Tag Archives: two states

The Questions For People Chanting “From The River To The Sea…”

Posted on by
2

Some pro-Palestinian protestors have attempted to market their chants for “Free Palestine” as a call for everyone to live in peace, security and dignity. They claim that they harbor no antisemitic feelings and just want a civil society for everyone.

So here are three questions to test their assertion:

  1. Are they in favor of Jews living throughout the land, including eastern Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza? If Arabs can live everywhere “from the river to the the sea”, a call for mutual humanity would demand that Jews have those same rights. Are they in favor of abolishing United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 in a one-state scenario?
  2. Are they in favor of open Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount? Millions of Muslims get to visit the al Aqsa Compound every year but Jewish visitation is limited. Worse, Jews are not allowed to pray at their holiest site, a glaring denial of their basic human rights. Are they in favor of allowing millions of Jews onto the Temple Mount and to openly pray at their holiest site?
  3. Are they in favor of turning the Dome of the Rock into a Jewish Temple? Muslims have a holy shrine on the al Aqsa Compound – the al Aqsa Mosque. In an effort to achieve common dignity and humanity, Jews should build their Third Holy Temple nearly, at the site of the Dome of The Rock which sits on the location of the prior Jewish temples. Are they in favor of a new Jewish Temple on the Jewish Temple Mount?

If people calling to “Free Palestine” support the rights of Jews to live everywhere, to ascend en masse to the Temple Mount and pray openly at a newly built third Jewish Temple, I concede that they are not antisemitic and can join them in their chant. However, if they deny Jews common rights and dignities in the Jewish holy land, they are revealed as Muslim supremacists out to destroy the only Jewish State.

Related articles:

Stop Calling Them “Pro-Palestinian Protests” (April 2024)

Pros And Cons Of Muslims Considering Jewish Holy Sites As Sacred Also (April 2022)

The Palestinian State I Oppose (April 2018)

Dignity for Israel: Jewish Prayer on the Temple Mount (May 2017)

The Parameters of Palestinian Dignity (August 2016)

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount (October 2015)

Joint Prayer: The Cave of the Patriarchs and the Temple Mount (November 2014)

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land (November 2014)

The Farce Of Unities: Palestinian Government And Palestinian Territory As A Pathway Towards Peace With Israel

Posted on by
1

On January 29, 2021, the United Nations General Assembly published document A/75/729 which provided an update about Al Qaeda and ISIS, seemingly the only groups which the world agrees are terrorist groups. It contained a section called “Increasing support for the victims of terrorism,” which noted the importance of “healing” for victims and the need to be sensitive to events which might be “triggering or adding to their trauma.“

It was an interesting document for the UN, as two weeks earlier on January 16, 2021, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres welcomed the news that the Palestinians would be holding elections, which he said would give “renewed legitimacy to national institutions, including a democratically elected Parliament and Government in Palestine.” It is baffling and alarming that the head of the United Nations would want to give “legitimacy” to an election which included the deeply anti-Semitic terrorist group, Hamas.

Guterres added that the election would “contribute to restarting a process towards a negotiated two-State solution based on the pre-1967 lines, and in accordance with relevant UN resolutions, bilateral agreements and international law.” Perhaps he never read Hamas’ foundational charter which is vociferously opposed to the basic existence of Israel and a peace process, “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time.” (Article 13)

Now, three years after the leader of the United Nations called for Hamas to be part of the Palestinian political process while also calling for support for terrorist victims’ trauma, we are witnessing countries calls for Palestinian unity in the aftermath of the Palestinian armies of Hamas and PIJ butchering 1,200 innocent Israelis.

Last week, Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh resigned from office in light of the current war saying “I see that the next stage and its challenges require new governmental and political arrangements that take into account the new reality in Gaza and the need for a Palestinian-Palestinian consensus based on Palestinian unity and the extension of unity of authority over the land of Palestine.“

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov welcomed the move towards Palestinian unity offering “Jesus Christ was born in Palestine. One of his sayings is: ‘A house divided against itself will not stand.’ Christ is honoured by both Muslims and Christians. I think that quote reflects the challenge of restoring Palestinian unity.” Leave aside that Jesus was a Jew and born in the land of Israel, the gist of Lavrov’s desires are understood.

United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken echoed a call for Palestinian rule over both the West Bank and Gaza while being unclear whether he supported a unified Palestinian government as he has denounced Hamas’s rule in Gaza. He shared in November 2023, “we need to see and get to, in effect, unity of governance when it comes to Gaza and the West Bank, and ultimately to a Palestinian state.”

Senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad speaks in an interview with Lebanese channel LBC on October 24, 2023 calling for more butchering of Israelis. (Screenshot: X; used in accordance with Clause 27a of the Copyright Law)

A Palestinian government that is peaceful and demilitarized which governs all Palestinian territory can theoretically make peace with Israel, however, the majority of Palestinian Arabs approve of Hamas and its aims of destroying Israel and ethnically cleansing the land of Jews. Therefore, one can either have a “legitimate” Palestinian government which speaks for local Arabs which is at war with Israel, or an illegitimate Palestinian government which does not truly represent Palestinian Arabs making a peace agreement with Israel.

The United States seems to be pushing for the latter – a peace agreement over enduring peace – hoping that Israelis will ignore the leadership farce and that the Palestinian street will grow to accept the Jewish State over time.

Coupled with such approach, the United States will be demanding that the Israeli victims of terror and the entire country, ignore their profound trauma.

Related articles:

The IDF In Jews’ Trauma of Past and Future and Palestinians’ Trauma of Present

A National Mall Between Shiva And Hope (November 2023)

The Scale And Barbarity Of The Hamas Massacre (October 2023)

“Deformity in Palestinian Culture” Is A Permanent Feature (August 2023)

UN Lies About Palestinians Favoring Two States (December 2022)

Palestinian Terrorist Groups (July 2021)

The Shrapnel of Intent (January 2019)

The Left-Wing’s Two State Solution: 1.5 States for Arabs, 0.5 for Jews (January 2016)

Related video:

Abbas Demands R-E-S-P-E-C-T (Music by Aretha Franklin)

Israel Provokes The Palestinians (Music by The Clash)

Israel and Hamas Trade Shots (Music by Pat Benatar)

After UNRWA

Posted on by
17

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.

Related articles:

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)

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

Posted on by
20

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.

Related articles:

UN Lies About Palestinians Favoring Two States

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”

Blinken Preps Netanyahu And Abbas For UN

Posted on by
2

The United Nations General Assembly is getting ready to welcome foreign leaders this month. In advance of the New York gathering, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President(-for Life) Mahmoud Abbas yesterday.

Blinken’s call to Netanyahu revolved around four principle elements: working together on “bilateral partnerships”; commitment to Israel’s security including dealing with Iran; integration into the region; and advancing a productive future with Palestinians. The call to Abbas focused on: “ongoing violence” in the region; quality of life for Palestinians; and a commitment for a “two-state solution.”

To Israel, Blinken mentioned a peaceful coexistence with Palestinians but he didn’t even mention the word “Israel” to the PA leader as he focused only Palestinians’ desire for a good quality of life. In addressing the Israeli leader, Blinken mentioned America’s commitment to Israel’s security but to the Palestinians, the Secretary of State simply mentioned concern about the violence without addressing who was committing and instigating the attacks and the U.S.’s determination to stand opposed to terror.

The official Palestinian news agency, Wafa covered the Blinken call and discussed what Abbas discussed on the call:

“President Mahmoud Abbas stressed, during the call, that what the Israeli occupation authorities and their forces and settlers who practice terrorism are doing contributes to undermining the two-state solution and destroys all chances of achieving peace, calling on the US administration to accept the State of Palestine’s endeavor to obtain full membership in the UN by a Security Council decision, and to end all sanctions imposed on the Palestinians due to US laws, and build normal relations between the US administration and the State of Palestine, including reopening the US consulate in Jerusalem and an office for Palestine in Washington, and restoring the direct aid program.

“On the other hand, President Abbas stressed the need to oblige the Israeli occupation authorities to stop all their aggressive practices and unilateral Israeli actions, adhere to the signed agreements, and focus on the political horizon.

“President Abbas stressed that the State of Palestine will continue its efforts at the UN level in order to obtain full membership in the UN, and implement the resolutions of international legitimacy and the Arab Peace Initiative, by ending the Israeli occupation of the State of Palestine, with its capital, East Jerusalem, on the 1967 borders.”

While Abbas ranted about Israeli “terrorism’, Blinken seemingly opted to not mention the U.S.’s commitment to Israel’s security, and didn’t even mention “Israel” on the official call notes. Abbas told Blinken that he wanted Palestine to have full UN membership and the opening of political offices for the PA in the U.S., and Blinken avoided the topic and focused on Palestinians rather than the PA.

It is safe to assume that the United Nations General Assembly will continue to be a spectacle of disappointment as a parade of dictators and anti-Semites are given a global platform. Any real peace may be achieved in bilateral meetings held in restaurants and apartments away from the microphones.

Related articles:

Imagine You Were Abbas, Giving A Speech To The United Nations

UN Lies About Palestinians Favoring Two States

Enduring Peace Requires Unity AND Tolerance

The United Nations Narrows Its Focus on Certain Hatreds

To Serve Jews, United Nations Style

The United Nations Must Take Its Own Medicine Re the Palestinian Authority

Letter to Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) On Conditioning Aid To Israel

Posted on by
11

Dear Senator,

I have read with alarm that you are considering making aid to Israel “conditional,” something no American president has ever done, including President Biden. The reasons for doing so are abundant, and have never been more obvious.

Sen. Chris Murphy (photo: REUTERS/Joshua Roberts.)

Security

Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. This leading state sponsor of terrorism is on the very cusp of nuclear weapons capability, a fact very well known to you and the United States government which has been alternatively attempting to stop the terrorist regime from gaining weapons of mass destruction, and paving the way to a legal complete manufacturing infrastructure. 

Lebanon. One of Iran’s terrorist arms is Hezbollah, just north of Israel in Lebanon. The terrorist group is overseeing a country in the middle of a complete freefall, with its currency collapsing by over 90% since the beginning of they year. The Lebanese are becoming extremely anxious, with a populace now ranked as the second most unhappy country in the world, just ahead of Afghanistan. The terrorists of Hezbollah have an estimated 150,000 missiles and mortars targeting Israel, and there is no better way to distract the angry Lebanese than to start a war against the Jewish State.

Syria. Another leading state sponsor of terrorism is still led by a mass murderer who has killed hundreds of thousands of his own citizens. The country remains in an official state of war with Israel, as it has been since the reestablishment of the Jewish State. While Israel was effective at stopping Syria from building a nuclear weapons compound which the Islamic state was doing with the help of North Korea (yet another state sponsor of terrorism), Syria continues to get supplied with arms and intelligence from Iran and Russia.

West Bank Palestinian Arabs. The Arabs in the West Bank have never been more blood-thirsty than they are at present. According to a December 2022 Palestinian poll, 46% support killing Jewish civilians inside of Israel (Gazans’ support was yet higher at 57%). Several new terrorist groups have recently emerged in the West Bank including the Lion’s Den and Jenin Battalion which have a 70% approval rating according to a March 2023 Palestinian poll, with the groups shooting and planning attacks against Israelis. A similarly frightening high percentage of Palestinians support the point blank shooting of two Jewish brothers who drove into an Arab town a few weeks ago.

Gazans. The political-terrorist group Hamas, continues to rule Gaza. The group is committed to never making peace with Israel and was elected to a significant majority of the Palestinian parliament with the most anti-Semitic charter ever written. If new presidential elections were held, Hamas would win according to the March 2023 poll (52% for Hamas’ Ismail Haniyeh to 36% for Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas), and assume control of the Palestinian Authority to rule both the West Bank and Gaza.

The idea of making aid to Israel conditional in such backdrop is not only dangerous in hurting Israel’s military readiness, but serves as an invitation to the Jewish State’s hostile neighbors that it is standing alone and vulnerable.

Palestinian Thoughts on the “Peace Process”

And for what? Why subject Israel to the evil forces that seek its destruction? Are the radical jihadist values listed above closer aligned to the United States?

You mentioned that Israel is not actively engaged in pursuing a two state solution. Have you looked at the facts and polls related to Palestinians?

According to the March 2023 PCPRS poll, “support for the concept of the two-state solution stands at 27% and opposition stands at 71%.” Three times as many Palestinian oppose a two-state solution as support it.

Their preference is violence. The same poll found that “58% supported return to armed confrontations and intifada,” and 77% want Abbas to resign. The Palestinians are not interested in peace or negotiations led by a corrupt and inept leader, but want to go to war with Israel.

Exactly how is Israel supposed to push forward two states with such Palestinian counterparty? Israel has shown its readiness to make peace with many Arab countries willing to engage, and has put forward numerous solutions through the decades to the Palestinian Arabs. The current situation offers no opportunity for fruitful negotiations.

Jewish Homes East of The 1949 Armistice Lines (E49AL)

Senator, you seem to believe that the presence of Jews obliterates the chance for a two state solution. On February 15, 2023 you said “The Israeli government’s move to advance nearly 10,000 new settlement homes and legalize nine outposts in the West Bank is deeply concerning. Unilateral decisions like these make a negotiated two-state future more and more difficult to achieve and undercut prospects for a just and lasting peace with the Palestinians.” A couple of weeks later you doubled down and said “I worry that we are at a moment in which we are watching a future Palestinian state be obliterated by the pace of settlements, by the legalization of outposts.”

If Israel is thriving with over 20% of its population coming from non-Jews including Arabs and Druze, and the United Nations continues to demand that Israel accept millions of additional Arabs into the country, why are 10,000 new homes for Jews an obstacle for a “lasting peace with the Palestinians”? Is it because the Palestinians want an ethnically-cleansed, pure Arab country devoid of Jews? If that is their goal, how can anyone believe that there will ever be peace with people who hold such noxious anti-Semitic views?

Senator, your comments would simply be viewed as irresponsible if they were uttered from the mouths of radical members of the House of Representatives. Coming from a senator who sits on the foreign affairs committee is a dangerous invitation for brutal violent dictators and terrorist groups to wage war on the Jewish State.

Conditioning aid to Israel to pressure the Jewish State to bend to the will of anti-Semitic Arabs is not the mark of a “pragmatic progressive.” It is a product of a delusional mindset chasing a fantasy that Palestinians do not want (in regards to two states) and Israelis cannot risk.

Sincerely,

Members of First One Through

CONTACT Sen. Christopher Murphy (D-CT)

Other member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ)
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD)
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)
Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-DE)
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
Sen. Cory A. Booker (D-NJ)
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI)
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)
Sen. James Risch (R-ID)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT)
Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Sen. Todd Young (R-IN)
Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-TN)
Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC)

Related articles:

The Israeli-Arab Conflict Is About The Presence of Jews, Not the “1967 Borders”

UN Lies About Palestinians Favoring Two States

Israel: Security in a Small Country

On Defenses: Provocative and Legal / Unprovocative and Illegal

The Green Line

Palestinian Arabs Do Not Want Negotiations or a Two State Solution

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

The Israeli-Arab Conflict Is About The Presence of Jews, Not the “1967 Borders”

Posted on by
16

The Arab-Israeli conflict gets so much ink and analysis because the region is always in flux.

Yet some things remain constant.

The Israelis and Palestinian Arabs poll themselves frequently about sentiments on a variety of topics. Occasionally, they conduct joint polls as occurred on January 24, 2023. The Palestinian Center of Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) and Tel Aviv University’s International MA Program in Conflict Resolution and Mediation (Israeli Pulse) issued their report as Palestinians and Israelis engaged in a series of attacks. The joint poll is another tool to assess how Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs and Palestinian Arabs (there are no Palestinian Jews anymore, as Palestinians exclude Jews from the definition) consider different aspects of living together, and how trends in such attitudes change.

In many ways, the groups agree on much: only about one-third of Israelis and Palestinians supports a two-state solution, a percentage that has continued to decline since 2016. About 85% of both Israelis and Arabs do not trust each other, and 84% of each considers themselves the victim in the conflict. About 60% of each group fears for their safety, roughly 93% of each group believes that they are the rightful owners to all of the land, and about 70% of each thinks the conflict is a zero-sum relationship, in that what’s good for one side is bad for the other.

The areas with some gap in sentiments includes engaging in an all-out war, with an estimated 40% of Palestinians and 26% of Israelis in favor, and roughly one-third of Israeli Jews willing to share the land with Palestinians but only 7% of Palestinians willing to share any land with Jews.

That last figure – only about one in fourteen Palestinians Arabs are in favor of sharing any of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea – is frightening and should be read in the context of another question in the joint poll.

“When did the conflict begin?”

To read the news and consider the ideas floated to bring peace to the region, one would imagine that the respondents would answer “the 1967 Six Day War,” to the question when the conflict originated, as that is when “occupation” began and those are the contours proposed in the Saudi Peace Plan. Yet only 8% of Palestinian Arabs and 5% of Israeli Jews believe that is the beginning of the conflict.

A majority of both Palestinians and Israeli Jews (60% and 52%, respectively) believe that the conflict began with the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and the Zionist immigration wave. It is the increased presence of Jews in the region – with international support – that is the core of the conflict, and why only 7% of Palestinians would consider sharing any of the land with the Jewish “colonialists.”

Only Israeli Arabs don’t hold this position, as they believe the conflict began with Israel’s declaration of independence, which makes sense as that is when their reality began. Similarly, they are the group most likely to promote good relations between Jews and Arabs (70%), followed by Israeli Jews (56%). Almost no Palestinians want to promote good relations (22%), as it has been blacklisted under the banner of “normalization.”

Palestinians do not believe that the Arab-Israeli conflict is about land or religion. They believe it is about the physical presence of Jews in the land they view as singularly theirs. Until the world focuses on changing this jaundiced Palestinian viewpoint, there is no hope for a peaceful resolution.

Related articles:

UN Lies About Palestinians Favoring Two States

The Debate About Two States is Between Arabs Themselves and Jews Themselves

Settlements For Peace

Posted on by
4

The Biden Administration publicly admonished Israel for approving the construction of more Jewish homes in Area C of the West Bank. State Department spokesperson Ned Price said “We [the Biden Administration] strongly oppose the expansion of settlements… damages the prospects for a two state solution.” The homes are to be built in Revava, Kedumim, Elon Moreh, Har Bracha, Karnei Shomron, Gush Etzion and the Hebron Hills, towns strongly supported by Christian communities in the United States and around the world.

While broadly supported by religious Christians and Jews, the Biden Administration and the European Union attacked the plans for 1,300 Jewish homes, even as they ignored Israel’s approval of over 1,000 homes for Palestinian Arabs in the Israeli territory of Area C, where roughly 14% of West Bank Arabs live.

The rebuke stands in contrast to the reality that Israel has managed to exist with a minority population of 25% non-Jews. A future Palestinian state could similarly exist with several hundred thousand Jews, and the economy of such a state would benefit from Jewish residents bringing stability and trade with Israel.

The true obstacle for an enduring peace – and a two state solution – is the Arab belief that Jews have no rights to live anywhere in the land. Such mindset has guided the Palestinian Authority to have a law calling for either a death sentence or life of hard labor for any Arab selling land to a Jew. It brings the PA to prioritize payments to terrorists who kill Jews over-and-above any other public service. It drives the political-terrorist group HAMAS which runs Gaza, to spend its finite resources on building and firing missiles into Israel rather than building a productive society and economy.

Guided by such anti-Semitic worldview, Palestinians believe that terrorism drove Israel out of Gaza and Areas A and B in the West Bank and will ultimately drive the Jews from Area C and Israel completely. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called all of Israel a “painful settlement” and is ready to be rid of it entirely.

This must stop.

The pathway to an enduring peace is not to forcibly evict half a million Jews from Area C, but to shatter the false idol of a Jew-free state. It is time for the world to tell the Palestinians that Jews will not leave the West Bank nor eastern Jerusalem. The same way that there are Israeli Arabs, there will be Palestinian Jews.

For too long people have embraced the timeless anti-Semitic tradition that Jews should be banned from living somewhere. Denying the human rights of Jews will never bring peace.

It is time to recognize that the road to a peaceful two state solution will be built with the efforts of those Jews living, working and building the West Bank.

Related First One Through articles:

Considering Israel’s Model for Arabs Applied to Jews in a Palestinian State

Considering Carter’s 1978 Letter Claiming Settlements Are Illegal

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

“Which Most of the World Considers Illegal…”

Anti-“Settlements” is Anti-Semitism

The Legal Israeli Settlements

The Jordan Valley in 1930 and 2020

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

American Leaders Always Planned on Israel Absorbing Much of the West Bank

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

The Debate About Two States is Between Arabs Themselves and Jews Themselves

Posted on by
7

The common refrain surrounding the Arab-Israeli Conflict is that the Israelis and Arabs need to find a compromise solution that will work for both parties. People on the left believe that Israel, as the entity which is much stronger than the Palestinian Authority, must make the majority of that compromise. For those on the right, Israel is the smaller party that has always been under attack by the surrounding Arab and Muslim world, and therefore will demand that Arabs must make significant concessions.

This viewpoint is valid in concept, but lacks any nuance to capture the situation as it exists today. In reality, it is the Palestinian Arabs themselves and the Israelis themselves who are torn on the path towards an enduring peace. Until each party can arrive at a consensus internally, the only bridge with consensus regarding a two state solution is found between the Palestinian Authority leadership and far left progressive Jews; a failed partnership, as the PA is despised by the Arab masses and fellow Jews in Israel and the diaspora consider the progressives a dangerous fringe group, as discussed below.

The Arabs

The Palestinian Arabs have three distinct viewpoints regarding the conflict, and a fourth approach among Israelis Arabs who share some commonality with Jews.

  1. Hamas. Hamas has no interest in a two-state solution as they believe that Israel has no right to exist. While it may make some short-term accommodations related to a cease-fire or an interim acceptance for a two-state solution, the concept of an enduring peace between two countries is abhorrent to Hamas and all of its supporters.
  2. The Palestinian Authority. The PA is a corrupt and inept kleptocracy which seeks a two-state solution to empower and enrich themselves. It has stated it will make the great “compromise” of not demanding the entirety of Israel as part of its state and “very reasonably” demand that its country be stripped of any Jews while refusing to accept Israel as a Jewish State. From such perch, the PA flies around the world with honor, pomp and circumstance while fattening their bellies as foreign nations pour money into the wallets of its leadership.
  3. The Palestinians. The Palestinian Arabs have no interest in a two-state solution according to their own polls, even if they get everything which the PA demands. They are fed up with everybody – the PA, Hamas, the Israelis and the Arab world which has forgotten about them. They view any and every deal with deep distrust.

This is not very promising. The only Palestinians who want the two-state solution today is a leadership which has no legitimacy as it is ten years past its stated term limit, and the majority of Palestinians want the acting leadership to resign.

A softer position in the Arab world which is closer to the Jewish positions on two states is held by Israeli Arabs.

Israeli Arabs. The Israeli Arabs are eager for a two state solution which looks very different than what the PA has proposed. They want NO RETURN of any Palestinian refugees into Israel. They want Israel to be recognized as the nation state of the Jewish people. They demand institutions that are transparent and devoid of any fraud – all desires which the PA will not accept.


Arabs in the Old City of Jerusalem
(photo: First.One.Through)

The wide range of opinions regarding a two state-solution is not limited to Arabs, as Jews also have their own spectrum of ideas.

The Jews

  1. The Far Right. Israel has a number of political parties including Yisrael Beiteinu, United Right (each with 5 seats in the new Knesset), Zehut and the New Right (which got zero seats in the 2019 election) who support annexing Judea and Samaria/ the area east of the Green Line (EGL) commonly called the “West Bank.” The extent of Palestinian “sovereignty” would be limited to Gaza which will be denied any standing army, and essential be an entity with autonomy but will likely need to be a territory of either Egypt, Jordan or Qatar. Israel would likely never permit it to be aligned with Turkey.
  2. The Right. Is represented by the majority Likud party and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It is in favor of annexing blocs of the West Bank such as the Gush Etzion area and Maale Adumim, but would give the Palestinian Authority large sections of the West Bank where the majority of Palestinian Arabs live including Areas A and B and parts of Area C. There would be no admittance of any Stateless Arabs from Palestine (SAPs). Good news is that the Israelis just held elections so there is clarity that this is the majority consensus view.
  3. The Left.The left is represented by the Blue and White party which came in second in the Israel elections. They would allow as many as 100,000 SAPs into Israel as part of a peace deal and give virtually the entirety of the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem to the PA. A bit further to the left in Israel are the Labor and Meretz parties in Israel (6 and 4 seats, respectively) and in the diaspora in groups like J Street and the Israel Policy Forum who oppose the notion of Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish people.
  4. The Far Left. Believes that Israel should cease to exist as a Jewish State. They advocate for folding all of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza into a bi-national state with no special rights or privileges for Jews. Essentially the Hamas platform, without the murder of Jews, but with all of the demonization. There is virtually no one in Israel with such views, but is in vocal extremist diaspora organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace, the New Israel Fund and Code Pink.

Lining up the groups against each other reveals interesting bedfellows between Arabs and Jews:

  • Hamas <> JVP/ Code Pink
  • the PA <> Labor/ J Street
  • Israeli Arabs <> Likud/ Republican Jewish Coalition
  • some Israeli Arabs <> Yisrael Beiteinu/ the New Right
  • The Palestinians <> everyone who has given up hope for any solution

Hamas, JVP, Code Pink, Students for Justice in Palestine and similar groups have tried to gain legitimacy in the public sphere. Former US President Jimmy Carter blessed Hamas despite its vile antisemitic charter and the United Nations has sought to fold it into the Palestinian Authority. Groups like SJP are getting awards on college campuses like New York University. These are hate groups and should be condemned and boycotted by everyone who wants to see an enduring peace in the Middle East. They will never be accepted by any Israeli administration forging a peace settlement, and will only make Israelis move further rightward.

J Street and progressives around the world have been reaching out to the PA as the best chance for peace. However, the PA is despised and disrespected by Palestinians. Until there are legitimate Palestinian elections, reaching out to the PA is a fool’s errand. Most Jews and conservatives see through the chimera and think J Street’s moves to weaken Israel and go against the Israeli government by advancing condemnations at the United Nations and promoting a deeply flawed Iranian nuclear deal are dangerous and divisive. The liberal media mostly follows this narrative and will promote the PA as “moderate” which is counter-factual and J Street as “mainstream” which is liberal wishful thinking. However, if they can tack towards the center instead of continuing to lurch leftward, perhaps they can be part of forging an enduring solution instead of today’s alt-left miasma.

For their part, Israeli Arabs and Likud consider the past decade a tremendous success. While the neighboring region had wars killing nearly a million people in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and other countries; with millions of war refugees scattered around the world; military coups taking over Egypt and almost Turkey; and heads of state chopped off in Libya, Israel was relatively calm. When the financial markets took the western world into an abyss, Israel emerged unscathed and its economy boomed. Riding the status quo has worked, and selectively extending that secret sauce with more global partnerships and annexing blocs of the West Bank are logical next steps.

However, the masses are unhappy. The lack of self-determination for the SAPs is not in anyone’s interest and everyone should want to see a resolution to their status. But with no consensus between the Arabs themselves and Israelis themselves, there is little hope for an enduring peace anytime soon.

It may therefore be time for some Israeli Arabs to assume a leadership role in the negotiations to help both the Arabs and Jews each reach a centrist consensus among themselves, and then ultimately with each other.


Israeli Arab women entering the Western Wall Plaza
(Photo: FirstOneThrough)

Related First.One.Through articles:

The Israeli Peace Process versus the Palestinian Divorce Proceedings

“Peace” According to Palestinian “Moderates”

The Only Precondition for MidEast Peace Talks

The Time Factor in the Israeli-Arab Conflict

The Hebron Narratives: Is it the Presence of Jews or the Israeli Military

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

 

 

Nikki Haley Will Not Equivocate on the Ecosystem of Violence

Posted on by
7

The new United States ambassador to the United Nations was unimpressed with her first monthly meeting of the UN Security Council. Nikki Haley addressed the press and called out the blinding anti-Israel hatred at the United Nations. She clearly stated that the US would stand up against the distortions of reality peddled repeatedly at the global body.

Some of her remarks were not new compared to Obama’s UN ambassador Samantha Power, who also lamented the anti-Israel bias of the UN. Like Haley, Power also stated that any peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinian Arabs would need to be negotiated directly between the parties and not forced on them by external forces.

But there was a clear break from the Obama administration, specifically as it related to Israeli “settlements” east of the 1949 Green Line (EGL).

Settlements

The Obama administration believed that no Jews should be allowed to live in EGL. As such, it allowed a damning UN Resolution, UN Res 2334, to pass the UN Security Council which labeled such settlements as illegal. Haley was horrified. She stated:

“We will never repeat the terrible mistake of Resolution 2334 and allow one-sided Security Council resolutions to condemn Israel. Instead, we will push for action on the real threats we face in the Middle East.”

Haley said that the UNSC has failed its mission. “The Security Council is supposed to discuss how to maintain international peace and security.” Under her watch, she would aim to refocus the group on the ecosystem of violence in the Middle East which includes:

  • “Hizballah’s illegal build-up of rockets;”
  • on the “money and weapons Iran provides to terrorists;”
  • and holding “Bashar al-Assad accountable for the slaughter of hundreds and thousands of civilians.”

Haley wants the UN Security Council to focus on how “we defeat ISIS,” not on Jewish families buying and moving into apartments in the eastern half of Jerusalem.

This is a sharp departure in approach from the Obama administration.

haley
US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley at her first press conference
February 16, 2017

Even when Obama’s team at the United Nations condemned Palestinian Arab terrorism, it equivocated by discussing Jewish homes in the same statement. Just look at the statement one month ago about the condemnation of the January 8 terrorism against Israelis. Ambassador Michele J. Sison said:

“Let me begin by reiterating, in the strongest possible terms, the United States’ condemnation of the horrific vehicular attack on January 8 by a terrorist in Jerusalem. We extend our deepest condolences to the families of the four Israeli soldiers who were killed, including U.S. citizen Erez Orbach, and we hope for a full and fast recovery of those injured. The United States and the Security Council both issued statements condemning the attack. There is absolutely no justification for such brutal and senseless attacks. … We have repeatedly and emphatically stressed to the Palestinians that all incitement to violence must stop and that all acts of terror must be condemned. Our position regarding settlement activity has also been clear.”

How did a condemnation of violence (note that the terrorist was not labeled “Palestinian”) get combined with condemnation of Jewish homes? Because of Obama’s symmetry of Palestinian violence and Jewish presence. It was not just cause-and-effect for the Obama administration; it was the equivalence of evil.

The Obama administration wanted to put Palestinian violence in context. It was not naked aggression against innocents as the Middle East witnessed in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, but simply part of an ongoing dispute about land.

As further evidence, consider Ambassador Sison’s comments about a two-state solution on December 16, 2016:

“The United States remains committed to achieving a lasting resolution to the conflict, and we will continue to work to advance the interest we all share in bringing about a lasting peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. We remain in close consultation with the parties and key stakeholders to try to move things in a more positive direction.

We continue to call on all sides to demonstrate with actions and policies a genuine commitment to the two-state solution that will enable a resumption of meaningful negotiations in the future.

This administration has consistently opposed every effort to delegitimize Israel or undermine its security, including at the United Nations, and we will continue to oppose any resolutions that would seek to do so.

As you know, we are very concerned about the situation on the ground and believe that current trends are moving in the wrong direction. This includes our serious concerns about continued settlement activity. Make no mistake – the United States views settlements as illegitimate and counterproductive to the cause of peace.

In his recent remarks at the Saban Forum, Secretary Kerry made clear that Israel now faces a choice between continued settlement activity and a two-state solution in the future. As he said, while we do not believe that settlements are the root cause of the conflict, they are clearly a barrier to achieving a two-state solution.

The number of settlers in the West Bank has climbed from 110,000 at the time of the Oslo accords in 1993 to nearly 400,000 today. We are deeply disturbed by Israel’s moving forward on the unprecedented legalization under Israeli law of outposts deep in the West Bank. We believe the potential legalization of thousands of settlement housing units that are currently illegal under Israeli law would profoundly damage prospects for a two-state solution.

We are further troubled when ministers in the Israeli government say publicly that there will be no Palestinian state.

Terrorism, incitement to violence, glorification of terrorists, and other violent acts also profoundly threaten efforts to advance peace. We continue to stress to the Palestinian leadership the importance of strongly opposing violence in all forms. We continue to make clear that the terrorism and incitement to violence must end, such acts run contrary to efforts to preserve prospects for peace.

We strongly condemn terrorist acts and other violence against Israelis and Palestinians. There is absolutely no justification for such acts.

We are also deeply concerned about reports of excessive use of force by Israeli security forces against Palestinian civilians. Authorities should conduct timely and transparent investigations into these incidents, and ensure that appropriate measures, including prosecution when warranted, are taken to follow through on the findings.”

This went beyond equivocation. Team Obama laid most of the blame for a stalemate of peace negotiation on Jews living in EGL. There was only a single statement against Palestinian Arab violence and the PA leadership’s support of the violence. The problem principally stemmed from Jewish homes and violence and excessive force against Palestinians.

Ambassador Samantha Power used the same formulation time-and-again. On July 12, 2016, Power said:

“Let me begin with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We share the Secretary-General’s serious concern about the situation on the ground, especially the violence against innocent civilians. There is absolutely no justification for terrorism or for the taking of innocent lives. That is why we condemn in the strongest terms the unconscionable terrorist attack last week in the West Bank, where a 13-year-old girl, Hallel Ariel, was stabbed to death in her own home as she slept.

In recent months, there’s been a steady stream of violence on both sides of the conflict. On June 21, as we heard, a 15-year-old Palestinian boy, Mahmoud Badran, was killed when returning home from a night out at a water park in the West Bank, in what the Israeli army said was an accidental shooting. Shortly thereafter, clashes broke out at Haram Al-Sharif/Temple Mount during Ramadan. We offer our most sincere condolences to the families of Hallel and Mahmoud and all victims of senseless acts of violence.

Israel just announced the advancement of hundreds of settlement units in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. If implemented, this would be the latest step in what seems to be a systematic process of land seizures, settlement expansions, and legalizations of outposts that is fundamentally undermining the prospects for a two-state solution.”

A deliberate act of Palestinian Arab terrorism became morphed into an accidental killing of an Arab boy. And then somehow Jewish homes get thrown into the discussion.

Further, how did a phrase “absolutely no justification” get repeated for Palestinian violence? Why was it constantly sandwiched between condemnation of violence and settlements? Either Palestinian violence and Israeli settlements have nothing to do with each other (no cause-and-effect, just both equally bad), or they very much are connected, and the Obama administration really believes that there IS a justification for murdering Jews.

In such a mindset of distortions, it was not surprising that the Obama administration allowed UNSC Resolution 2334 to pass

It is still very early, but the words of the US Ambassador Haley at her first press conference were encouraging. As she clearly stated:

“The prejudiced approach to Israeli-Palestinian issues does the peace process no favors. And it bears no relationship to the reality of the world around us.”

#AlternativeFacts have been present for many years at the United Nations, including from the mouths of US officials. Maybe Haley’s new focus on hatred and violence will lead to a more peaceful world.

Related First.One.Through articles:

The Palestinians aren’t “Resorting to Violence”; They are Murdering and Waging War

The Obama Administration Continues to Abandon Israel in Fighting Terror

Ban Ki Moon Understands Why People Kill Israelis

The Cancer in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

The UN Fails on its Own Measures to address the Conditions Conducive to the Spread of Terrorism

The US State Department Does Not Want Israel to Fight Terrorism

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through  Israel Analysis