Doc's Talk: The Futility of Relying on the International Community

Monday, September 03, 2012

The Futility of Relying on the International Community

Isi Leibler
http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=4258

Over 120 countries – equating to two thirds of total United Nations membership – convened in Teheran to partake in the 16^th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) hosted by the Iranian Islamic Republic.

The Iranians boasted that 3 Kings, 27 presidents, 8 Prime Ministers and 50 Foreign Ministers attended. Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsy was present, breaching Egypt’s long standing estrangement from Iran which he now describes as “a strategic ally”, even though he condemned Assad’s regime in Syria. India, the world’s most populous democracy, participated with a delegation of 250 headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, stating shamelessly that its objective was to increase trade and commerce with Iran.

Despite appeals from the United States and others, UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, also attended. He did so only days after his condemnation of Iran for defying repeated Security Council resolutions demanding that it end its uranium enrichment program and repeatedly contravening the UN Charter by calling for the destruction of Israel.

In his address to participants, Ban, without explicitly naming Iran, did condemn “threats by any member state to destroy one another, or outrageous attempts to deny historical facts such as the Holocaust”. He also called on Iran to stop supplying arms to Assad in Syria and expressed regret that Iran’s refusal to halt its nuclear enrichment program.

Ban’s media spokesman, Martin Nesirsky stated that in private meetings with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad, the UN leader also referred to the vicious verbal attacks on Israel as offensive, inflammatory and unacceptable.

But this did not detract from the fact that combined with representatives from 120 nations, the UN Secretary General’s presence effectively provided legitimacy to Iran and sabotaged efforts to isolate it as a pariah state, the regime which serves as a launching pad for global terrorism. In fact, only last week, Iran proudly proclaimed that it had dispatched members of its Revolutionary Guard Corps and other fighting personnel to support Assad’s criminal rule in Syria.

At the opening of the conference, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini made yet another feral anti-Semitic speech, shamelessly exhorting the world to annihilate Israel the cancerous growth, referring to the “blood-thirsty Zionist wolves” who kill and torture Palestinians and control the global media. Yet the UN Secretary General, together with the other 120 participants remained passively glued to their seats. In many respects, the atmosphere was reminiscent of the late 1930s when the European nations, bent on appeasing Hitler, abandoned Czechoslovakia.

Had the Iranians, instead of targeting Israel, been describing a country like the UK as the cancer of Europe and calling for its elimination, it would have been inconceivable for Ban and the participating countries to attend a meeting hosted by such rogues. But apparently, for Israel, anything goes, provoking Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to appropriately describe the Tehran NAM summit as “a disgrace and stain on humanity”.

To exacerbate matters, in their closing statement, the 120 participants mockingly denounced the UN Security Council “unilateral sanctions” and unanimously endorsed Iran’s right to pursue “a peaceful nuclear program” including “nuclear enrichment”.

Nor was there a single dissenting voice when Egyptian President Morsi handed over the rotating presidency to Holocaust denier, President Ahmadinejad who will now preside over NAM during the next three years.

Any criticism or deviation from Iranian policy such as Ban’s censure of Iranian behavior or Morsy’s condemnation of Syria’s Assad was predictably censored by the local media who presented the Summit to the Iranian public as a vindication of their policies and a global rejection of efforts to isolate and impose sanctions against their government.

Not surprisingly, the Iranian leaders jubilantly proclaimed that the broad global participation vindicated them and represented a repudiation of US and Western efforts to deter them from becoming a nuclear power. All in all, it was a major PR victory for this evil regime and an indictment of the dismal state of the international community.

The willingness of so many countries to attend such a conference in Teheran at this time and unanimously endorse the Ayatollah’s nuclear policies, clearly demonstrates the abysmal failure of Obama’s initial policy of “engaging” with Iran and his subsequent decision to impose sanctions and isolate the rogue state.

This episode underlines the futility of Israel relying on the international community to resolve potential conflicts.

It also reaffirms the disfunctionality of the United Nations, which the Obama Administration continues to appease.

Nothing epitomizes this more demonstratively than the prominent role of Syria, Iran, Libya, Cuba, Saudi-Arabia and similar dictatorships have contributed towards formulating the policy of the so-called United Nations Human Rights Council. Ironically, both Syria and Sudan, whose leaders are recognized war criminals, notorious for brutally butchering their own people, are candidates for seats on this bogus organization’s council scheduled for election next month.

Ironically, the US is the principal financial donor to the UN - to the tune of a staggering $6 billion annually. It is highly unlikely that UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon would have dignified the Iranians with his presence, had the US threatened to review its funding to the UN budget if he proceeded to undermine efforts to isolate Iran for defying Security Council demands and repeatedly calling for the annihilation of a member state.

The United States and Western democracies must recognize that they will become utterly impotent if their global policies continue to be effectively subject to veto by international bodies dominated by an alliance of Islamic nations, dictatorships and tyrannies.

Democracies should unite and seek to create a world order which will strengthen freedom, encourage oppressed people to achieve self-determination and if required, be willing to employ military power to deter the barbarians at our gates. Failure to confront these problems now, threatens the long-term survival prospects for Western civilization.

In Europe, the motivation to resist antidemocratic forces has been substantially weakened by the immigration of large numbers of Moslems who have undermined the foundations of genuine multiculturalism by seeking to impose their way of life on indigenous communities. This has been aided and abetted by the postmodernists –– whose anarchical leftism and confused anti-colonialism have led them to allying themselves with terrorist organizations and apologists for the most rabid racist.

The message emerging for us in Israel is that we must retain our relationship with democratic countries, in particular the US, which despite the Obama administration’s appeasement of Muslim extremism, has not capitulated to Islamic pressures like the Europeans.

Ultimately, the bottom line is that we must not succumb to pressures from those seeking to deter us from taking steps to thwart threats to our survival. Nor should we be tempted to rely on undertakings from other, “friendly” nations. We have learnt from bitter experience, that when the chips are down we must rely on ourselves. As Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya’alon recently stated “the righteous work may be done by others, but we have to prepare as if no one else will do it for us”.

The writer’s website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com
He may be contacted at ileibler@netvision.net.il
This column was originally published in the Jerusalem Post and Israel Hayom

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