Doc's Talk: Iran and Syria as state sponsors of terrorism in the annual report

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Iran and Syria as state sponsors of terrorism in the annual report

Overview

1. Iran and Syria, two countries designated as state sponsors of terrorism by the US Department of State, have consistently pursued a long-term strategy of encouraging and inciting violence and terrorism against Israel (“resistance”) by relying on Palestinian terrorist organizations (mostly Hamas) and the Lebanese Hezbollah. The purpose of that strategy is to strengthen the radical Iranian-Syrian axis in the Middle East, to weaken Israel by hitting its economy and social structure, to reinforce the radical Islamic forces in Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, Iraq, and other sites in the Middle East and worldwide, and to undermine the prospects of a US-sponsored Middle East peace process between Israel and the Palestinians.
2. Iran and Syria tend to play down or even deny the military-operative nature of the assistance they provide to what the US Department of State has designated as terrorist organizations, portraying it as political, informational, or even humanitarian assistance. However, reliable intelligence information collected by Israel , the US , and other countries conclusively proves that those claims are false. The annual report on terrorism issued by the US Department of State, based on considerable information held by the US , conclusively proves that in 2008 there was no real change in the extent and nature of Iranian and Syrian support of terrorist organizations. For their part, the Iranians deny the findings of the report, claiming that it is the US which pursues a strategy of violence and terrorism, and that Iran itself is a “victim of terrorism”.

3. The US Department of State's annual report on terrorism, published in April 2009, dedicates a separate chapter to state sponsors of terrorism. Iran and Syria, two major state sponsors of terrorism, feature prominently in Chapter 3, which deals with the two countries. The report indicates that Iran remained the most significant state sponsor of terrorism and that it has long employed terrorism to advance its key national security and foreign policy interests. The report further notes that Iran continues to rely primarily on its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps- Qods Force to clandestinely cultivate and support terrorist and Islamic militant groups abroad, including: Lebanese Hezbollah, Palestinian terrorist groups such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, certain Iraqi Shi'a militant groups, and Islamic militants in Afghanistan, the Balkans, and elsewhere (pp. 10, 182-183). Also according to the report, Hamas and Hezbollah continued to finance their terrorist activities mostly through state sponsors of terrorism Iran and Syria (p. 120).

Iran

4. As indicated in the beginning of the chapter about Iran (pp. 182-183), “ Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism”. Iran‘s involvement in the planning and financial support of terrorist attacks throughout the Middle East, Europe, and Central Asia had a direct impact on international efforts to promote peace, threatened economic stability in the Gulf, and undermined the growth of democracy.

5. The report asserts that Iran remained a principal supporter of groups that are implacably opposed to the Middle East Peace Process . Iran provided weapons, training, and funding to Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups, including Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC). Iran‘s provision of training, weapons, and money to Hamas since the 2006 Palestinian elections has bolstered Hamas's ability to strike Israel. According to the report, in 2008, Iran provided more than $200 million in funding to Lebanese Hezbollah and trained over 3,000 Hezbollah fighters at camps in Iran (p. 183). Since the end of the 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, Iran has assisted Hezbollah in rearming, in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701. 1

6. The report indicates that Iran 's Qods Force,2 the elite unit of the Revolutionary Guards, is the Iranian regime's main instrument of supporting terrorism outside of Iran . According to the report, the Qods Force provides assistance in arms, training, and funding to Hamas, other Palestinian terrorist organizations, Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqi militants, and Taliban fighters in Afghanistan .

7. Iranian authorities continued to provide lethal support, including weapons, training, funding, and guidance, to Iraqi militant groups that targeted Coalition and Iraqi forces and killed innocent Iraqi civilians. Iran‘s Qods Force continued to provide Iraqi militants with Iranian-produced advanced rockets, sniper rifles, automatic weapons, and mortars. In addition, Tehran was responsible for some of the lethality of anti-Coalition attacks by providing militants with the capability to assemble improvised explosive devices (IEDs) with explosively formed projectiles (EFPs) that were specially designed to defeat armored vehicles. 3 According to the report, The Qods Force, in concert with Lebanese Hezbollah, provided training both inside and outside of Iraq for Iraqi militants in the construction and use of sophisticated IED technology and other advanced weaponry. 4

8. As for Al-Qaeda, the report indicates that Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior Al-Qaeda members it has detained, and has refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran also continued to fail to control the activities of some Al-Qaeda members who fled to Iran following the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan (p. 183). 5

9. In some places, the report mentions the growing ties between Iran and Latin American countries (which, we believe, may potentially increase Iran 's terrorist activity in Latin America ). The report also mentions that the US is concerned about the activity of Hezbollah and Hamas supporters in the tri-border area between Argentina , Brazil , and Paraguay . Regarding Iran 's terrorist activity in South America , the report mentions the following:

a. Shipment of chemicals to Venezuela seized in Turkey : In November 2008, Turkish customs officials at the Port of Mersin seized a suspicious Iranian shipment bound for Venezuela which contained 22 shipping containers of barrels of nitrate and sulfite chemicals, commonly used for bombs, along with dismantled laboratory equipment. Customs officials detected the equipment during a search of 22 containers manifested as “tractor parts.” They were being transshipped to Port of Mersin by trucks from Iran . In December, customs officials asked Turkish Atomic Energy Authority and military experts to examine the seized material. At year‘s end, disposition of the shipment remained undecided (p. 105).

b. The report also indicates that Iran and Venezuela continued weekly flights connecting Tehran and Damascus with Caracas (p. 180). Passengers on these flights were reportedly subject to only cursory immigration and customs controls in Caracas . Venezuelan citizenship, identity, and travel documents remained easy to obtain, making Venezuela a potentially attractive way station for terrorists. 6

Syria

10. The chapter on Syria (pp. 184-186) starts by saying that Syria was first designated in 1979 as a state sponsor of terrorism (meaning it is now thirty years since it was designated as a state sponsor of terrorism by the US Department of State). Syria has not been directly implicated in an act of terrorism since 1986, although it did continue to defend what it considered to be legitimate armed resistance by Palestinians and Hezbollah against Israeli occupation of Arab territory, and by the Iraqi opposition against the “occupation of Iraq .” The report also mentions (p. 185) Syria 's involvement in the February 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, which is still being investigated by the UN. Syria assisted terrorist organizations by providing them with military, financial, political, and informational support, as detailed in the report.

11. The report asserts that Syria provided political and material support to Hezbollah and allowed Iran to use Syrian territory as a transit point for assistance to Hezbollah. Hamas, Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLFP), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), among others, based their external leadership within Syria 's borders. The Syrian government insisted these groups were confined to political and informational activities (a false claim often made by the Syrians), but groups with leaders in Syria have claimed responsibility for deadly anti-Israeli terrorist attacks. As for Hezbollah, the report further adds that, highlighting Syria 's ties to the world's most notorious terrorists, Hezbollah Operations Chief Imad Mughniyah, perished in a February 12 car bombing near Syrian Military Intelligence (SMI) headquarters in the Damascus neighborhood of Kafr Sousa. The report mentions that Mughniyah was wanted in connection with the 1983 bombings of the Marine barracks and the U.S. Embassy in Beirut , which killed over 350. The Syrian government acknowledged that one of the world's most wanted terrorists had been present and died on Syrian soil.

12. The report asserts that President Bashar al-Asad continued to express public support for Palestinian terrorist groups. For example, Hamas Politburo head and de facto leader Khaled Mash'al and his deputies continued to reside in Syria . Syria provided a safe haven for Mash'al and security escorts for his motorcades. Mash'al's use of the Syrian Ministry of Information as the venue for press conferences this year could be taken as an endorsement of Hamas's message. Media reports indicated Hamas used Syrian soil to train its militant fighters, even though Syrian authorities claimed they attempted to prevent such activities. 7 The Syrian government allowed Palestinian conferences organized by Hamas, PIJ, and other terrorist organizations to take place in Syria .

13. The report states that throughout 2008, Syria continued to strengthen ties with fellow state sponsor of terrorism, Iran . Syria 's Minister of Defense visited Tehran in May and initiated a Memorandum of Understanding on defense cooperation. Syria also allowed leaders of Hamas and other Palestinian groups to visit Tehran (p. 185). The report further notes that Asad continued to be a staunch defender of Iran 's policies, including Iran 's “civil” nuclear ambitions.

Reactions to the report

Iran

14. The US Department of State's report on terrorism was severely criticized by Iranian spokesmen, who wondered that the new administration, which had talked about change, did not change its view of Iran and was continuing to make false accusations against it. Initial reactions follow:

a. Iran 's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, staying in Cuba for the Non-Aligned Movement conference, said that the United States ' accusations and the American “despicable” attitude were groundless. He further added that the US had no authority to accuse other countries of supporting terrorism while it followed a racist approach and continued its occupation, and that its doings in Guantanamo Prison were not to be forgotten (IRNA, May 1, 2009).

b. Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi noted that Iran was itself a victim of terrorism and was always suffering from terrorism at the hands of the Mojahedin-e Khalq. 8 He said that 16,000 Iranians had been killed by that organization. He also added that Iran had always spearheaded the struggle against terrorism, unlike the US , which supported “the Zionist regime which is a symbol of government terrorism” (Fars News Agency, May 4, 2009).

Hezbollah

15. In response to the US Department of State‘s report, Hezbollah issued an announcement saying that it was not at all surprised by the findings of the report and by its “old-new” allegations, which Hezbollah considers “a badge of honor”. The announcement says that the Americans do not address the term of “resistance” or anything that has to do with that term (used by Hezbollah and terrorist organizations, that term legitimizes violence and terrorism). It further states that the US , which does nothing but “occupation and aggression”, arrogantly brands peoples and governments “terrorists”. The announcement argues that when the US administration speaks negatively about Hezbollah, it actually praises it, because “Hezbollah's value is not in its impressive technology but rather in its willingness and commitment to matters of justice, in the spirit of deep responsibility to fight the inequity and the aggression of the occupation” (Hezbollah's organ Al-Intiqad, May 1).

16. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah portrayed the report as part of a global US-led attack against Hezbollah, referring also to the semi-annual report issued by the UN Secretary-General. 9 According to Nasrallah, the purpose of the report is to portray Hezbollah as an organization involved in terrorism, drug trafficking, murder, forgery, and so forth. Nasrallah claims that such allegations are baseless, because Hezbollah represents “noble, real, pure and pristine resistance, which has perseverance, which fights the holy war [jihad], which is honest and loyal”. He further notes that the problem with all the report writers is the respect and prestige commanded by Hezbollah, and the fact that the organization refuses to recognize Israel and the US regional hegemony. Nasrallah brought up the claim that if Hezbollah limited its activities to Lebanese internal affairs, even if those activities were violent, its name would be crossed off the list of terrorist organizations. According to Nasrallah, it is designated by the US as a terrorist organization because its goal is confronting Israel (Al-Manar, May 1).

Syria

17. The Syrian official media has yet to respond to the findings of the annual report issued by the US Department of State. An unofficial Syrian website published a response on behalf of an organization calling itself Syria 's Independent Committee, which proclaims itself a representative of all sectors of Syrian society. The website countered the US report with a report of its own, portraying the US as a state sponsor of terrorism. The reason for that, the report says, is that the US formerly supported Bin Laden and established the Al-Qaeda organization in Afghanistan, it supports “the Israeli terrorism”, it occupied Iraq and committed a genocide there (all4syria, May 2).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Assisted by Iran and Syria , Hezbollah does not uphold Security Council Resolution 1701 and continues building up its military infrastructure in southern Lebanon . See our August 12, 2007 Information Bulletin: “One year since the acceptance of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the second Lebanon war: An interim report” .

2 See our April 2, 2007 Information Bulletin: “Using the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards as the main tool to export the revolution beyond the borders of Iran ” .

3 One of the latest roadside IEDs developed using Iranian technological know-how is Shawaz 4, a shaped IED found in the possession of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Using high-energy explosives, those IEDs can reportedly penetrate over 200 mm of steel.

4 Iranian technological know-how on producing lethal IEDs (such as Shawaz) was also provided to Hamas in the Gaza Strip. See our January 12, 2009 Information Bulletin: “Iranian Support of Hamas” .

5 For more on Iran 's former “dual role” regarding Al-Qaeda, see our April 2003 Information Bulletin: “Iran as a State Sponsoring and Operating Terror” .

6 On the activity of Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guards in Venezuela , see our April 19, 2009 Information Bulletin: “Iran increases its political and economic presence in Latin America, defying the United States and attempting to undermine American hegemony. It also foments radical Shi'ite Islamization and exports Iran's revolutionary ideology, using Hezbollah to establish intelligence, terrorism and crime networks, liable to be exploited against the United States and Israel” .

7 As at April 2008, 600 Hamas operatives trained in Syria . See our April 8, 2008 Information Bulletin: “Hamas's military buildup in the Gaza Strip” .

8 Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) is a left-wing terrorist organization which operates in Iran since the 1960s. Since the 1980s, after Khomeini's revolution, the organization operates outside of Iran , mainly against the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is designated as a terrorist organization by many countries, including the US . It is also designated as a terrorist organization in the latest report on terrorism for 2008 (p. 283).

9 For more information on the UN Secretary-General's report about the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1559 and Hezbollah's response, see our April 28, 2009 Information Bulletin : “Exposure of a Hezbollah network in Egypt: state of affairs, implications, and reactions in Egypt and in the Arab and Muslim world”.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk