Palestinian people.” (Article 7)
“Sovereignty belongs to the Palestinian Arab people. Its prerogatives shall be exercised by the people directly, by means of elected representatives, by referendum, and through their constitutional institutions.” (Article 10)

It goes on, and the point is underscored: a new Palestinian State would be Arab and Islamic.

Even without a state, the Palestinian Authority created a framework of what it meant to be a Palestinian State. Yet, Israel, which had been a country since May 1948, never defined what it meant to be a Jewish State.

Until 2018.

Israel – like the United Kingdom and New Zealand – does not have a constitution. Instead, it issues a series of “Basic Laws.” These laws enumerate key principles of the country. Until July 2018, the government of Israel did not declare what it meant to be a Jewish State in any of the Basic Laws, even while it enumerated other key attributes such as human dignity and liberty. There were Jewish symbols and Jewish holidays used in Israel, but those could easily be replaced with any new law. The State of Israel was only de facto a Jewish State. Nothing more.

Emblem of Israel, the seven branched menorah, as depicted in the Arch of Titus in Rome, celebrating the sacking of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE.

That de facto existence has been more than enough for Arabs and anti-Zionists. Thirty Arab and Muslim countries still refuse to recognize the existence of Israel. For his part, the acting-President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas has stated that Palestinian Arabs “will never recognize the Jewishness of the state of Israel.” The PA would make peace with the government of Israel simply as a counter-party to an agreement. However, it still objected to the basic formula laid out since 1947 of two states for two people: a Jewish State and an Arab State.

And Abbas could comfortably delude himself into that reality because Israel never proclaimed itself in its own Basic Laws that it is the nation-state of the Jewish people. The country operated like a Jewish man wearing a baseball cap instead of a kippah, acting religiously without the public declaration of being Jewish. The Jew and anti-Semite could play the farce of doing business and getting along with each other with the fig leaf of deniability.

No longer. The public declaration has been made. The Jew is out of the closet. Deal with your anti-Semitism if you want to live next to Israel, and strike treaties and do business with the Jewish State.

In 2018, the State of Israel declared itself the Nation-State of the Jewish people. For anyone that held out hope for a two state solution built on a solid foundation, there is only cause for optimism and joy.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Deciphering the 2018 Basic Law in Israel – The Nation State of the Jewish People

The Basic Law’s “Unique” Problem

Israel’s Nation-State Basic Law is Not Based on Religion

A “Viable” Palestinian State

The Palestinian State I Oppose

No Jews Allowed in Palestine

Maybe Truman Should Not Have Recognized Israel

Abbas’s Speech and the Window into Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Recognition Catch Up

Posted on December 17, 2017 by First.One.Through

The United States recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on December 6, 2017 in a move that President Donald Trump said was a “long-overdue step.” Many countries disagreed, and viewed the announcement as premature, claiming that such recognition should be done in conjunction with a broader peace process and mirror whatever the Israelis and Palestinian Authority themselves agree to.

If anything, Trump’s move was very late considering the recognition that had been afforded to the Palestinian Arabs over the previous decade.

Recognition of Palestine

In 1988, the Palestinian Liberation Organization declared its independence. Israel and the western world ignored the declaration of the noted terrorist organization, while fellow Arab and Muslim countries quickly recognized the State of Palestine.

Within a few years of the PLO declaration, the Israelis and Palestinian Arabs signed the Oslo Accords (in 1993 and 1995) which put in motion a peace process, including the creation of a Palestinian Authority (PA). As part of those agreements, both parties agreed that the PA would have limited powers regarding international relations (Article IX), including having no ability to obtain official recognition from other governmental bodies.

“In accordance with the DOP, the Council will not have powers and
responsibilities in the sphere of foreign relations, which sphere includes the
establishment abroad of embassies, consulates or other types of foreign missions and posts or permitting their establishment in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip, the
appointment of or admission of diplomatic and consular staff, and the exercise of
diplomatic functions.”

When the leader of the PA, Yasser Arafat (fungus be upon him) failed to deliver on peace and launched a second intifada in September 2000, the peace process ground to a halt. Any movement by world organizations and governments to provide additional recognition on key issues for the Israelis and PA was put on hold.

Yet the Palestinian Authority under Mahmoud Abbas pushed forward with seeking global recognition, even as he lost control of the Gaza Strip in 2007.

Abbas began with Costa Rica (2008) and Venezuela (2009) before making significant headway with the major countries in South America.

In 2010, Abbas got Brazil and Argentina to recognize Palestine, despite commitments in the Oslo Accords that the PA would not take such steps. The Israeli foreign ministry released a statement that “Recognition of a Palestinian state is a violation of the interim agreement signed by Israel and the Palestinian Authority in 1995, which established that the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip will be discussed and solved through negotiations…. All attempts to bypass negotiations and to unilaterally determine issues in dispute will only harm the trust of the sides and their commitment to agreed upon frameworks for negotiations.”

No matter.

In 2011, other South American countries recognized Palestine including Chile and Uruguay. UNESCO followed suit and admitted the “State of Palestine.” Shortly thereafter, Iceland became the first country in western Europe to recognize Palestine, with borders based on the 1949 Armistice Lines. By the following year, the United Nations began calling the entity the “State of Palestine” in all official documents.

Remarkably, at the end of the third Hamas war on Israel in 2014, Sweden became the second western European country to recognize Palestine.

Recognition of Jerusalem

While Abbas’s PA actively sought recognition of a state since 2008, Israel was fighting three wars from Gaza and a “stabbing intifada.” Israel was not busy lobbying the world to recognize Jerusalem as its capital, but focused on getting the world to stop the Islamic Republic of Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons while it declared its intention of destroying Israel.

While the Palestinian Authority was playing offense, Israel was playing defense.

At this point in time, with over 20 countries and United Nations entities recognizing Palestine over the past decade despite the explicit statements in the Oslo Accords, isn’t it well past time for countries of the world to recognize the capital of Israel?

Alternatively, if countries are truly concerned with the peace process, they can strip their recognition of Palestine, and leave the Israelis and PA to negotiate their peace, including matters related to borders, settlements and Jerusalem, and ultimately embrace the conclusion of the parties. Impartiality demands one or the other.

Jerusalem from the air, facing north