I have no intention here of
reviewing matters in the sort of detail I offered yesterday. It is not
necessary, in any event.
I’m seeing much the same as I did
yesterday: Inherently contradictory comments from Kerry regarding his continued
faith in the “peace process” that prompts him to declare that he will continue
“no matter what,” coupled with a resignation that “you can
facilitate, you can push, you can nudge, but the parties themselves have to make
fundamental decisions and compromises."
This is a very
conflicted man, I would say: he sees the end but cannot admit the
failure.
Credit: DaledAmos
~~~~~~~~~~
And PA leaders? Playing
games. Commented one senior political leader in Israel, "Every time it gets to the point of making a decision,
[Abbas] runs away."
Top Fatah official Mohammed
Shtayyeh was a member of the PA negotiating team until he resigned in
November. Yesterday, speaking to Sky News Arabic, he said the PA was
willing to keep talking in April. Challenging Israel to present a map
based on the 1967 line, he declared that discussion “will be on the border
only.”
~~~~~~~~~~
It is at this point, of course, that Netanyahu
should say, so sorry, but we reject discussions based on that line, as it was
only a temporary armistice line.
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Ze’ev Elkin
(Likud) has the right idea (emphasis added):
The
time has come to stop being the go-to sucker of the Middle East. I call
on the prime minister and Minister Livni to end the entire negotiation process
so long as Abbas doesn’t withdraw his request from the United Nations, and [to]
unilaterally implement the many measures Israel has in order to convince the
Palestinian leadership that it doesn’t pay for them to fight us in the
international arena.”
So does Housing and
Construction Minister Uri Ariel (Habayit Hayehudi):
"The Palestinians turning
to the U.N. breaks down all the [negotiation efforts], and we should respond in
kind and work to strike down the Oslo Accords.”
We are not nearly where we need to be yet. But I
take heart when I see members of the government speak as these two did.
~~~~~~~~~~
Understand what has happened: The PA could have
had 400 more prisoners released in a deal that would have been sweetened by the
US, and that required only that they stay at the table. The Israelis are
saying Abbas “torpedoed” it.
Not an accident, not simply the result of
enormous anger at Israel. I would say this was a planned tactic, that had
simply awaited the proper timing. These guys are masters at manipulation and
effective PR.
(Arafat had thoroughly planned the second
intifada, and then he waited. When Sharon went up on the Temple Mount, Arafat
said this created so much anger there was a “spontaneous” uprising “caused” by
the Israelis.)
Now they claim to be ready to continue
negotiations but put a major stumbling block in the way of Israel with demands
that only the border at the ‘67 line be discussed. Shatayyeh followed his demand
for discussion only of the border with a telling statement:
Should
the talks fail, the PA will move to join 63 international organizations
including the International Criminal Court.
~~~~~~~~~~
Of course the talks are going to
fail! The trick, from their perspective, is to make it Israel’s fault that
they failed. This gives us a bit of understanding into why Netanyahu
behaves as he does. There is another way, however, and it’s the approach
of Elkin and Ariel. It means taking the offensive.
This route that the PA is now
embarking on was inevitable. It was only a matter of time, and being
forever conciliatory in order to placate the Palestinian Arabs means simply
delaying that inevitability.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is considerable concern on the
part of some of my readers regarding the implications of what the PA is planning
now. In due course I will deal with the various issues. But I want to do
so with seriousness, and I hope to be consulting with one or more attorneys I
rely upon before writing. The fact that we are heading towards Pesach does
slow matters down.
What I will say here is that the
situation can be managed, if the Israeli approach is one of strength and
self-confidence. What we are facing in good part are international
perceptions, and not matters of international law. In any event, the UN
cannot “create” a state.
See what Alan Baker – international
lawyer and Director of the Institute for Contemporary
Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs - said when the PA went to
the UN just a little over a year ago (emphasis added):
“The UN upgrade resolution has neither created a Palestinian
state, nor did it grant any kind of statehood to the Palestinians.
General Assembly resolutions, including the Palestinian upgrade
resolution, can neither determine nor dictate international law or
practice.
“...After the
Palestinian upgrade resolution, neither the status of Israel in the
territories, nor that of the Palestinians, has changed in any way. The
new claim voiced by the Palestinian leadership that Israel became, overnight, an
occupant of Palestinian sovereign territory is without any basis.
The
internationally accepted requirements for statehood include, among other things,
a unified territorial unit and responsible governance of its people, and
capability of fulfilling international commitments and responsibilities.
Furthermore, the UN Charter requires that a state seeking membership in the UN
be ‘a peace-loving state’ that accepts and is willing and capable of carrying
out the obligations of the UN Charter.”
~~~~~~~~~~
Robbie Sabel, Professor of
International Law at Hebrew University, is quoted by Times of Israel as saying
(emphasis added:
“...even if ‘Palestine’ were
admitted [to all 15 treaties and conventions] it would have no direct practical
implications for Israel...
“It gives them a feeling
of satisfaction and it strengthens their feeling of getting international
recognition of their state, but [it has] no practical importance
whatsoever.”
~~~~~~~~~~
I will close here – hopefully to
pick up again after Shabbat – with this good news story:
The Tiferet Israel synagogue was one
of the most prominent synagogues in Jerusalem before the War of Independence,
but it was destroyed – along with all of the other synagogues of eastern
Jerusalem – in 1948 when Jordan occupied this part of the city.
In 2012, plans were first mentioned
for restoring this synagogue (just as the Hurva Synagogue has been
restored). Now, Elder of Ziyon tells us, the plans for its restoration
have been approved.
The Arabs are in an uproar over this
and say it will threaten the stability of the Al Aqsa Mosque (everything we do
apparently threatens the Mosque) and will “judaize” the city.
The Arabs object to all major Jewish
building in eastern Jerusalem, but the restoration of this synagogue will
present a particular problem: Mosques and other Muslim religious buildings are
supposed to be the tallest in a given area. But Tiferet Israel, because of
its location in the Jewish Quarter, which is on a hill, will be higher than the
Dome of the Rock.
Here is a pre-1948 picture of the
synagogue, which is the building on the upper left, as seen from the Temple
Mount.
The full story can be seen
here:
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner.
This material is produced by
Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted
for it to be reproduced
only
with proper attribution.
If it is
reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be
noted.
This material is transmitted by Arlene only to
persons who have requested it or agreed to receive it. If you are on the
list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and include your name in the text of
the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment