[See also:The Palestinian UN Upgrade: Setting Things Straight
Amb Alan Baker, JCPA]
By Rafael Ahren, TOI
Jan 7, 2014
Notwithstanding the best intentions of US Secretary of State John Kerry, the current round of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians may fail (shocking, we know). But what happens then? Well, most members of the current Israeli government may be fine with the status quo — the emphatic absence of a Palestinian state — but Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has vowed to resume steps to unilaterally advance the PA’s statehood bid, a move Jerusalem is extremely wary of.
Yet Israeli experts disagree whether Israel really has something to worry about. Is it just a “big bluff” (as one international law scholar claimed), or would a unilateral Palestinian statehood bid make it impossible for Israel to ever reach a peace agreement that takes its positions into consideration (as another academic argued)?
To prevent, or at least defer, the unilateral Palestinian statehood campaign — that was one of the main reasons why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however grudgingly, agreed to resume direct peace talks with the Palestinians in July 2013. The PA’s commitment to refrain from unilateral steps during the course of the talks was a large factor in the Israeli government’s decision to sit down at the negotiating table — perhaps even more so than Kerry’s relentless pressure.
Last week, after Israeli ministers advanced a bill to annex the Jordan Valley, Saeb Erekat, the PA’s chief negotiator, said that the proper response would be to “seek statehood recognition by the United Nations and other international bodies.” Abbas, however, has promised to remain at the table at least until the April deadline initially set for the talks. But if the current efforts break down without an agreement — and if the past has taught us anything, it’s that the next crisis of faith is generally merely a matter of time — the Palestinians have made it clear that they won’t hesitate to turn to the international community.
“At the end of the day, these negotiations won’t succeed, and Abu Mazen [Abbas] has a strong card in his hand: an appeal to the UN institutions,” said Ahmed Tibi, an Israeli MK who once served as adviser to Yasser Arafat and maintains close contacts with the Palestinian leadership, in an interview last week. “There are more than 60 agencies in the UN, and sooner or later he will turn to them. That will cause a diplomatic confrontation.”
Tibi is certainly not alone in his assessment that the talks will collapse sooner or later. Indeed, most members of Israel’s government are exceedingly skeptical. And yet they agreed to start negotiating. They voted to release Palestinian prisoners. And they risked being blamed for the talks’ failure (including the threat of European Union sanctions), just because the Palestinians promised that they wouldn’t make further moves to be recognized as a state, at least not for for nine months.
But what exactly is Israel afraid of? After all, “Palestine” is already recognized as a nonmember observer state by the United Nations; an overwhelming majority of 138 states supported that move in November 2012 (nine countries opposed and 41 abstained). The chances of a “State of Palestine” being admitted as a full-fledged member of the UN prior to signing a peace treaty with Israel are minimal. The Americans have vetoed such efforts in the past and there are no indications they wouldn’t do it again.
At least, so goes the conventional wisdom. One Israeli diplomatic official warned, however, that there are no guarantees that the US will forever continue to put the kibosh on a Palestinian application for full UN membership.
“If Abbas gets all other members of the Security Council to agree, he might manage to drive the Americans into a corner,” the official said. “Washington might at some point become fed up with being the only country to oppose Palestinian statehood, and embarrassed and fearful of international isolation, it might accede to the Palestinians’ request.”
‘Since the Palestinians joined UNESCO, they hijacked the organization’s agenda and now it’s all about bashing Israel. Their strategy is working’
But even assuming that for the time being the Americans will continue to wield their veto power, the mere fact of Palestinian statehood coming to a vote again and again will slowly have an impact, an Israeli academic specializing in international law said. He recalled that the UN Security Council did not formally condemn South African apartheid because of the British veto, but eventually an international consensus emerged to demand the racist regime’s immediate demise. A similar scenario is plausible vis-à-vis Palestinian statehood, said the academic, who asked to remain unnamed because he didn’t want to be quoted invoking Israeli diplomatic struggles in the context of apartheid.
In the meantime, though, the Palestinians don’t need full UN membership to incriminate Israel on the international stage, an Israeli official said. As soon as they are admitted into the World Health Organization, Habitat or other UN programs, “they could have our arms twisted,” he said.
Before the current round of peace talks commenced, the Palestinians were quite successful in their quest to achieve “incremental recognition,” he said. “Since they joined UNESCO, they hijacked the organization’s agenda and now it’s all about bashing Israel all the time,” added the official, who asked to remain anonymous so he could more freely discuss sensitive diplomatic issues. “All the Palestinians do all day is get yet another condemnation against Israel. And their strategy is working.”
In 2011 UNESCO — the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization — admitted “Palestine” as a full member. Since then, Israeli and Palestinian officials have sparred about UNESCO’s positions and declarations vis-à-vis the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. During a debate at the 37th session of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee in June, the Jordanian delegation, at the behest of the PA, submitted a resolution slamming Israel over its Jerusalem policies. UNESCO officials at first denied the resolution’s very existence but it was eventually adopted by a large majority.
Scarier, in the eyes of some Israelis, is the prospect of Palestinians turning to the International Criminal Court and suing Israeli leaders for war crimes or crimes against humanity. Joining the Hague-based court is a bit more complicated, because it would expose the PA itself to law suits, and it isn’t clear that membership in the ICC would be in its best interests, the Israeli official said. “We’re not really worried about being condemned by the ICC; they can threaten whatever they want,” he said. Still, he acknowledged, it would be “a major headache” if the Palestinians did try to drag Israelis in front of the court for alleged misdeeds.
Will the Palestinians attempt to drag Israel before the court rather than sit down to peace talks? A courtroom at the International Criminal Court, The Hague (photo credit: CC BY Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Flickr)
A courtroom at the International Criminal Court, The Hague (photo credit: CC BY Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Flickr)
“Such a process would involve such besmearing and casting of allegations that would take us a long time to defuse,” the official said. “Not only is it a waste of time, but it’s a declaration of diplomatic war. And if it’s a war, you need to dedicate resources to fighting it, and doing this will prevent us from focusing on other measures to defuse the conflict.”
In 2009, Palestinian Justice Minister Ali Khashan asked the ICC to investigate Israel’s conduct in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The prosecutor’s office initially declined the request, noting that the Palestinian Authority was not a state and that consequently the court had no jurisdiction to launch an investigation into acts committed in the territories it claims. After “Palestine” attained nonmember state status at the UN in 2012, the prosecutor’s office released a brief statement saying that it “will consider the legal implications of this resolution.” It has yet to issue a new ruling on the matter.
‘A big bluff and an empty threat’
According to Alan Baker, a former legal adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the Palestinian threat of a unilateral statehood drive is absolutely nothing to be afraid of. “This is a big bluff; it’s just an empty threat,” he said. “So the Palestinians will go to the International Health Organization, the International Postal Union and the Civil Aviation Authority. So what? That won’t give them statehood. It won’t make a difference, because Israel is still sitting in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank], and any change can only come about as the result of a negotiation process.”
And there is no cause to fear a Palestinian onslaught against Israel in international forums, averred Baker, a former Israeli ambassador to Canada, as such attacks have been going on for years. “There are 20 or so anti-Israel resolutions at the UN at any given moment, so how is this night different from any other night?”
Palestinian attempts to influence the agendas of UN bodies actually did more damage to the credibility of those international organs than to Israel’s interests, he posited. Many diplomats and parliamentarians have told him, he said, that the international community is becoming “increasingly fed up” with Palestinians trying to appropriate UN organizations for their political purposes and, in the process, distracting those bodies from their actual jobs.
Alan Baker (photo credit: courtesy ambassadoralanbaker.com)
Alan Baker (photo credit: courtesy ambassadoralanbaker.com)
Neither does the specter of an ICC trial against Israel faze Baker. “That’s a completely empty and utterly unrealistic threat,” he said. Even if the court’s prosecutor ruled that “Palestine” could file a complaint against Israeli leaders for war crimes, an investigation would have zero chances of succeeding because the Palestinians would need to prove that the alleged offenses took place on Palestinian sovereign territory. “But the Palestinians themselves agreed [in the 1993 Oslo Accords] that the final status of territories is subject to negotiations.”
Likewise, Israel has nothing to fear from “Palestine” turning to the UN’s International Court of Justice, Baker said. It’s possible that it would be asked to write an advisory opinion on Israel’s actions in the West Bank – as it has in the past – but “there’s no guarantee that it wouldn’t be counterproductive to whoever is asking for it.”
So if Israel has nothing to worry about, in terms of unilateral Palestinian steps toward statehood, why did Netanyahu let himself be pressured into entering peace talks?
The prime minister himself has stated that he wants the talks to lead to a viable deal, and that he is anxious to avoid a single bi-national state between the river and the sea. But he has also made clear his misgivings about Abbas as a partner, and his skepticism that the Palestinian Authority president will adopt the compromise positions that he regards as essential to Israel’s security. So Netanyahu plainly won’t have been surprised, almost six months into the nine-month time period allotted, to be at odds with Abbas over most every core issue critical to a permanent accord.
One senior cabinet minister told The Times of Israel that it was in Jerusalem’s interest to “buy time.” While the talks may ultimately amount to nothing, he suggested, nine months of diplomatic quiet were well worth the effort.
Baker didn’t buy that argument, saying he failed to understand why the American and Israeli governments gave credence to Palestinian threats. “The damage was caused by Kerry, when he said if Israel doesn’t make concessions Israel would be under attack by international community — as if it isn’t already. The Palestinians are laughing all the way to the bank,” he said. “I’m flabbergasted at the naivete that exists within the US administration, but even more so in the Israel government.”
The only possible reason for Jerusalem’s behavior was that Washington might have threatened not to veto a Palestinian attempt to get full UN membership, Baker surmised. “I wouldn’t put it past Kerry, for whom I have absolutely no respect, to make such a threat,” he said.
‘How will IDF soldiers react when their superiors are being accused of war crimes and the like?’
Amichai Cohen, a senior lecturer of international law at Ono Academic College, said that even if international courts are unlikely to condemn Israel, such a scenario wasn’t impossible. At the ICC, for instance, it is the chief prosecutor who makes these decisions based on his own criteria, and he might not take into consideration the views of Israeli experts and pundits. “When assessing a certain risk, you don’t only look at how low the chance is of a certain scenario coming true, you also think about the damage that could be done in the unlikely case that it does come true,” he said.
Less than the threat of censure, the mere idea of Israeli politicians and generals standing trial could inflict great damage on the state, both externally (in terms of reputation) and internally, Cohen continued. “How will IDF soldiers react when their superiors are being accused of war crimes and the like?” he asked. The very prospect of such a scenario does not necessarily mean that Jerusalem should feel pressured to make concessions; there is cause, however, to take the Palestinians’ threats into consideration, he said.
Jerusalem currently does not recognize the Palestinian Authority as a state, he said, and much of the international community understands that a peace treaty will have to be signed between both sides, and that Israel has legitimate demands for any deal. But as soon as the world welcomes “Palestine” as a legitimate member in the family of nations — with or without Jerusalem’s blessings — Israeli claims and arguments against Palestinian statehood will not be heard anymore, Cohen predicted. “We haven’t arrived at that stage yet… but we’re getting there.”
SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said:
The prospects here are no better. Well may be Govt.Perry, Texas is booing, but he has huge hill to climb.
Bear Klein Said:
I agree regarding one reason why he entered the talks but that there is more. The one requirement was to sit for 9 months and the reason for that is the why of the talks. The GCC and US wanted the talks so that the pal issue did not conflict with the syrian iran agenda. this was in summer 2013 and since then the events of syria was not as planned plus bengahzi limited obamas moves. thinking carefully there is no reason for releasing terrorists if everyone expects any results. terrorists get released after agreement. One dos not need a gesture to enter talks. The prisoners were given because everyone wanted Abbas commitment to sit for the period knowing that the end would not be a final agreement. he could not afford that situation without getting prisoners released. Therefore, BB gets pressured to release prisoners but he also has limitations. No reason for BB to release prisoners until agreement or to get abbas to sit down unless BB thought he was getting something of value. The Eu and US could also get a stall of pressure from its constituents as long as talks go on but I doubt they believed anything major would happen. US, EU and GCC want peace so that they can proceed with their other plans but Abbas and Israel do not feel this is the time for various reasons. The EU and US will be satisfied with talks that go nowhere or an extension of talks that go nowhere. I do not beleive that Abbas even wanted talks as he did not want a major change. Therefore he was the one who least wanted to sit down. I expect that his carrots were also the faux state and GCC cash and possibly getting back gaza in some form. Egypt has been pressuring hamas and the tamerod movement from egypt set up there. this pressure is probably from the GCC(saudi/qatar)
@ honeybee:
Thank you but not in the cards. We need a younger person. Caroline Glick or Mr. Plaut, Sarah Honig, Uzi Landau, Danon, etc. The constellation right now up there is dreadful.
@ bernard ross:
Bibi did not want piss off the Obama plus the EU. This is why he entered the talks. This is why he does many of the things he does e.g. Bar Illan speech. He wants to portray as the reasonable party.
SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said:
For the people to move someone must lead. Perhaps when you house is finished.
@ the phoenix:
May I? Todah
There is a consensus among the folk here.
How about starting to formulate action plans?
The premise in my view is that the unJewish leadership will not ever move in the direction that the people must move. …
@ the phoenix:
xxxxxxxxxxxxooooooooooooooooo Did you read the article about the young women from USA immigrating to Israel,that you give you hope
@ honeybee:
You are right.
Thank you.
🙂
the phoenix Said:
That goes without saying.
@ the phoenix:
If you did “root cannels” without anesthetic wouldn’t you loose patients quickly. Same with words Sugar Darlin.
@ honeybee:
Dear hb,
You might be right.
And I have no problem admitting that I am wrong (if that were to be the case)
In fact I WISH beniyyar and I were both wrong…
But again, (and here is where it can become a circular argument), the EVIDENCE clearly points out to a rapid march towards a chasm while blindfolded!!!
Pointing it out in ‘kinder’ terms, perhaps would be better….
I pretty much write as I think / speak. ( I’ve already said it , that Bernard Ross… I ain’t)
I want our Jewish brethren to WIN!!!! WITHOUT APOLOGIZING !!!!
There!
🙂
http://youtu.be/mfwN0X8YnWo
@ the phoenix:
The USA is over run with illegal cheap labor, its a two edged sword.
@ the phoenix:
Your post [above] is un-necessary harsh. Not like you phoenix.
@ beniyyar:
You are absolutely correct!!!
But , if this IS the stark truth…WHY do we still have to convince others (Israeli Jews…and those in a leadership role) of the immediate need to change course?
The traitors that have brought Oslo and bar ilan must be unceremoniously disposed of and tried for treason!!!
I am certain that all these poor Jews that were rounded up and forced to march into cattle cars and into ‘showers’ while all around the stench of burning corpses would fill the air….
They must have BLOCKED OUT the incredibly obvious pictures that their eyes were registering, yet, refused to believe that, what they see is ACTUALLY what it looks like ……
They must have said to themselves… There obviously, must be SOMETHING that we just don’t know……
HELLOOOO!!!!!
It always was impossible to reach any peace agreement with the Palestinians, and it is just as impossible now as it has been for decades. The Palestinians deeply and with all their hearts and souls want an end to the Jewish People, the Palestinians want all of us Jews dead, deported, exiled, massacred, or exterminated, and they just as deeply and with all their hearts and souls want the Jewish Homeland, the State of Israel destroyed so completely that nothing Jewish or Israeli remains in existence. The Palestinians don’t just hate us, they absolutely loathe and despise us, and if they had the chance they would exterminate every single Jewish man, woman, child, and baby. Moreover,the Palestinians would not just celebrate the genocide of the Jewish People, they would declare the genocide of the Jews as a Muslim religious festival. Any Jewish Israeli who still argues that there is even the slightest chance of making peace with these vile Palestinian baby murderers is either incredibly stupid and ignorant or has been so socially, culturally, and religiously damaged that he now lives in an alternate universe. The Palestinians will never, ever settle peacefully with us, they will only settle for the complete and utter destruction of Israel and the absolute and utter extermination of all the Jews they can get their blood soaked hands on!
The PA or UN declaring a state is the best opportunity for Israel to annex C on the basis of securing it’s interest, protecting the local majority Jewish population and security of the Jordanian border. Israel can still claim the rest of YS but leave it to further negotiations. By annexing C most of the issues are resolved. Any sanctions can be made to fall on the shoulders of the pals. Even if the UN ratifies the state and accepts it into the Un it would be a dispute between 2 states that would last for ever and where possession would govern. The reason that the world can declare Israel an occupying power is because Israel itself has given itself that classification in its own law. Israel has legally appointed itself as an occupying power because it has not annexed. Therefore, annex c but still claim A & B. This resolves refugees into Israel, Jerusalem, gaza link, and even refugees into A & B. Israel can enter a state the same way Russia enters georgia and ukraine. Everything now said about Gaza would also be said about A & B and is now being said about A & B so it would not be a change for the worse. guatemala claimed British Honduras even after UK granted them independence as Belize. People and states can claim anything. I dont think the situation would be worse if the pals declared a state and Israel annexed all of C. the problem is that even those threatening annexation only threaten to annex the main population blocks. this assumes that vacant land in YS belongs to the pals by right: that is a grave error. This is not the same as annexing C and continuing to claim A & B but not annexing now.
At least a Pal state would change the failed paradigm that Israel operates under now and would allow for a shift in behavior on the basis of reacting to the pals. Israel appears unable to make that change on its own.
@ yamit82:
I totally agree with you.
While this is the only logical course of action, it could be argued, that the reason it is not being implemented is because current (and past) goi, were an assembly of spineless unjews that were / are not acting in Israel’s best interest.
As it has been pointed out on many threads, this has affected the entire public sector. Army, justice, police etc.
In order to be able to do just what you wrote, it seems to me that it could only happen following a complete total change of the apparatus.
‘Dear customers, thank you for your past patronage, this restaurant is now under new administration’….
I do not know if this scenario will ever play out, but it is very scary to see the direction where the country is being taken, TO KNOW that it does not have to be that way…. and to just resign to ‘hopefully there is a reason for all this… Which I just DO NOT SEE AT ALL right now…. But hopefully there is a reason….
I hope all 248 organs are intact
🙂
All suggestions clearly doable and logical. Who is going to do that?
This is our stellar leadership for the occasion:
Peres, Netanyahu, Livni, Lapid, Hertzog, (minority leader), supported by Ya’alon and his roster of political generals. Lets not forget the ubiquitous supreme courtiers.
the phoenix Said:
You asked a question which I answered. There is reality and that reality conflicts with other realities. Nothing is black and white. Every move has consequences some recognizable others unintended and unforeseen. Israel does not want the financial responsibility of governing large populations of unemployable Arabs. It would drain our economy and lend itself to exploitation by the Jews of a near captive cheap labor source. (Every Jew an Effendi) Much of our moral confusion can be traced to when we captured or liberated Y&S and Gaza. Suddenly we had over 2 million Arabs willing to work for peanuts and destroyed the motivation for Jews to work in jobs that the Arabs undercut. Every Jew became a boss and exploited the Arabs to the fullest. Israel would have to extend the basket of entitlements to Arabs living under our sovereignty whether citizens of residents status. It would set back our economy 20 years. We would have to allow them to purchase property in Israel and to live where they choose. They would have freedom of movement all over Israel. (A social, economic and security nightmare).
We want the land but not the Arabs so if we cannot at the same time remove the Arabs we can’t take the land they occupy. I have always maintained that before you seriously consider annexation you must first get rid of the Arabs. War offers the best opportunity to effect such a move along with economic restrictions against them by Israel but here we have as I said conflicting interests.
@ yamit82:
yamit, your entire post, reads almost like it was written by someone else…
Something just does not add up.
SEVERAL things for that matter…
Israel is on the OR table, where everything is ready to proceed with removing her heart, Israel HAS the capacity to prevent this irreversible disaster, but one of the main concerns is
WHO IS GOING TO PICK TOMATOES AND CUCUMBERS and WHO IS GOING TO WORK AS A BUS BOY IN THE HOTELS ????????????????
if that is the case, as hitlery said, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE if Israel has the power to destroy, could declare Oslo dead etc etc etc????
I believe the talks exist in order to further the US/GCC regional plan and are not expected to go far. that is why Abbas had to be paid in prisoners as he could not enter the talks without having something to show at the end and he knew it would be minimal and he does not even want it. However, The GCC need to have the pal issue contained so it does not interfere with their recruitment of jihadis into syria, iraq and iran. The best indication of this scenario is that the assembled jihadis do not attack Israel.
as for a pal state, the minute this is serious Israel would have no choice but to annex C in order to protect its interests. Israel already controls C and the pals have no sovereignty there so they cannot claim it as a border.
Does no one wonder why gaza does not declare itself as a state and go to the UN. Gaza actually satisfies the criteria for a state in that it controls its borders , has a ruling gov and army, etc. Gaza can become a state but chooses not to. this is a big question??????? Why?
the answer would probably reveal the case is weak for a pal state in the west bank when considering gaza. If gaza declared a state would they also claim the west bank, which is not even contiguous to them? who would be the rightful gov of a west bank and gaza palestine?
yamit82 Said:
That’s my complaint too,Sweetie
the phoenix Said:
Several reasons but one is that our third largest trading partner is the PA. They are not consumers of all that much of our Hi-Tech but support the low Tech enterprises which employ most of the Israeli workforce. Our Corporate Oligarghs are making billions off of the Palis consumer and they do supply a cheap labor force to agriculture, basic manufacturing and tourism (hotels and restaurants),in general jobs Israelis don’t want. Yes we can import cheap labor from other countries but we have to house and feed them and they send most of their earnings back to their home country and families. Arabs at the end of the day go home and spend a high % of their incomes in Israel or for Israeli products.
Israel enjoys donor nations supplying hard currencies to the Arabs as we get a sizable cut.
yamit82 Said:
Only states can recognize new states but so far over 100 states have recognized Palestine as a state. And more will line up with them when they go to the UN. There are recognized criteria for statehood and they include control of the territory. (Montevideo Convention). Kosovo has been recognized by some but not all states. e.g Russia doesn’t recognize it as a state.
Unfortunately what applies to everyone else doesn’t apply to Israel. What the recognition outside of Montivedeo means, I don’t know.
@ yamit82:
.
We would answer any violence against us with overwhelming and disproportionate Force.
The ‘Palestinian Authority’ owes the State-owned Israel Electric Corporation a whopping NIS 1.4 billion (about $400 million at today’s rates), … Shut them off!!!!
.
Within what borders could the UN give recognition to a Palis State?
To receive official recognition as a legitimate state it’s borders would need to be delineated unless virtual status becomes a new criteria.
Israel has the power to totally destroy the PA without firing a shot. Their economy is 80% dependent upon Israel if not more so. Israel could use her economic leverage to put so much pressure of the Arabs in the territories that they would in short order take care of the whole PA leadership and the chaos that would ensue would render any declaration or recognition by the UN in favor of Palis statehood mute.
It is my understanding that it is not the purview of the UN to create and define borders of nations they can only recognized established states with defined borders.
If Israel does not recognize the PA within any borders and no agreement exists between Israel and the Arabs I don’t see where there is a problem. Israel can declare the Oslo Null and Void and return to what was the status quo ante before Oslo agreements.
We would answer any violence against us with overwhelming and disproportionate Force.
WEST BANK AND GAZA:…. INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND : The PA’s financing model is showing signs of stress, and its medium-term viability is in question.
THE MEDIUM-TERM VIABILITY OF THE WEST BANK AND GAZA’S FISCAL FINANCING MODEL
The ‘Palestinian Authority’ owes the State-owned Israel Electric Corporation a whopping NIS 1.4 billion (about $400 million at today’s rates), … Shut them off!!!!
Palestinians ask to forgive $150m electricity bill
Jerusalem peeved at Palestinian request to forgive debt to Electric Corp.
Ted Belman Said:
Thanks. Well said, Ted! It is better to deal with PA’s UN option taking into account all of its ramifications now than delaying it.
@ Ted Belman:
Correct. Establish facts on the ground (e.g. build in E1 and Jordan Valley)
Pass Levy Report
Annexing Area C and any land in Be needed for contiguous borders. Keep the right to annex Area A at a later date.
@ Ted Belman:
Correct. Establish facts on the ground (e.g. build in E1 and Jordan Valley)
Pass Levy Report
Annexing Area C and any land in B needed for contiguous (security) borders. Keep the right to annex Area A at a later date.
Best defense is a good offense.
Well if that’s where we’re heading anyway, how does it not make sense to act now and annex all of J&S?
It will became either ours or our enemy’s. A no-brainer I should have thought!
All the “yes-buts” are really secondary and will need to be sorted out but immediate annexation is now paramount.\