By Ted Belman
PM Netanyahyu doesn’t have a wanderlust. He is keeping the ship of state snuggly anchored in the harbor and has no interest in sailing out into troubled waters. So says a highly respect Israeli analysts with access to the PM Office. I spoke with him for an hour.
Bibi is quite happy with the status quo and has no interest in changing it. Israel controls J&S, the Arabs there have autonomy and they are cooperating with security. There is no need to govern them or give them citizenship. He wants international money to keep flowing to the PA. It keeps them stable and enables them to buy Israeli goods.
The PA has no interest in the peace process. It will not make a final agreement with Israel. Instead it will get the international community to deliver Israel up. It prefers to be recognized as a state by the UN without the necessity of declaring themselves as a state. They are trying to have it both ways. Meanwhile the money is flowing and the leadership is raking off their unfair share.
Israel is fearful of the UN recognizing them as a state because that would give way to the PA state bringing war crime charges against Israel’s leaders and senior officers. It would also give way to sanctions. Israel is doing what it can to avoid this from happening. She is fearful of becoming another South Africa.
Sha, shtil. Israel has no intention of drawing attention to itself by provoking the West. She is keeping a low profile. It is keeping settlement construction east of the green line, even in Jerusalem, to a bare minimum. She will neither annex some of this land or extend sovereignty to part of it. Why bother, we already control it. My analyst friend cared only for security and not in making the land ours. Bibi probably shares that view. Bibi is always talking about the need for security and never talking about our rights to the land which essentially is the import of Res. 242 and the Oslo Accords. I told the analyst that Bibi should be fighting for our right to the land rather than for our right to security.
I complained to him that the High Court decision to recognize certain lands as “private Palestine land” was in violation of most legal norms and shouldn’t be allowed to stand. He agreed. But Bibi is doing nothing about it and instead has positioned himself as the protector of the independence of the Court. Rest assured he supports the policies of Ehud Barak. For the most part Bibi has stymied the initiatives of the right to gain more control over what is happening. In effect Bibi is buying into the narrative of the left with which the international community is aligned. If they say something is undemocratic he accepts it as such even though much can be argued to the contrary. Bibi is focused on putting out fires rather than starting them.
Remember in forming his government, he made sure to include people like Sol Meridor high up in the Lidud rankings and Moshe Feiglin low down. So Meridor is now a high ranking Cabinet Minister and Feiglin is not even an MK. Similarly he shunned the National Union Party and invited Labour into the coalition instead. This should have told us all we needed to know about how Bibi was going to govern.
In all probability, even if the right-of-center parties increase their seats in the up-coming election, Netanyahu will invite Kadima under Mofaz to join the coalition. He needs to have a counter-weight to the pressure from the right. Mofaz, not Yaalon, would replace Barak.
The Government of Israel is adamantly against the toppling of King Abdullah of Jordan. It works with the Bedouin who keep the King on the throne and the border with Israel quiet. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Israel’s quid pro quo is that they wouldn’t expel Palestinians on the West Bank to Jordan. My analyst friend didn’t trust the Palestinians there one iota. They would not, in his opinion, abandon the West Bank. Even if some of their leadership would, all kinds of infighting and terrorism would take place to destabilize such a Palestinian regime and assassinate the leadership.
Steady as she goes.
Ted Belman Said:
I was simply deducing from this. I found it in an article by Gil Ronen in which he quotes Naftali.
@ Ted Belman:
Is your claim fact or supposition?
What is the “or else” that would make Netanyahu baulk at doing in Area C what the Palestinian Authority did in Area A?
david singer Said:
Because Obama read him the riot act. Don’t do it or else…
Ted Belman Said:
Why should Netanyahu lack the courage to place Area C under Israeli sovereignty?
As I have argued long and hard here – 194 countries – including Israel and America – recognized that Palestine is a State on 31 October 2011 either by voting for its inclusion in UNESCO or doing nothing in the last six months to have that decision reversed on the basis that it was not a State and that its admission was unlawful and in breach of UNESCO’s Constitution. .
You can’t recognize a state or claim to be a state – if you don’t at least have effective control over some territory somewhere – as a minimum condition.
So what area of land could these 194 countries possibly have had in mind they admitted Palestine as a fellow member state of UNESCO? The location of all of those 194 countries was well known and accepted. Where was the location of the 195th and newest State?
The only possible area then effectively controlled by Palestine at best was Area A and Gaza. It could not have possibly included Area B and Area C because neither was under the effective control of the Palestinian Authority.
This unilateral claim of sovereignty – and recognition of that claim – outside the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap – made extant any further negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority under either.
Israel is now free to incorporate Area C within the state of Israel – as this territory has been under the sovereign control of no one since Great Britain handed back its Mandate to the United Nations in 1948 and it is now effectively controlled by Israel.
Would those 194 countries recognize Israel’s unilateral claim for sovereignty in Area C as they recognized Palestine’s unilateral claim for sovereignty in Area A?
If they didn’t they could be rightly accused of bias and pursuing double standards. What is good for the goose is surely good for the gander.
If the new test for claiming sovereignty is only effective control of territory – what objection could they and Palestine have to protest Israel doing exactly the same thing?
But to get any further other than objecting – it would need a new negotiating process to be opened up between the State of Palestine and the State of Israel on the allocation of sovereignty in Areas B and C.
If agreed – those negotiations would focus not on statehood – but on the competing claims of two states to the same piece of land.
My view is that those negotiations (if agreed to by Israel) should be restricted to the allocation of sovereignty Area B – where neither Israel nor Palestine exercise effective control.
Israel’s claim to sovereignty in both Area B and Area C under Article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter is far superior to any possible claim by the State of Palestine.
The mess these 194 countries and Palestine find themselves in is purely of their own making – brought about by pursuing the law of the jungle and not the rule of law.
wil
Naftali Bennett, former Chief of Staff to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said
“Netanyahu does not have enough courage to place Efrat under Israeli sovereignty and Israeli jurisdiction. Netanyahu reports to the U.S. and that is why he will not place Areas C under Israeli sovereignty.“
@ stanley:
I have been identifying the condition for a long while. The Israeli “elites” and their US parallel fellowship associates shed a long time ago all connections to the Jewish national heritage and rights. When the original Dayan abandoned Temple Mount, the rabbit was out… Since then the “peace process”, a completely organized process all right, but of “disengagement” from all that is Jewish, including people, dead or alive, took over. ONLY MONEY, personal lucre and fame counts for the unJews.
WE do not want to internalize the completely clear information flashing in front of us, that is all.
Only weeks ago, Netanyahu DE LISTED from Jewish Heritage lists nothing less than KEVER RACHEL and the MA’ARAT HAMACHPELA, following “unesco” declarations after they accepted the Arabs in question as members.
We are facing a deadly setting and remain unwilling to call it as it is.
People does not understand or prefer not to face up to the facts as to why the “elites” want a “palestinean” entity? SO there is something there to which the unJews can ABANDON, shed, destroy any semblance of Jewish identity using them as proxies.
Iran will be allowed to become a nuclear power in exchange for fortunes and Nobels.
The “elites” could have defeated Arafat easily but opted to make him a “partners”.
The same conceptziahh remains in place.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Why is membership in the General Assembly required?
If a state maintains hostile relations against another state – for whatever reason – the attacked state has a right to defend itself. Israel is now free to act as it thinks is in its national interest – free of the 19 years negotiating process that limited its freedom of movement.
Face up to the fact that the two-state diplomatic game is over – and plan and prepare for the future on this basis. Make sure the 194 states complicit in this decision do likewise. They have bought it on themselves because of their own unlawful decision.
If they want to try and correct it – fine. If they don’t – then also fine. The choice is theirs.
Ted Belman:
I benefited from reading both Yamit’s remarks and Bills remarks. A good discussion. Today I wrote to my analyst friend and pressed him on some issues. There is no such thing as maintaining the status quo. It is always changing and it is incumbent on our government to channel the change to our benefit. We must keep building even if it invokes the ire of everyone. I pressed him for Bibi’s long range vision. Where does he see the conflict in 10 or 20 years. Surely he must be more than a caretaker. He must be a builder.
Ted Belman Said:
Whether Palestine’s admission to UNESCO is a “good thing” is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether that decision was lawful or not.
Of course they are looking decidedly stupid – as the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC has made clear.
They are looking even more foolish as UNESCO has lost 22% of its budget and they are running around like chooks with their heads off trying to replace $260 million in lost funding just to the end of 2013.
I for one will be making sure they are reminded of their folly and the consequences of their decision to achieve the two-state solution outside the process laid out in the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap.
You can’t be half pregnant and you can’t be half a state. So far as those 194 countries are concerned – Palestine is a state. It doesn’t have to be demilitarized or recognize Israel as the Jewish State. It will have to make do with the area it effectively controls. It cannot demand any right of return. Israel is now relieved of any obligations to negotiate for a two-state solution.If there are to be any further negotiations – a whole new negotiating process will have to first be agreed between Israel and Palestine.
These are the consequences that these 194 countries have created since 31 October 2011- rather than tell the PA to go back to negotiating with Israel under Oslo and the Accords.
Until UNESCO has the guts to face up to the diplomatic mess they have created and get an advisory opinion from the International Court – they will have to live with the consequences of their decision.
The endgame for Israel has to be the ANNEXATION of J&S…has Bibi given up on it or not ?
The inclusion of J&S must be the underlying political imperative for any Zionist strategy…only to play it save will not secure the Jewish state !
It is no wimpy action Israel is taking in calling up battalions to line up on the Egyptian and Syrian borders.
What is not clear is just what threat this sudden action is intended to confront. Does Israeli intelligence reveal an immediate clear and present danger or rather, a gathering storm that its armed border presence, might avert before having to defend against?
As to Ted’s point that Israel “must keep building even if it invokes the ire of everyone”, I sympathize with such brave thinking.
I disagree however, that Israel can afford to be obvious about it, except in appropriate circumstances.
Given Israel’s situation, a particular building goal must usually be approached in a far less obvious fashion, yet calculated so that as each mini-strategic step is embarked on and achieved, few if any alarm bells will go off.
Though requiring a lot of patience, guile, foresight, time and effort to reach the ultimate goal, getting there the long way around often holds more promise of succees than some immediate all in action.
Muslims/Arabs have used this approach to their credit and benefit. Why shouldn’t Israel?
@ yamit82:
Six army battalions called up under emergency orders to meet growing threat on Egypt, Syria borders
Knesset approves IDF request to call up a further 16 battalions if needed
I benefited from reading both Yamit’s remarks and Bills remarks. A good discussion. Today I wrote to my analyst friend and pressed him on some issues. There is no such thing as maintaining the status quo. It is always changing and it is incumbent on our government to channel the change to our benefit. We must keep building even if it invokes the ire of everyone. I pressed him for Bibi’s long range vision. Where does he see the conflict in 10 or 20 years. Surely he must be more than a caretaker. He must be a builder.
The SC can declare that our actions threaten world peace and invoke Chap VII to our detriment. If so can we avoid the fate of S. Africa. Better still will Obama vote yes or veto. If he allows it to happen and the SC imposes sanctions, I can’t see the US going along with them. It could well bring about the end of the UN rather than Israel.
For that matter it can declare our mere existence is a threat to peace.
Yamit, knowing your ingrained antipathy towards BB, I am not surprised by your response.
You conclude as you usually do that just about anyone would be better than BB to lead Israel. When I challenge you however, as I do now to come up with a name of a politician or leader waiting in the wings who shares your gutsy attitude to tell the world to F#$k off and just do what is best for Israel and one who has the smarts, wisdom, charisma and electability factor to carry that off, you acknowledge there is no one like that who can now beat Netanyahu in an election.
Of course we all want Israel to have strong leadership that can resist pressures from world opinion and the U.S. in particular, to be captain of Israel’s ship that steers a course the best suits Israeli needs, aspirations and interests, without being steered off course by the wind of world opinion.
You say that Netanyahu has not given much if anything away, inspite of his trying to do so. May I suggest that his efforts that you damn him with, were done knowing the likelihood of Palestinians taking advantage of those efforts were slim to none. Israel has before and with Netanyahu adopted certain positions, not that they ever intended those positions to be realized with an agreement with the Palestinians, but rather to appear to be doing what the world demanded and thus with such appearance, lessening the pressure of world and American opinion.
Netanyahu, like former PM leaders knew therefore that there was little if any chance that the Palestinians/Arabs would take him up on his various offers to yield J & S to them, because even Israel’s minimal security minded conditions, were way too much for Palestinians to accept.
In other words what we have witnessed is very much a danse macabre, even led at times by Israel. It is a dance that plays to Western, and especially American sentiments. I expect however, that not only Israel, but the West knows that this dance will not end or accomplish anything for so long as the Palestinians are moved by their Jew-Israel hatred far more than, if at all by wanting to have their own state and improve their own lot.
Time and again we have seen Western leaders go through the motions of trying to bring about a good result for a noble cause, but never achieve that goal and not just as regards Israel.
That is so because appearing to be doing something is all that is important, especially when achieving success is known to be impossible in the here and now.
Does Netanyahu want to hold onto his power as PM as you accuse him of? Of course. Every politician who has risen to high office wants that.
That however, does not completely define Netanyahu’s thinking any more than it does the thinking of any politician.
@ Ted Belman:
For those fixated on size of populations and proportions may I remind them that when the state of Israel was declared we were still a minority. May I remind those same people that applied to the region as a whole we are surrounded by hundreds of millions of hostiles. A Bi-national state has some advantages if when after accepting, all available methods are used to reduce the size of the Arabs population legally and when we can get away with it not so legal.
The old Mapai (Labor) knew how to do it and they got away with it quietly with no noise little discussion and no media oversight.
@ Felix Quigley:
Except for your advocacy of Lev Bronstein, I agree.
@ Ted Belman:
The problem with Jews in general and Israel in particular is there is too much respect for the rule of law( whatever that means in a real-politik world) and we have too many lawyers in the decision making and implementing process. This is a hold over and the result of diaspora thinking and not that of an independent sovereign nation.
We are not so poor and powerless as our leaders project. They seem stunned in-fear at the prospect of projection our real wealth, real influence and real as yet unused power. The territorial size and small population are no longer true indicators of overall strength and power.
If the Arabs hold the world hostage to oil it’s time the world understands we hold the matches that could ignite their energy sources.
Message:
Israel will not be the 2nd country in the ME to use nukes
@ Bill Narvey:
I agree
Here you are full of crap. The only times in our history when world opinion was not so overwhelmingly against Israel was in the 48 war and the aftermath of 67 war. Those two precedents are the real poltik and what you have termed realism. Israel hunkering down and appeasing everyone with the minutest of influence and leverage is defensive, and in fact only invites more pressure, which is apparent with anyone with eyes and an IQ above 50. Conflict avoidance can only put off the conflict for so long until it can’t be avoided any longer. When that happens a positive result is less assured but the costs to us rise exponentially. A real leader faces threats and challenges head on and moves with skill to remove the threats and overcome the challenges. BB sole purpose is to hold on to his seat as long as he can by any means no matter the consequences. We can’t afford him any-longer he might based on his (realism) get us all killed. His realism isn’t mine.
He has not given up any more territory but not for lack of trying.
He has in principle declared before the world on more than one occasion that the Y&S do not belong to us but we are only holding on to them till we get a deal that meets someones concept of minimal security? The world cares nothing about security but knows we occupy and control territory BB has declared belongs rightfully to the diaper heads
Besides I could supply a lengthy list of actions he has taken that have harmed Israel and many Israelis. Ask and I will supply.
They already have produced great harm and you are suggesting we endure more of his mistakes? Lets have new elections and see were they take us? one never knows sometimes they produce welcome surprises.
In international realpolitik, law is either what popular opinion says it is or it is ignored altogether when nations take positions that declare without more, what is legal and illegal.
We have seen this time and again in many variations, in many forums and many circumstances.
Obama for instance has, using the highly evocative and pejorative label of settlements, declared all Israeli expansion beyond the green line illegitimate. Obama uses that word as a euphemism for illegal, but in doing so he is drawing a distinction without a difference.
Whatever negative views one holds of Netanyahu, he is a realist who knows that the weight of world opinion against Israel is not just theoretical, but in the world of realpolitik, world opinion weighs very heavy on Israel. Not making waves against that world opinion, does ease the burden of anti-Israel world opinion to at least some extent.
So far, Netanyahu has not given up much as he steers Israel around the rocks of despair and the shoals of disaster.
That is not to say that Netanyahu hasn’t made some miscalculations and will doubtless make more, but with any luck those miscalculations will not be so significant as to render Israel more existentially insecure and vulnerable to both internal and external anti-Israel forces.
Jordan is the real home for the meandering Arabs. And that on itself is a major concession on our part. Regardless of how much anyone want to massage the truth away, that is it. Ted is working very hard on that alternative and I congratulate him.
david singer Said:
They can do whatever they want. They can argue that it is a state enough for membership in UNESCO but not a totally free state with agreed borders. They can have it both ways. Nevermind that on the one hand a state is supposed to be master of its house and on the other hand it is not the master of its house. It can’t militarise etc.
Look at Gaza. We withdrew from Gaza but we are still held responsible for it in certain ways. We are still considered occupiers.
So do you think it is a good thing that 194 countries recognized Palestine as a state or not. Do you want to have it litigated or not?
@ Ted Belman:
A state is a state is a state – if people care to recognize it and no action is taken to reverse or challenge that decision and get a definitive court ruling to the contrary.
When that state sought to join the ICC it was rebuffed because the Office of the Prosecutor took the view it was not a state. Similarly when it applied to join the UN -its application did not even get past the vetting Committee.
So some have recognized Palestine as a state and some haven’t. Indeed many argue the Montevideo Convention is not the last word on the subject.
Those who have recognized the state of Palestine cannot now say the two-state solution has yet to be achieved. Their vote in UNESCO – or their subsequent conduct – clearly ensured that in their opinion it had been achieved. Hold them to it.
I can assure you I laboured long and hard to get UNESCO and the Australian delegation to UNESCO to take a lead role in UNESCO going to the International Court of Justice to seek an advisory opinion on that decision which (apart from the state issue) I maintained is also unlawful because the required vote to admit Palestine was 129 votes – not the 107 votes obtained.
I was rebuffed with no attempt by UNESCO or Australia (which had voted against admitting Palestine) to answer my detailed submissions.
So if that is their attitude – let them suffer the consequences of their decision.
Of course this is what happens when the law of the jungle takes over from the rule of law.
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. These 194 states are going to die of thirst – unless the International Court is asked to clarify the position their decision and subsequent conduct has created.
Until this happens accept that:
1. The State of Palestine has been recognized by all 194 countries in UNESCO
2. The Palestinians are no longer stateless
3, The two-state outcome diplomatically supported by these states for the last 19 years has been achieved courtesy of their votes and subsequent conduct in UNESCO.
4. Oslo,the Roadmap,UNWRA,the Quartet,the Committee on the Inalienable Right of the Palestinians and its Special Rapporteur,the Saudi Peace Plan and all other plans and ideas for achieving the two-state solution are of no further consequence.
If any of these states beg to differ with my conclusions – I would love to hear their reasons.
I is quite worrisome. Is passivity toward Iran part of “don’t rock the boat”?
What about the Iranian nuclear bomb coming up? Iran is going to use it somewhere to help the hidden iman appear and bring real happiness to the miserable life of the Muslims.
This mixed multitude that governs Israel is some of the most despicable types around. It is almost as if that judenrat king of the Nazi ghetto, Jacob Gens, is still alive and governing Israel instead of Vilna, Lithuania.
Ted, I thank you for graciously peeling the onion and exposing the truth.
Now I know for what is my son serving in Tzahal during Miluim and why I did myself serve. So they GoI would be comfortable. Got it!
And we were so concerned about our safety. It is all OK fellow citizens. Rest at ease. The “leadershi…p, is comfortable and our hundreds of billions of dollars dumped into military and civilian government salaries and huge warehouses of materials were well invested. They are comfortable and that is all well. They do not need to protect our people or Heritage. Your money is spent paying them huge salaries and buying toys of war they do not intend to use to defeat enemies. They use that prowess just to attack Jews. That way the Goyim will be pleased. Great job!
Enemies they import and arm. Illegal immigrants piled up and not just from Africa. PEACE!
Lets just keep on electing that aggregate, it is fine. What else should we expect but to know that the creeps are at ease. I felt that being the case during the 2006 Lebanon War. We took 180+ rockets and not a one milico showed up.
Wait! I wonder if Mr. Netanyahu would like some more special wines and cigars to help him be at ease?
NUTS!
Iran is home free and nothing will be left of Eretz Israel if we keep voting for that fellowship.
I am with David on this and it is a great point because it leads into the reality of what has happened since 1990…Yugoslavia, Gaghbo, Mubarak, Gadhafi
They could not care a fig about international law. Fascism is defined as control by the armed bodies of men on the streets, but I have been strugling to find the equivalent word for this (Fascism) on the international scene.
David’s point must be joined to this new reality, the doctrine of “responsibility to protect” which is spearheaded by the Media (NYT and BBC for example)
The football team which seeks to defend 1.0 score usually is beaten.
Israel will be in great difficulty without a qualitatively different leadership. I think Trotskyism has a role to play.
david singer Said:
Perhaps you are right. If these states used the admission of Palestine into UNESCO as a way of affirming their recognition of Palestine as a state in defiance of the Security Council and Montevideo, does that make it a state? Does it matter that Palestine has not declared itself a state?
@ Ted Belman:
Ted
You suggest I am making too much of the UNESCO decision? I think you underestimate its importance.
I agree with everything you say on the illegality of the decision. However 194 states do not – and have accepted that Palestine is a state without raising one of your legal points during the last six months when they had the opportunity to do so. Their conduct now precludes them from denying that they have recognized the State of Palestine.
Can these states still assert the two state-solution has not been achieved? I hardly think so.
Can these states assert that UNWRA should not be disbanded forthwith? I hardly think so
Can these states assert that the two-state solution should be pursued under Oslo and the Roadmap when the two-state solution has already in their judgement been achieved? I hardly think so
These states have made their decision. Now they must live with its consequences and need to be reminded of those consequences whenever they try to say anything inconsistent with what they have done.
@ CuriousAmerican:
States can be recognized as states whether they are in UNESCO,the UN or any other organization.
Palestine’s admission to UNESCO was unconstitutional and unlawful – but none of the 194 member states has objected. Until it is overruled it stands and the states that made that decision will have to deal with the consequences of that decision. They can hardly deny the Palestinians are still stateless and homeless after admitting Palestine as the 195th member state of UNESCO.
Other organizations like the ICC will make their own judgements on whether Palestine is a state or not.
Sever Plocker in Moving closer to one state argues that managing the status quo isn’t good enough if we want to avoid a bi-national state. Please note that he ignores that we are having more babies proportionately then the Arabs are having and he misrepresents the Arab population in J&S. It is really 1.5 million.
david singer Said:
I believe you make too much of the UNESCO decision. The ICC rejected application of Palestine to join and thus be able to bring charges, presumably because Palestine wasn’t a sovereign state. Palestine doesn’t meet the criteria for statehood because it doesn’t have a defined territory on which it exercises internal and external sovereignty. In order to become a member state of the UN, the SC must recommend admission to the GA. Although many countries recognize Palestine as a state, Palestine hasn’t declared itself to be one. That’s all important. But I believe that if it declared its statehood and everyone recognized it as such, it would be contrary to international law. But such recognition would effectively trash the Montevideo rules for statehood.
I think the flow is from our area to Saudia Arabia. I have seen the geo maps when I was worked for an oil company in Sinai.
Israels primary goal is not to export our energy resources but to ensure our own energy Independence in the future.
The solution to the problem is OIL.
Israel should drill and drill fast off of its seashore.
Once Europe ceases to be dependent on the Arab oil teat, then European sympathies for the Arabs will die off. France is on the verge of anti-Arab pogroms.
“Asher shall dip his foot in oil” (Deut. 33:24)
Once you have oil
A) The West will cease to be dependent on Arab oil
B) The money can be used to finance a voluntary exodus of Judean and Samarian Arabs to South America, by giving substantial money to the Arabs and to the South American countries which take them in
C) The money can be used to encourage Aliyah
OIL OFF OF TEL AVIV
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/153723
The deep secret is that Israel is over the lowest basin of oil in the Mideast, which means that if they strike oil, it the oil will drain down from Saudi Arabia into Israel.
Israel should drill everywhere it can.
NOT EXACTLY! Membership in the General Assembly is required.
I would be careful how you use that definition. If you declare Palestine a recognized state,
then de jure you make “armed resistance” against an “occupation” legal; so don’t go there.
This is what the PA sought, but don’t give it to them on a platter.
Status quo? Nor really.
Policies and deals undermining Israel are being implemented in a slow and subtle manner.
An insignia with an oblivious frog boiling slowly in a pot could symbolize the coalition’s unofficial agenda for Israel.
Jewish Israel is being dismantled – one policy at the time.
~~~~~~~~~
And about the frog? Just check all those polls showing strong popular support for Likud.
~~~~~~~~~~~
To be fair, it’s not all the politicians’ fault.
But without public indifference or complacency or fatalism or self-deceit – and without nationalist disunity and focus on skirmishes instead of the real battle – those politicians wouldn’t stand a chance.
Here is one recent anecdotal evidence of how badly things have degraded:
National Railways agreed with Akko’s train station managers who turned away teenagers holding up a banner saying PROUD TO BE ISRAELI on Independence Day because – get this! – it might offend Israeli Arabs.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/155255
But that was only a small part of the problem: A few pathologically politically-correct bureaucrats. Nothing new. They exist everywhere.
The REAL PROBLEM is that nobody else seemed disturbed by this news.
Now the word Israeli is not only offensive in other countries, but in Israel itself!!!
And nobody is showing appropriate outrage.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
So, what are the prospects for a country that has become the high-tech equivalent of Santa’s North Pole workshop? All those Jewish elves busy-busy creating wonderful things for the entire world, but never being recognized for their efforts?
Has anyone ever heard of those elves enjoying elf-rights laws recognized by the international community? Or saying Proud to be an Elf without being accused of chauvinism?
And I won’t even mention Santa’s dark role in all this.
~~~~~~~~
Ted Belman’s analysis is heartbreaking.
Present leaders are not leading Israel into a bright future. They’re merely acting as careful administrators while decisions are being made elsewhere.
And let’s not just blame the White House. This modern process of undermining Jews’ rights to their ancient land has been going on at least since the British Mandate years.
They arm and train the Arabs – in Egypt, PA, Jordan, everywhere. And they disempower the Jews through “diplomacy” and hardball tactics.
If Israel were any other country, those foreign powers would have instigated a coup long ago and gotten it all over with. But since that’s not the case, they do it by stealth instead.
One day you woke up and Jews were gone from Sinai. And then they were gone from Gaza. And one of these days they might be expelled from Judea and Samaria’s smaller communities. Or from all of them. After all, the PM does not even refute the charge of “occupation” anymore.
~~~~~~~~~~
Eventually the government may even remove the Star of David and blue stripes from the Israeli flag for being too offensive to the Arab population, and display an appropriate white flag of surrender instead.
The ultimate agenda is taking time to implement, but they’re getting there.
You state:
“Israel is fearful of the UN recognizing them as a state because that would give way to the PA state bringing war crime charges against Israel’s leaders and senior officers. It would also give way to sanctions. Israel is doing what it can to avoid this from happening. She is fearful of becoming another South Africa.”
UNESCO recognized Palestine as a state on 31 October 2011. Not one of UNESCO’S 194 member states – including Israel or America – has taken any action since then to reverse that decision or have its legality tested in the International Court of Justice.
The two-state solution was achieved when Palestine was admitted to UNESCO. No longer can the Palestinians claim to be stateless. The Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap are now extant and extinct.
Why then can’t the state of Palestine now take the actions suggested by you above – without first becoming a member of the UN?
No kidding. In fact, Israel is so intent on not provoking the West, it will surrender its own existence to do avoid this — and, incidentally, to avoid facing reality at the same time. I’m not concerned that much about Judea and Samaria: If the Jews want to surrender their ancestral homeland, let them. God will raise up someone else to bear His name there, maybe Messianic Christians. What concerns me more, is that Israel, by doing nothing when even their enemies expect them to do something, is allowing Iran to get nuclear weapons and to become a scourge upon the whole earth.
Sooner or later, the world will wake up to a real Iranian menace… and I’ll give you three guesses whom they will blame (Hint: They will all be Jews).