How the US and UN can Restart Relations with Israel

Posted on December 23, 2016 by First.One.Through

On December 23, 2016, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution condemning Israeli settlements east of the Green Line as “illegal” and called for the removal of all of them, including those in Jerusalem. It passed because the US decided to abstain, rather than veto such resolutions as it typically does.

There is a pathway to right this wrong, as a new US administration and head of the United Nations will soon take over.

On December 12, 2016, former Prime Minister of Portugal Antonio Guterres was sworn in as the new United Nations Secretary General, and on December 19, Republican Donald Trump secured the electoral college to become the next president of the United States. Both men can restart positive relations with the State of Israel. The recommendations listed below are just a few positive actions that can promote peace in the Middle East.

Positive Actions for the United States

President Barack Obama had a very rocky relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It was not simply a matter of personal chemistry; Obama took various steps to create significant “daylight” between the US and Israel. Trump can fix those Obama missteps.

1. Recommit to the 2004 Bush Letter.

On April 14, 2004, US President George W Bush wrote a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, giving Israel assurances of US support in conjunction with Sharon’s planned withdrawal of Israeli presence from Gaza. The language in the letter had bipartisan support, and the 2008 Democratic Platform used key clauses from the letter as its official policy regarding Israel.

However, Obama opted to ignore the letter and all of the US commitments. He gutted key components of US assurances, and had the 2012 Democratic platform remove all of the Israeli-oriented positions completely.

Those commitments from President Bush included:

“United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan.”

“Palestinians must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel. The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure.”

“Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister.”

“The United States reiterates its steadfast commitment to Israel’s security, including secure, defensible borders, and to preserve and strengthen Israel’s capability to deter and defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats.”

“Israel will retain its right to defend itself against terrorism, including to take actions against terrorist organizations.”

“The United States will lead efforts, working together with Jordan, Egypt, and others in the international community, to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat that would have to be addressed by any other means.”

“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.”

“In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.”

“the barrier being erected by Israel should be a security rather than political barrier, should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues including final borders”

“the United States supports the establishment of a Palestinian state that is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent”

“the United States believes that all states in the region have special responsibilities: to support the building of the institutions of a Palestinian state; to fight terrorism, and cut off all forms of assistance to individuals and groups engaged in terrorism; and to begin now to move toward more normal relations with the State of Israel.”

The Trump administration should recommit to these principles that were abandoned under Obama.

2. Clearly Define that the Obstacle to Peace is anti-normalization, not settlements.

The goal of two-states living in peace starts with the desire to live in peace, not the desire for two states. A Palestinian Authority leadership that incites violence cannot be rewarded with a state. Parties that engage in BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) of Israel or Israeli territories are anti-Semitic and work against a two state solution.

Obama inverted this formulation, and pushed for two states before pushing for peace. He fought Israeli settlements, including asking Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to freeze settlements in 2009, shortly after assuming office. No movement was made by the Palestinian Authority to advance peace. No matter, Obama took a parting shot at Israel by allowing the UN Security Council resolution labeling the settlements as illegal, as if that would advance peace.

Trump should focus on stopping the Arab incitement to violence and glorification of murderers. Penalties should be assessed including withholding US financial assistance and meeting with American leaders should the Palestinian Authority not reform.

3. Terror must be stopped and fought completely.

As the world has started to confront terror in recent years, much the way Israel has since being reestablished, it has fought the terrorism with absolute clarity and global support. Not so for Israel.

Obama asked Israel to confront terrorism with “reasonableness and restraint,” something that the US hasn’t done in its ongoing war against terrorism since September 11, 2001.

Donald Trump should give Israel the same complete support in combatting evil, as every other country in the world is offered when it confronts terrorism.

4. Recognize Anti-Semitism

For a reason only known to him, President Obama was loathe to call out anti-Semitism.

When Islamic terrorists killed people in Paris, France, including in a kosher supermarket, Obama called that attack “random,” and his administration twisted itself to refrain from stating the obvious – that the killers went to kill Jews.

When Obama gave his final State of the Union address, he once again decided to call out “Islamophobia” in the United States, as he did often in his presidency. He did this even though an average Jew is two times more likely to be targeted by hate crimes than an average Muslim. But there was no mention of anti-Semitism.

The Jewish State is not oblivious to the treatment of Jews in America and France, home to the largest concentration of Jews outside of Israel. By recognizing anti-Semitism with a fraction of the concern that Obama showed for Islamophobia, would be a very positive step for US-Israel relations.

Donald Trump addressing the Republican Jewish Coalition, December 2015
(photo: FirstOneThrough)

5. Clarity: Settlements are not illegal; no Hamas in a Palestinian Unity Government

In taking the four actions noted above, the United States government will once again underscore its long-held bipartisan approaches to Israel. Repeating the assurance that Israel must have “defensible borders” that will not “return to the Armistice lines of 1949,” recognizes that many Israeli settlements over the Green Line will be incorporated into Israel. This is a sharp reversal from the anti-Semitic comments of the Obama administration that felt that any Jew living over the Green Line – even in existing apartments in Jerusalem – are anti-peace, and now, with a wink to the UNSC resolution, illegal.

Further, understanding that Israel must “take actions against terrorist organizations” like Hamas, offers more support to banning the organization from any Palestinian unity government.

The Trump administration should underscore these two points clearly, as it can have a positive impact in how other allies and the United Nations treat Israel.

Positive Actions for the United Nations

The United Nations is a cesspool of autocrats and dictators.

The UN is the poster child of a “bucket of deplorables” of homophobes, anti-Semites, misogynists, xenophobes and racists. As such, the UN Secretary General is often viewed as the deplorable mascot.

It is difficult – ney, impossible – to get many of these countries to be civil, and the UNSG cannot enforce peaceful interactions in the world. However, he can make changes to how the institution itself runs, and his own comments as they relate to Israel.

1. Fold UNRWA into the UNHCR

The United Nations created an organization for Palestinian Arab refugees on December 8, 1949. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) was created as a temporary agency to help Arabs that lost their homes after five neighboring Arab countries invaded Israel after it declared statehood in May 1948. Today, UNRWA has morphed into something unrecognizable, giving “refugee” status to millions of descendants of refugees and perpetuating a conflict.

As the incoming UNSG knows, having served as the High Commissioner of Refugees from 2005 to 2015, there is another UN refugee agency, the UNHCR, which works with ACTUAL refugees that are fleeing war zones. It provides real relief for families in transition. It works with millions of refugees from around the world with a fraction of the budget of UNRWA.

More significantly, the UNHCR focuses on providing services for civilians without taking sides in a conflict. Not so UNRWA, which consistently attacks Israel and tells grandchildren of refugees that – with UNRWA’s help – they will return to homes and villages that no longer exist in Israel.

UNRWA perpetuates the suffering of the stateless Arabs from Palestine, and the ongoing conflict with Israel. Over the course of five years, UNRWA should be closed and services should be transitioned to the same relief agency that the rest of the world uses, UNHCR. The descendants of refugees from the 1948-9 Israeli-Arab war should have their ability to obtain services gradually withdrawn.

2. Isolate Iran

Any United Nations member state that threatens to destroy another member state should be completely isolated. Such a state should no longer be allowed to chair any committee. It should no longer be allowed to vote on any resolution. Its flag should be removed from the hall and from the exterior of the all United Nations buildings.

The inspections of the nuclear facilities should not just be rigorous in ensuring that Iran is in compliance. It should be reinforced without any rights or approvals by Iran.

Such treatment should remain in place until such state clearly rescinds such threats.

3. Remove the Standing Measure Against Israel

The UN Human Rights Council has a standing agenda item to criticize only one country in the world – Israel. It must stop the practice immediately.

4. Clean House in the UN Media Centre

The UN has a press group that summarizes the many sessions that happen at the sprawling UN and its many agencies. It selects what items to cover, which people to highlight and the quotes to cover in the stories.

In an organization which is littered with Israel-bashers, the UN Media Centre takes the hate to yet another level. It edits quotes from people that appear sympathetic to Israel and magnifies injuries by Palestinian Arabs. That is not a recipe for fairness or to advance peace. It is a form of incitement itself.

5. Clarity: No Hamas in the Palestinian Government; Stand with Israel

In addition to fixing the anti-Israel bias that is structurally part of the UN, Antonio Guterres should make his own opinions about the Israeli-Arab relationship known.

Outgoing UNSG Ban Ki Moon often stated that he stood with Gaza, and encouraged Hamas to become part of a Palestinian Authority unity government. It was disgusting and disgraceful to every Israeli and civilized person to watch the head of the UN promote a vile anti-Semitic terrorist group that openly calls for killing Jews and destroying Israel. The sentiment was aggravated by Ban Ki Moon’s never stating that he stood with Israel in its fight against terrorism.

Mr. Guterres should be clear that he supports Israel and every country’s fight against terror. He must be clear that there is no room for Hamas in any conversation whatsoever, until it replaces its charter and states that it seeks peace with Israel.

The United States had historically been the best and biggest ally of Israel, while the United Nations abused the Jewish State as if the organization was the reincarnation of the Spanish Inquisition. Obama left his legacy as a horrific foreign policy president, as he threw his lot in with the real bucket of deplorables.

With the five steps outlined above for both the US and UN, the relationship with Israel can be reset, and the cause of peace in the region advanced.

Related First.One.Through articles:

The Legal Israeli Settlements

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s Foreign Policy on Israel is like the United Nations

The Israeli Peace Process versus the Palestinian Divorce Proceedings

The Cancer in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

The Only Precondition for MidEast Peace Talks

J Street: Going Bigger and Bolder than BDS

Failures of the Obama Doctrine and the Obama Rationale

My Terrorism

The United Nations Audit of Israel

The United Nations “Provocation”

Obama’s “Palestinian Land”

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Ban Ki Moon Understands Why People Kill Israelis

Posted on December 20, 2016 by First.One.Through

On December 19, 2016, a Turkish policeman assassinated the Russian Ambassador to Turkey. The killer loudly proclaimed in front of rolling cameras that he did so because of the killings happening in Syria in the civil war that has claimed 500,000 lives. He called out the city of Aleppo, which was under siege by the Syrian Assad regime with the assistance of Russia.

The murder of Russian diplomat Andrey Karlov in Ankara.
(Photo: REUTERS)

The United Nations outgoing Secretary General Ban Ki Moon condemned the assassination. His comment implied that there was no basis for the attack.

“The Secretary-General is appalled by this senseless act of terror and emphasizes that there can be no justification for the targeting of diplomatic personnel and civilians.”

Did Ban Ki Moon not watch the video or read the transcript of why the murderer committed the act? Did he not appreciate Russia’s role in the massacre in Aleppo? Or did he feel that the murder of a Russian diplomat had nothing to do with alleviating the suffering of the Syrian people?

By way of comparison, consider how Ban Ki Moon discussed the Palestinian Arab terrorism against Israelis in 2014. He said:

“We must address these underlying issues – including mutual recognition, occupation, despair and the denial of dignity — so people do not feel they have to resort to violence as a means of expressing their grievances.”

When it came to the murder of Israeli civilians, the UNSG seemed to sympathize with the Palestinian Arab murderers. He did not speak of “senseless acts of terror,” but of the “underlying issues” behind the attacks. He did not say that there was “no justification” for the murder of innocents, but that the killings were a natural means of “expressing their grievances.”

As discussed in “The United Nations’ Adoption of Palestinians, Enables It to Only Find Fault With Israel,” the United Nations was established as a forum for countries to engage with each other. However, the UN actively advocates for the Palestinian Arabs, as it considers that the UN itself as the guardians of these stateless wards. As such, it views all attacks against Israeli civilians – including children – through a unique lens of empathy and support for the Palestinian Arab narrative.

While more Syrians have been killed in the year 2016 than the combined total of all Palestinian Arabs, Egyptians, Jordanians, Lebanese and Syrians in every war with Israel since 1948, the UN cannot comprehend the grievances of Syrians or why they might “resort to violence.”

While at the same time, no murder of Israelis can ever be “senseless” for the United Nations.

Related First.One.Through articles:

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

Ban Ki Moon Has No Solidarity with Israel

Ban Ki Moon Stands with Gaza

The United Nation’s Ban Ki Moon is Unqualified to Discuss the Question of Palestine

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Ban Ki Moon Defecates on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Posted on December 10, 2016 by First.One.Through

One of the basic laws established on December 10, 1948 in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was the ability to change one’s religion. Yet apostasy – converting from Islam – remains a capital offense in various countries including: Afghanistan; Brunei; Mauritania; Qatar; Saudi Arabia; Sudan; United Arab Emirates; and Yemen.

So how did the outgoing Secretary General of the United Nations choose to recognize the basic rights of people? He rewarded one of those countries with a “humanitarian” post.

On December 8, 2016 – two days before the anniversary of the UDHR – Ban Ki Moon announced that Ahmed Al Meraikhi of Qatar would be his Humanitarian Envoy. The press release included the role of that position:

“The Humanitarian Envoy will ensure stronger linkages between the United Nations and decision makers in Qatar and the broader region. His overall objective will focus on supporting multilateral humanitarian response efforts by raising the profile of humanitarian crises with Governments and non-governmental organizations and increasing their engagement with the international humanitarian community.”

Imagine that a country that flagrantly defies the basic premise of human rights is awarded with a position by the same United Nations.

It underscores the current farce of the United Nations and its embarrassment to humanity.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon

Related First.One.Through articles:

An Easy Boycott: Al Jazeera (Qatar)

Al Jazeera (Qatar) Evicts Jews and Judaism from Jerusalem. Time to Return the Favor

The Holocaust and the Nakba

Goodbye Moon

The Termination Shock of Survivors

Elie Wiesel on Words

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The United Nations Once Again “Encourages” Hamas

Posted on October 21, 2016 by First.One.Through

“I stand with the people in Gaza who have suffered through conflicts, closures and continue to face unimaginable suffering….

“I encourage Hamas to pursue reconciliation with Fatah in line with the PLO principles and to consider redefining its political stance.”

Nickolay Mladenov, Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process
19 October 2016

Nickolay Mladenov addressing the UN via satellite

Nickolay Mladenov is one of the more balanced people working at the United Nations commenting about Israel. The Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process typically goes through the efforts of pointing out the good and bad of both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs as he tries to advance Middle East Peace, an atypical practice among UN personnel.

Consider his remarkable statement on October 19, 2016 of the plain fact that “Fueling Israeli fears [of Palestinian Arab terrorism] is that Gaza is controlled by a de facto authority whose overtly anti- Semitic Charter equates resistance with violence, rejects peaceful solutions and aspires to the obliteration of Israel.” No one at the United Nations ever bothers to discuss the Hamas Charter which lays out it’s thoughts about Jews around the world in language seemingly lifted from Nazi propaganda.

Unfortunately, Mladenov’s understanding of the genocidal aspirations of Hamas only took his thought process so far.

Mladenov spoke of “Hamas’ takeover of Gaza in 2007,” but failed to note that Palestinian Arabs VOTED Hamas to 58% of the Parliament the year before, in 2006. In doing so, Mladenov made Hamas appear as simply a military force with de facto control of Hamas, rather than a political party with tremendous support of the Palestinian Arabs who endorsed the terrorist group’s anti-Semitic charter.

Failing to point out the Palestinian Arabs’s deep hatred of Jews (93% were found to be antisemiitc by an ADL poll), made it comfortable for Mladenov to repeat UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon’s call of “stand[ing] with the people in Gaza.” Would the UN proclaim that it stands with the people of Nazi Germany during World War II?

Further, how could Mladenov – knowing that Hamas seeks the complete destruction of Israel, is opposed to any peace process, and is virulently anti-Semitic – then go on to “encourage Hamas to pursue reconciliation with Fatah in line with the PLO principles and to consider redefining its political stance.” This is a group that should be banned completely, and not invited into any government.

Historically, the United Nations chose to ignore uncomfortable facts like the deeply anti-Semitic and nihilistic views of Hamas, as the UN promoted Palestinian Arab interests. So while at first it seemed encouraging that the Mladenov acknowledged those facts, it is arguably more depressing that the UN would nevertheless still use words of encouragement for such entity.

Mladenov may state that “if Palestinians genuinely hope to reach the long-overdue goal of statehood and an end to the occupation, this will not be achieved through violence, but must be reached through negotiations,” but his efforts at promoting Hamas fly in the face of such efforts.

Related First.One.Through articles:

UN Breakthrough? “Hamas continues to directly threaten the security of Israel”

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

Goodbye Moon

The Cancer in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Ban Ki Moon Has No Solidarity with Israel

An Inconvenient Truth: Palestinian Polls

Stopping the Purveyors of Hateful Propaganda

Extreme and Mainstream. Germany 1933; West Bank & Gaza Today

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

It’s the Temple Mount, Not the Western Wall

Posted on October 18, 2016 by First.One.Through

An October 2016 vote by UNESCO condemned Israeli activities around the Jewish Temple Mount in the Old City of Jerusalem. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu noted the farce of the resolution that distanced the Temple Mount from Judaism. The UNESCO resolution even prompted the spokesperson for the UN Secretary General to read a prepared statement on two occasions, on October 14 and again on October 18:

“… the Secretary‑General reaffirms the importance of the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls for the three monotheistic religions and stresses the importance of the religious and historical link of the Jewish, Muslim and Christian peoples to the holy site. The Al Aqsa Mosque/Al‑Haram al‑Sharif, the sacred shrine of Muslims, is also the Har HaBayit — or Temple Mount — whose Western Wall is the holiest place in Judaism, a few steps away from the Saint Sepulchre church and the Mount of Olives, which is revered by Christians. The Secretary‑General reiterates that any perceived undertaking to repudiate the undeniable common reverence for these sites does not serve the interests of peace and will only feed violence and radicalism. He also calls on all sides to uphold the status quo in relation to the holy sites in the Old City of Jerusalem.”

The statements made many pro-Israel people happy, as it was a marked improvement from the UNESCO resolution.

However, the statement continued two terrible falsehoods.

First, the Temple Mount itself – and where the Dome of the Rock currently sits – is the holiest place in Judaism, not the Western Wall. The Western Wall is simply the place where Suleiman I relegated Jews to pray after he kicked them off of the Temple Mount while he “improved” Jerusalem around the 1560s. Before the edict, Jews had prayed on the Temple Mount for centuries.

Over the last 500-or-so years, Jews have come to venerate the Western Wall as holy, even though it has no more inherent holiness than the southern or eastern retaining walls of the mount. For example, rabbis do not recommend a person visit a mikvah, a ritual bath, before visiting the Western Wall, as they insist for Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount.

Second, the status of the Jewish Temple Mount in Jerusalem is akin to the Kaaba Stone in Mecca, Saudi Arabia for Muslims. It does not even have an equal in Christianity. Neither Islam nor Christianity have any sites in Jerusalem that are as holy to their religions, as the Jewish Temple Mount is to Judaism.

While it was appreciated that the spokesperson for the UNSG chose to politely distance himself from the horrible UNESCO resolution, it would have been far better to:

clearly condemn the UNESCO resolution
state that it is the Temple Mount, not the Western Wall that is the holiest spot for Jews
not try to equate the holiness and significance of the Temple Mount for Jews, with the other monotheistic religions’ holy places in Jerusalem

It is worthwhile to educate Jews about these basic facts as well.

The Temple Mount in Jerusalem

Related First.One.Through articles:

It is Time to Insert “Jewish” into the Names of the Holy Sites

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount

The Waqf and the Temple Mount

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

Losing the Temples, Knowledge and Caring

The Cancer in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

UNESCO Votes after only Hearing the Opposition

Posted on October 16, 2016 by First.One.Through

Imagine a legal system where the plaintiff is also the prosecutor.

Imagine a legal system which passes judgment, after only listening to the arguments of the prosecution.

Imagine a legal system, where the judges are all family members of the prosecuting team.

That is the farce of the United Nations.

UNESCO Vote on the Temple Mount

Consider the October 2016 UNESCO vote condemning Israeli policies at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The resolution was completely one-sided and did not seek any balance, such as:

mentioning that the site is called the Jewish Temple Mount, the holiest spot in the world for Jews;
mentioning the Muslim harassment of Jews who came to visit the site during normal visiting hours;
mentioning that Israel has security control of the compound, as agreed in the Oslo II Accords signed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and the 1994 Peace Agreement signed between Israel and Jordan

The Western Wall, the western retaining wall of the Jewish Temple Mount,
site of Jewish prayers since Jews were evicted from the Temple Mount by Suleiman 450 years ago. Dome of the Rock at top, sits on location of the Jewish temples.
(photo: First.One.Through)

The UNESCO resolution was advanced by the Palestinian Authority and submitted by fellow Islamic Arab countries, Algeria; Egypt; Lebanon; Morocco; Oman; Qatar; and Sudan. They sought to alter history and reality, by declaring that only Muslims had rights to an Islamic site.

The countries that voted in favor of the resolution were predominantly Muslim-majority countries, including: Algeria (99% Muslim); Bangladesh (86%); Chad (58%); Egypt (90%); Iran (100%); Lebanon (60%); Malaysia (61%); Morocco (91%); Oman (88%); Pakistan (96%); Qatar (78%); Senegal (96%); and Sudan (97%).

The only Muslim-majority country that did not vote in favor of the resolution was Albania (59%), which abstained.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation hailed the vote that was submitted and approved by Muslim countries:

“The General Secretariat of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation welcomed the adoption by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) of a resolution that acknowledges Al-Aqsa Mosque/Al-Haram Al Sharif to be an exclusively Islamic holy site. The General Secretariat stressed that this resolution was an expression of the condemnation and rejection by the international community ofall Israeli occupation policies and actions, designed to cover up historical facts and deny the inalienable political, cultural and religious rights of the Palestinian people in Jerusalem, the capital of the State of Palestine.

The Secretary General, Iyad Amin Madani, commended the OIC group’s efforts and the positions of friendly countries that backed the resolution, which would entrench and preserve the Arabo-Islamic identity of Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Iyad Madani stressed the importance of enforcement of these historic and important resolutions, and called, at the same time,on UNESCO to shoulder its responsibilities and take the necessary measures to put an end to the serious Israeli violations against the Arabo-Islamic heritage in Palestine, especially in the cities of Jerusalem and Al-Khalil, which run counter to the principles of international law and relevant UN resolutions.”

Irina Bokova, the Director General of UNESCO understood the absurdity and bias of the UNESCO vote and offered her opinions on the matter:

“Jerusalem is the sacred city of the three monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is in recognition of this exceptional diversity, and this cultural and religious coexistence, that it was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list.

The heritage of Jerusalem is indivisible, and each of its communities has a right to the explicit recognition of their history and relationship with the city. To deny, conceal or erase any of the Jewish, Christian or Muslim traditions undermines the integrity of the site, and runs counter to the reasons that justified its inscription on the UNESCO World Heritage list.

“Nowhere more than in Jerusalem do Jewish, Christian and Muslim heritage and traditions share space and interweave to the point that they support each other. These cultural and spiritual traditions build on texts and references, known by all, that are an intrinsic part of the identities and history of peoples. In the Torah, Jerusalem is the capital of King David, where Solomon built the Temple and placed the Ark of the Covenant. In the Bible, Jerusalem is the city of the passion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In the Quran, Jerusalem is the third holiest site in Islam, where Muhammad arrived after his night journey from Al Haram Mosq (Mecca) to Al Aqsa”

It was an appropriate comment and gesture, but underscored the absurdity of the organization she heads.

The United Nations is a kangaroo court that passes one-sided resolutions that denies protections to minorities. Today, it exists as a forum of hate under an umbrella of respectability.

Related First.One.Through articles:

The Waqf and the Temple Mount

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

The Countries that Acknowledge the Jewish Temple May Surprise You

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

The UN’s Disinterest in Jewish Rights at Jewish Holy Places

Al Jazeera (Qatar) Evicts Jews and Judaism from Jerusalem. Time to Return the Favor

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The Countries that Acknowledge the Jewish Temple May Surprise You

Posted on August 14, 2016 by First.One.Through

The United Nations has been a hotbed of anti-Israel sentiment for decades. Whether the issue was war, terrorism, blockades, the security barrier, peace talks, settlements, refugees, etc., the vast majority of countries have been very vocal and very critical of Israel.

The UN also has a long history of ignoring Jewish rights to their sacred sites, as described in “The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land.” The various countries in the UN had a chance to add their own voices to that history.

In the fall of 2015, Palestinian Arabs claimed that Jews were going to overrun the Al Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, and proceeded to kill and attempted to kill dozens of Israelis. Those events made the countries at the UN focus on discussing the Temple Mount itself. Their comments on October 22, 2015 were interesting.

The Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount above the Kotel,
location of the First and Second Jewish Temples
(photo: FirstOneThrough)

A Muslim Holy Site

Not surprisingly, the Muslim countries referred to the Temple Mount as an exclusively Islamic holy spot.

“State of Palestine” called the location the “Haram al Sharif,” the Muslim name for the Temple Mount.
Angola discussed the “Al Aqsa Mosque,” which is Islam’s third holiest spot, located on the southern tip of the Temple Mount
Qatar mentioned the “Holy Shrine”

Some countries went further, and stressed that the Temple Mount compound was important only to Muslims.

Maldives stated “Haram al-Sharif must be restored. Israel must stop altering the Islamic and Arabic character of the city”
Egypt noted that the “Holy Shrine was extremely important to more than one billion Muslims worldwide,” and said nothing about Jews
Iran called the site “Haram Al-Sharif, and called for respect for the rights of Muslim worshippers to pray at that site in peace.”

Others were more extreme in their calls against Israel:

Saudi Arabia said that “Israel had failed to protect Islamic holy sites, demolished the gates of Haram al-Sharif and turned it into a prayer place for Jews. Israeli extremists had set fire to the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron”
Kuwait described “attacks on Al-Aqsa mosque were an unprecedented assault against the inalienable religious rights of Muslims all over the world. The OIC reiterated the historic and present Hashemite custodianship of the Islamic and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem, including Haram Al-Sharif/Al-Aqsa Mosque.”
Morocco was alarmed at the situation of “Islamic holy sites. Jerusalem was the very essence of the Palestinian question and there could be no peace without clarifying the status of Al-Quds as capital of a Palestinian State. Any harm brought against the Al-Aqsa mosque would heighten tensions.”

The surprise in the singular call of the Islamic character of the site, was that a single western country also only mentioned the Arabic and Muslim name for the site: the United Kingdom.

Just Holy Sites

Some countries avoided the controversy, like Spain, Chad, Nigeria, Norway, Korea and France, just referring to generic “holy sites.” Such language was impartial and neutral. That was perhaps logical in a tense and violent environment.

The Holy See mentioned that the location was sacred to “Judaism, Christianity and Islam.” An ACTIVELY balanced approach, which pulled all of the monotheistic religions to Jerusalem.

Turkey’s approach was a mix. Like the Holy See, it noted that “Jerusalem, a city sacred to Islam, Judaism and Christianity, should be treated with the utmost respect.” But then went on to attack Israel’s practices at the site saying that Israel was “targeting holy sites and all other provocative activities undermining the status and sanctity of Haram al-Sharif must immediately stop. The Jordanian role as custodian of the holy sites in Jerusalem was crucial for the preservation of Haram al-Sharif as an Islamic sanctuary.” It would appear that Turkey was willing to acknowledge the centrality of Jerusalem to Jews, just not the Temple Mount.

Most countries like: New Zealand; Venezuela; China; Chile; the United States; Russia; Sweden; Lebanon; Malaysia; Guatemala; Brazil; Japan; India; Bangladesh; Costa Rica; Kazakhstan; Iceland; Botswana; Sri Lanka; Bahrain; Cuba; and Pakistan did not mention the holy site itself.

Yes, that many countries weighed in about the situation in Israel.

Three Countries Recognize Judaism at the Temple Mount

In the long list of world condemnation, there was a silver lining, and it came from the unlikeliest of countries. Three countries besides Israel, referred to the platform as the Temple Mount, recognizing the history of Jews at the location and the sanctity of the spot in Judaism.

Lithuania, a country not known for being a strong Israeli ally, said that the “Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount was a sacred place for both Muslims and Jews.”
Ukraine mentioned the Al Aqsa mosque, but then also said “It was important for both parties to find the courage to respect holy places in accordance with the principles specified in the fundamental international documents, particularly those of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the agreements that regulated the status of the Temple Mount complex.”
Zimbabwe also said that “Access to the Temple Mount and other holy sites must be preserved under the status quo arrangements.”

These are not remarkable statements by these three countries on their face. But to consider that dozens of countries – including Israel’s allies – would not recognize the centrality of the Temple Mount to Judaism, does make their statements noteworthy.

Ukraine has a long history of anti-Semitism, but it was among the few countries that referred to the site by its historic Jewish name. The three countries did go on to chastise Israel for actions on the Temple Mount, but at least they had the decency to not ignore Jews and Judaism also.

Six months later, in April 2016 in Paris, UNESCO itself weighed in that there was no Jewish connection to the Temple Mount when it drafted 40 points of rebuke against Israel, that only referred to the Jerusalem site by Islamic and Arabic names 19 times. This was very deliberate, as seen when UNESCO went through the courtesy of referring to the common names of other Jewish holy sites in discussing “The two Palestinian sites of Al-Ḥaram Al Ibrāhīmī/Tomb of the Patriarchs in AlKhalīl/Hebron and the Bilāl Ibn Rabāḥ Mosque/Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem.”

Decades ago, several countries would not acknowledge the Jewish State, and many Arab countries to this day still refer to Israel as the “Zionist Entity.” Much of the world is still so backwards, that it cannot even recognize the history of the Jewish people and the holiest spot for Judaism.

Send a note to the governments of Lithuania (misija.jt@urm.lt), Ukraine (uno_us@mfa.gov.ua) and Zimbabwe (zimbabwe@un.int) and let them know that their statements, while seemingly insignificant, meant a lot to a small nation with a little country in the middle of a hostile neighborhood and United Nations.

Consider sending a note to your home country and the UK (fax 212 745 9316) as well, relaying your disappointment. You are welcome to attach this article.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Tolerance at the Temple Mount

Names and Narrative: CNN’s Temple Mount/ Al Aqsa Complex Inversion

Active and Reactive Provocations: Charlie Hebdo and the Temple Mount

Visitor Rights on the Temple Mount

The Arguments over Jerusalem

Subscribe YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis

The Parameters of Palestinian Dignity

Posted on August 1, 2016 by First.One.Through

There is a catch phrase that is popular with the United Nations and the Democratic party in the United Sates when they discuss a two state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian Arab conflict. It surrounds the word “dignity,” and its unique application for the Palestinian Arabs.

The UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon often called for realizing Palestinian Arab dignity, and US President Barack Obama also freely used the term for Palestinian Arabs. The 2016 Democratic Platform highlighted Palestinian dignity twice in it’s short discussion of the Israeli-Arab conflict (statement below).

What about Israeli dignity? It’s never mentioned by the UN or Democrats.

Oslo Accords

The concept of “dignity” was originally meant to be for both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs. In the actual agreements signed by both parties in September 1995, the language is clear:

“REAFFIRMING their determination to put an end to decades of confrontation and to live in peaceful coexistence, mutual dignity and security, while recognizing their mutual legitimate and political rights;”

Mutual dignity. Dignity for both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs. As agreed to by both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs.

Yet the Democrats and the United Nations NEVER mention dignity for Israelis. Why?

Palestinian Arab Dignity

Is there something unique and/or special about Palestinian Arab dignity? How is it distinct from Israeli dignity? How has mutual dignity been replaced by dignity for a single party?

Is it the Economy? According to one prominent Palestinian Arab, Bassem Eid, the dignity that Palestinian Arabs seek is completely related to economic prosperity:

“Palestinians are anxious about their future. In my opinion, dignity can come only via economic prosperity.”

Is that it? Economic opportunity? Perhaps that is why Israeli dignity is not mentioned by the UN and Democrats – because Israel already has a thriving economy.

But if the goal was economic development for Palestinian Arabs, why did the UN and US President Obama advance plans to ban Israeli Jews from living in EGL (east of the Green Line)/ West Bank of the Jordan River? Economic prosperity for Palestinian Arabs would be stimulated by greater investment, trade and normalization of the working and living conditions of the two people. Conversely, a Jew-free Palestinian state would hurt such path to Arab prosperity.

Is it Independence? Obama talked about dignity slightly differently than Bassem Eid:

“The Palestinian people deserve an end to occupation and the daily indignities that come with it. Palestinians deserve to move and travel freely, and to feel secure in their communities. Like people everywhere, Palestinians deserve a future of hope — that their rights will be respected, that tomorrow will be better than today and that they can give their children a life of dignity and opportunity. Put simply, Palestinians deserve a state of their own.”

In Obama’s formulation, dignity would be the natural outgrowth of independence and sovereignty. In other words, with an independent state, there would automatically be dignity. Palestinian dignity begins – and ends – with their own state. Nothing else is needed. (I would assume that Obama believes the US still strips Native Americans of their dignity since they only have independence but no real sovereignty).

Perhaps, as Israel already had independence and sovereignty, there was no need to call out for Israeli dignity.

If only life were that simple.

The Palestinian Arab leadership has a much broader set of criteria than Obama’s and Eid’s independence and economic opportunity to bring about “dignity”.

Is it Freedom for Murderers? Acting-President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas spoke at a “Freedom and Dignity” conference in Ramallah, just weeks after he met with President Obama in 2013, and dropped the “d-word” a few times.

Abbas, and his left-wing radical European brothers-in-arms, argued for the release of Marwan Barghouti, who was in Israeli jail for the murders of five Israeli civilians. Abbas said that only the release of murderers like Barghouti will show that Israelis are ready for peace; only the release of murderers, could restore Palestinian Arab dignity.

All of the Above, and much more? For Mahmoud Abbas, the requirements to restore Palestinian dignity did not stop with economic prosperity, independence and sovereignty, nor the release of Arab prisoners. As Abbas stated in his address to world leader at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015, Palestinian Arab dignity was tied to Israel itself:

“Is it not time for the humiliating and degrading checkpoints and barriers set up by the Israeli occupying forces in our land to be removed, for the Israeli blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip to be lifted, and for our people to move in freedom and dignity in their own homeland and outside? Is it not time to end the racist, terrorist, colonial settlement of our land, which is destroying the two-state solution? Is it not the time for the six thousand Palestinian prisoners and detainees in Israeli jails to see the light of freedom and to live among their families and communities? Is it not the time for the longest occupation in history suffocating our people to come to an end?”

Is it No Security for Israel? Abbas’s version of dignity means that Israelis would not be able to properly defend itself by removing the blockade of Gaza (which a UN report viewed as legal). He also suggested that Palestinian Arabs should have free access “outside” – meaning in Israel? Does Abbas truly believe that security checkpoints into Israel should disappear, and Palestinian Arabs should freely cross without screening?

Is it Banning Jews from the Land? Abbas referred to Israelis living in EGL/ West Bank of the Jordan River as “racists, terrorists and colonialists.” Are Israelis racists for thinking that Jews should be allowed to live anywhere they purchase land? Is Palestinian dignity only realized by having a pure Arab country without any Jews?

Is it Killing Jews? By declaring that peaceful Jews living in their homes in EGL (like the Fogels and Hallel Yaffa Ariel) are “terrorists,” Abbas gave legitimacy to fellow Palestinian Arabs to defend themselves and kill Israelis, even as they slept in their beds.

Is it in Denying Jewish history? By saying that Jews are “colonialists,” Abbas rejected the entire 3700-year history of Jews in their holy land. Is Palestinian Arab dignity only realized by obliterating the history of the Jews?

That’s quite an order for realizing Palestinian Arab “dignity.”

Palestinian Arab Dignity Reversing Negotiations

Beyond the anti-Semitic and insulting concepts that Abbas considered in his definition of “dignity,” he sought actions directly opposing the parameters of bilateral negotiations to date. Consider Abbas’s statement to the European Union in June 2016:

”Peace and coexistence based on the foundations of justice, truth and respect for the dignity and humanity and freedom of each party on an equal footing, is the real guarantee for security and stability and a promising future for the generations to come, and your generations.”

No to a demilitarized Palestinian State? What does Abbas mean by “equal footing?” Is he suggesting that not only should Israel limit/ remove checkpoints with a new Palestinian state, but that such Palestinian state would have a full army, on “equal footing” with Israel? One of the basic premises of negotiating of a two state agreement was that the Palestinian Arabs would have a demilitarized country. Does that now deny Palestinian Arab dignity?

What can we expect Abbas to add to his list of items for “dignity?”

Dhimmitude? Will Abbas at some point allow non-Muslims to live in a new independent soverign Palestinian state, as long as they are “dhimmis“?

Honor Killings? Gaza has become the leader in the world in the barbaric practice of honor killings where families kill women who “dishonor” the family. Does Abbas feel that the practice will bring back honor and respect to Palestinians?

Deny the Jewish Temples existed? In addition to denying the long Jewish history in Israel, will Palestinian Arab dignity be realized by denying the Jewish Temples stood on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem? Must the Arab world push UNESCO to deny Jews their spiritiual home and legacy, to achieve “dignity?”

Deny Jews Open Access for Prayer? Will the Palestinian dignity be realized by forbidding Jews from praying at their holiest location? The United Nations and Democrats seem to agree that Jews should be denied.

Calling Jews “sons of apes and pigs?” Do Palestinians achieve dignity by dehumanizing Jews and referring to Jews as “sons of apes and pigs”?

Naming squares and tournaments and schools after killers of Jews? Does Abbas help the Palestinian quest for dignity by naming schools, squares and tournaments after mass murderers of Jews?

Refusing to teach the Holocaust in school or various forms of Holocaust denial? Does Abbas instill dignity in his people, by denying the Holocaust and refusing to teach it at human rights at UNRWA schools?

Suing Great Britain for the Balfour Declaration? Is it not enough to deny the history and rights of Jews in their holy land, must Abbas gain Arab dignity by bullying the world into not acknowledging Jewish rights and history for themselves?

US President Obama and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon

Is this the kind of dignity and vision of two states that the United Nations and Democrats have? Is that why Israeli dignity has disappeared from the minds of the jaded power brokers, because Palestinian Arab dignity can only be achieved by denying Israelis their own dignity?

Historians will debate the demise of the Oslo Accords. As they do, they will examine how the United Nations and United States embraced the twisted notion that Israeli dignity precluded Arab dignity, and more specifically, that Arab dignity could only be achieved by denying Israeli dignity.

Democratic Platform 2016:

“A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance, and pluralism. That is why we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself, including by retaining its qualitative military edge, and oppose any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement.

We will continue to work toward a two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict negotiated directly by the parties that guarantees Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state with recognized borders and provides the Palestinians with independence, sovereignty, and dignity. While Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations, it should remain the capital of Israel, an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths. Israelis deserve security, recognition, and a normal life free from terror and incitement. Palestinians should be free to govern themselves in their own viable state, in peace and dignity.”

Related First.One.Through articles:

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s Foreign Policy on Israel is like the United Nations

Abbas Knows Racism

The Democrats’ Slide on Israel

An Open Letter to Non-Anti-Semitic Sanders Supporters

Obama’s “Values” Red Herring

A “Viable” Palestinian State

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

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

Posted on August 1, 2016 by First.One.Through

In an effort to stop global terrorism, the United Nations assembled a team that composed an official Counterterrorism Strategy. The eight point plan was meant to serve as a set of guiding principles for governments to follow in the hopes of curbing terrorism.

Unfortunately, the UN ignores those exact principles when it comes to dealing with Palestinian Arab terrorists.

Here is a review of the UN’s Counterterrorism Strategy, and its approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

“[C]ontinue to strengthen and make best possible use of the capacities of the United Nations in areas such as conflict prevention, negotiation, mediation.” Does the UN use the capacities of its institution in negotiations and mediation? No. It endorses a French plan that excludes both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs from the discussions. It does nothing to encourage the Palestinian Arabs to commence negotiations.
“[M]utual respect for and prevent the defamation of religions, religious values, beliefs and cultures.” The UN fails in this initiative as well. The United Nations’ UNESCO arm drafted resolutions that deny that the Jewish Temples stood on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and its centrality to Judaism and the Jewish people. It argues that Jews should be banned from praying at their holiest place. It’s entire treatment of Jewish holy places in the holy land is terrible. Further, as detailed in “The Only Religious Extremists for the United Nations are “Jewish Extremists,” the UN uniquely calls Jews extremists, while it never refers to Islamic terrorism.
“To promote a culture of peace, justice and human development, ethnic, national and religious tolerance, and respect for all religions, religious values, beliefs or cultures by establishing and encouraging, as appropriate, education and public awareness programmes involving all sectors of society. In this regard, we encourage the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization to play a key role, including through inter-faith and intra-faith dialogue and dialogue among civilizations.” UNESCO denies Jewish history in Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. It undermines the education of the world of the 3700 year history of Jews in the holy land, including throughout the West Bank/ Judea and Samaria, as it worries that it offends Arabs. Another UN agency, UNRWA, does not teach the Holocaust to Palestinian Arab children for the same reason.
“[P]rohibit by law incitement to commit a terrorist act or acts and prevent such conduct.” The UN calls for the terrorist group Hamas to be integrated into a Palestinian Authority unity government. The UN doesn’t seek to prohibit terrorism as much as reward it. The UN Secretary General loudly declares that he “stands with Gaza.,” which is run by Hamas that launched three wars against Israel. Does Ki-Moon ever say that he stands with Israel? Never.
“[C]ommitment to eradicate poverty and promote sustained economic growth, sustainable development and global prosperity for all.” The UN worked to remove the Israeli company Sodastream from the West Bank/ Judea and Samaria, costing hundreds of Arabs their jobs. In March 2016, the United Nations Human Rights Watch created a “blacklist” of Israeli companies operating east of the Green Line. Does the UN want a sustainable economic model for Israelis and Palestinian Arabs, or would it prefer to keep the Palestinians on perpetual life-support from the UN? In any event, the entire notion that there is a link between poverty and terrorism has repeatedly been proven false.
“To pursue and reinforce development and social inclusion agendas at every level as goals in themselves, recognizing that success in this area, especially on youth unemployment, could reduce marginalization and the subsequent sense of victimization that propels extremism and the recruitment of terrorists.” There is nothing that creates the sense of “victimization” of youth more than UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. As detailed in “UNRWA’s Ongoing War against Israel and Jews,” the organization is perpetuating a war from 1948 which the Arabs initiated and lost. UNRWA is making children, grandchildren and great grandchildren of original refugees grow up in camps without citizenship to specifically foster the sense of victimhood. The UN never address or rebukes the multi-decade laws of Lebanon and Syria that prevent the stateless Arabs from receiving citizenship.
“To encourage the United Nations system as a whole to scale up the cooperation and assistance it is already conducting in the fields of rule of law, human rights and good governance, to support sustained economic and social development.” Is the UN happy with Palestinian laws which call for death sentence for people who sell land to Jews? How about giving a pass to honor killings? Rampant theft by government officials? How has the UN helped the Palestinians these many years?
“To consider putting in place, on a voluntary basis, national systems of assistance that would promote the needs of victims of terrorism and their families and facilitate the normalization of their lives.” Maybe the UN can acknowledge the Israeli victims of terror for a change. Maybe it can stop excusing Palestinian Arab terrorists with statements that they “resort” to violence.

The United Nations stands by while Acting President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas incites terror. The UN ignores payments that the PA makes to terrorist families. It seems to bless the naming of schools, squares and tournaments after terrorists. The UN Secretary General never seems to have read the Hamas Charter or the Fatah Constitution, and then acts shocked when Hamas commits murder.

Instead, Ban Ki Moon asked Israel to put its trust in the Palestinian Authority as he stated “Israelis should be comforted by the emergence of a reliable partner and neighbour committed to Israel’s right to live in peace and security, opposed to violence and terrorism, and able to deliver on the ground.” Within days, an Israeli family was killed while they slept by two Palestinian Arab terrorists.

The United Nations under Secretary General Ban Ki Moon ha stood watch while terrorism spread from the Middle East to around the globe. The UN has acted as guardians of Palestinian Arab wards these many decades, and did not institute any of these reforms for itself or into the nascent Palestinian Authority.

How can the world put any faith in the UN in developing a plan to combat terrorism, when it has fostered and perpetuated terrorism in the Middle East?

As the UN doesn’t follow any of its own enumerated Counterterrorism strategies in dealing with Palestinian Arabs, maybe the plan might actually work.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Ban Ki Moon Has No Solidarity with Israel

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

The UN is Watering the Seeds of Anti-Jewish Hate Speech for Future Massacres

The UN’s Disinterest in Jewish Rights at Jewish Holy Places

The United Nations and Holy Sites in the Holy Land

Subscribe YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis

The Dangerous Red Herring Linking Poverty and Terrorism

Posted on July 13, 2016 by First.One.Through

There is a commonly held thought that if society understood the root cause of a problem, it would be able to arrive at solutions. Such reasoning implies that diagnosis is an essential part of solving the problem.

One of the major problems confronting the world in the 21^st century is terrorism. Innocent civilians are being murdered and maimed in such diverse places as: Bangladesh; Turkey; France; United States; Nigeria; Israel; India; England and Libya. Stopping such violence is a global priority.

In attempting to stop the scourge, the United Nations and the United States made a common diagnosis and prescription for stopping terrorism: poverty leads to despair and violence, so solving global poverty would eradicate terrorism.

The problem with the diagnosis is that it has no basis in fact.

The United Nations on Poverty and Terrorism

The UN developed a global counter terrorism strategy which called on all of its member states to take a series of steps to eradicate terrorism. It stated:

“Affirming Member States’ determination to continue to do all they can to resolve conflict, end foreign occupation, confront oppression, eradicate poverty, promote sustained economic growth, sustainable development, global prosperity, good governance, human rights for all and rule of law, improve intercultural understanding and ensure respect for all religions, religious values, beliefs or cultures” would promote stability and end terrorism.

The UN repeated its call for economic opportunity for all as a cure for stopping the mass murder of innocents in its Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy:

“To reiterate our determination to ensure the timely and full realization of the development goals and objectives agreed at the major United Nations conferences and summits, including the Millennium Development Goals. We reaffirm our commitment to eradicate poverty and promote sustained economic growth, sustainable development and global prosperity for all.”

While no one would suggest that poverty is positive, it also true that pollution and disease are problems plaguing our global society. Yet the UN had enough sense to not include those issues in a document meant to specifically address terrorism (yet- is global warming coming?).

The Obama Administration was in sync with this line of thinking.

The United States on Poverty and Terrorism

In February 2015, after terrorists beheaded Christians on a beach in Libya, the US State Department’s spokesperson Marie Harf said that the root cause of extremism was poverty:

“the root causes that lead people to join these [terrorist] groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs…we can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance, we can help them build their economy so they can have job opportunities for these people….If we can help countries work at the root causes of this- what makes a 17-year old kid pick up an AK-47 instead of trying to start a business, maybe we can try to chip away at this problem.”

President Obama made similar remarks about Countering Violent Extremism at a summit at the same time where he said:

“we must address the grievances that terrorists exploit, including economic grievances. As I said yesterday, poverty alone does not cause a person to become a terrorist, any more than poverty alone causes someone to become a criminal. There are millions, billions of people who are poor and are law-abiding and peaceful and tolerant, and are trying to advance their lives and the opportunities for their families.

But when people — especially young people — feel entirely trapped in impoverished communities, where there is no order and no path for advancement, where there are no educational opportunities, where there are no ways to support families, and no escape from injustice and the humiliations of corruption — that feeds instability and disorder, and makes those communities ripe for extremist recruitment. And we have seen that across the Middle East and we’ve seen it across North Africa. So if we’re serious about countering violent extremism, we have to get serious about confronting these economic grievances.”

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism at the State Department in Washington
February 19, 2015. (Photo: Reuters / Joshua Roberts)

The United Nations and the Obama administration were lock-step in finding the root cause of terrorism. Insanity had company.

No Connection Between Poverty and Terrorism

The UN and the Obama Administration have repeated this poverty propaganda without any evidence, or more specifically, despite the evidence.

Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 was from a wealthly family, as were many of the hijackers on the planes.

The terrorism that struck Bangladesh in July 2016 was perpetrated by wealthy men that attended elite universities.

This is often the norm.

The National Bureau of Economic Research did a study in September 2002 that found no connection between poverty and terrorism. Among its findings was that racism and nationalism was behind the widespread support for killing Israeli Jewish civilians among Palestinian Arabs of all income levels.

A report by the Brookings Institute in 2010 authored by Corinne Graff noted that:

“since 9/11, terrorism experts have invoked empirical evidence that poverty does not correlate with a higher incidence of terrorist attacks and participation. The consensus appears to be that poverty does not motivate individuals to participate in terrorism, and that development assistance, therefore, has no place in a longer-term counter-terrorism strategy.”

The New York Times also came around to reporting this conclusion on March 27, 2016, in an article called “Who Will Become a Terrorist? Research Yields Few Clues.” The article discussed how there is little correlation between an a person’s education and poverty level with the probability he will engage in acts of terrorism. For example, the shooters in San Bernardino, CA in December 2015 were a middle class couple.

Yet the global body of the United Nations, and the most powerful democracy on the planet, the United States, are working on combatting terrorism with a flawed world view.

Ramifications

There are many ramifications of chasing a myth. The implications are enormous when the subject is combatting global terrorism.

President Obama was correct when he called out the “warped ideologies espoused by terrorists like al Qaeda and ISIL” that use “their propaganda to Muslim communities, particularly Muslim youth” to advance a program to kill innocents. He is also correct that “Muslim communities, including scholars and clerics, therefore have a responsibility to push back” against these dangerous notions.

All citizens of the world have a similar responsibility to push back against the Obama administration and the United Nations that is pivoting the focus of counter-terrorism to economic development. The tactic to fight against twisted ideologies cannot be to give those communities more jobs and money. Such thinking led the Obama administration to give the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, an estimated $150 billion and a legal pathway to obtain ballistic missiles, while keeping its nuclear infrastructure in place. The Obama administration logic that the Islamic Republic of Iran will be so happy to have the money and be embraced by the global community, that it will abandon sponsoring terrorism and its twisted ideology, has (yet) to play out.

Meanwhile, the world does little to combat the narrative and ideology itself.

In Gaza, the United Nations has allowed the Hamas government to ban the teaching of the Holocaust in UNRWA schools, and the teaching of global human rights. Instead, UN Secretary General just talks about providing economic opportunity to Gaza. When the UNSG said that he stands with Gaza, while never pushing to reform the thinking of the Palestinian Arabs, what message does he think he is conveying?

There was a thin line that separated the “Hope” that characterized the election of Obama in 2008, and the “wishful thinking” without basis in fact, that Obama’s detractors feared. The trauma of global terrorism that has spread on his watch is anchored in a worldview that often denies uncomfortable truths and replaces it with a propaganda of his own.

Related First.One.Through articles:

Failures of the Obama Doctrine and the Obama Rationale

Obama’s “Values” Red Herring

The Invisible Anti-Semitism in Obama’s 2016 State of the Union

Liberals’ Biggest Enemies of 2015

Absolute and Relative Ideological Terrorism in the United States

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis