Israeli officials are being quoted today of accusing the United States of fostering protests against the decision of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to build 3,000 settlers’ homes and develop an area of the West Bank. The renewed settlement plans are widely viewed as destabilizing the area and attempting to undermine a viable Palestinian state.
What is most striking is the suggestion that the Obama Administration does not have the guts to confront Israel directly and must politically use surrogates. Five European countries, Australia and Brazil joined other countries in denouncing the move. Netanyahu has responded in his signature way by refusing to yield and going on the attack. His aides have said that the real country opposing the move is the United States. The obvious suggestion is that the Administration does not want to trigger a backlash in Congress by opposing Israel directly so it is using allies to push the issue.
The plans to build 1,700 homes in Ramot Shlomo in east Jerusalem and another 2,600 in Givat Hamatos are moving forward. The Ramot Shlomo development was shelved in 2010 after it provoked a row with the US.
The result is we can now add Israel to Iran, Syria, and Russia as countries claiming U.S. inspired protests.
Source: Telegraph
Waldo: “The UN Charter specifically denies any right of conquest to territory.”
Waldo,
If you want to talk about the UN, then let us go back to 1947 and to the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) which mandated the boundaries of the area. The West Bank ad Gaza were part of Israel. There was no “Palestinian State” only Jordan and Egypt. That was the original wishes of the UN.
Waldo: “Also, Israel launched the ’67 war and the Arabs surrounding them were hardly overwhelming force as Israel promptly crushed them militarily in six days (hence the name, the Six Days War).”
My following quote which shows you are wrong about the forces threatening Israel were taken from this Wiki link ,which if you read it, you will find is very fair to both sides in its analysis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War
Wiki: “On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt’s intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.”
Wiki: “Syria’s army had a total strength of 75,000 and amassed them along the Syrian border.Jordan’s army had 55,000 troops and 300 tanks along the Jordanian border, 250 of which were U.S. M48 Patton, sizable amounts of M113 APCs, a new battalion of mechanized infantry, and a paratrooper battalion trained in the new U.S.-built school. They also had 12 battalions of artillery and six batteries of 81 mm and 120 mm mortars.
Documents captured by the Israelis from various Jordanian command posts record orders from the end of May for the Hashemite Brigade to capture Ramot Burj Bir Mai’in in a night raid, codenamed “Operation Khaled”. The aim was to establish a bridgehead together with positions in Latrun for an armored capture of Lod and Ramle. The “go” codeword was Sa’ek and end was Nasser. The Jordanians planned for the capture of Motza and Sha’alvim in the strategic Jerusalem Corridor. Motza was tasked to Infantry Brigade 27 camped near Ma’ale Adummim: “The reserve brigade will commence a nighttime infiltration onto Motza, will destroy it to the foundation, and won’t leave a remnant or refugee from among its 800 residents”.
100 Iraqi tanks and an infantry division were readied near the Jordanian border. Two squadrons of fighter-aircraft, Hawker Hunters and MiG 21, were rebased adjacent to the Jordanian border.
On June 2, Jordan called up all reserve officers, and the West Bank commander met with community leaders in Ramallah to request assistance and cooperation for his troops during the war, assuring them that “in three days we’ll be in Tel-Aviv”.The Arab air forces were aided by volunteer pilots from the Pakistan Air Force acting in independent capacity, and by some aircraft from Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia to make up for the massive losses suffered on the first day of the war.” <Wiki
Now doing the math there were about 230,000 Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian troops massed on the Israeli borders. With an additional 60,000 Egyptian Troops also in the Sinai. Plus the Iraqi infantry division of 15,000 lined up on the border. Israel on the other hand had:
Wiki "The Israeli army had a total strength, including reservists, of 264,000, though this number could not be sustained, as the reservists were vital to civilian life"
The forces against Israel had at least 41,000 more troops available, which is a considerable advantage. Also to be factored in was that in 1957 the U.S. was not supplying equipment, like airplanes to the Israeli's, while the Russians were supplying aircraft to the Egyptians and Syrians, with Jordan being supplied by Great Britain. Also at the time the population surrounding Israel was about 150 million people and Israel had a population of 6 million. Quite a difference in resources.
"It’s not a “legitimate” solution at all. The Palestinian people do not want to be ruled by Jordanians or Egyptians, so this idea fails the right of self determination. Second, the West Bank and East Jerusalem prior to 1967 were occupied by Jordan but never legitimately part of Jordan."
There is no historical basis for the statement that the West Bank was never legitimately a part of Jordan. They ran it and they were recognized as having sovereignty there. As for what the legitimate aspirations of the "Palestinian" people on the West Bank were then, that is a moot point, in the same way that the Kurds have aspirations in Iraq and in Turkey. Many ethnic groups wish to be separate from the country they are in and some succeed. Like the Serbs and the Croats. The difference is that there exists between those two groups a religious difference, even though they are of the same culture. There is o difference in ethnicity between the Arabs and the Palestinians, they are of one ethnicity. Their desire for independence comes out of a strictly political context that deals mainly with the fact that Islam does not want a Jewish State existing in what they consider their territory. The indigenous Arabs fled Israel during the 1948 war having been assured that they would be allowed to return once "the
Jews were swept into the Sea". Didn't work out like that and their Arab brothers kept them bottled up in concentration camps, stoking their seething anger at their displacement. Their number at the time was 600,000. What is true, but soon forgotten is that during that same time around 600,000 Jews were deported from Arab lands like Iraq and Syria, with all their possessions confiscated. They were all resettled as Israeli citizens.
I don't expect though that I can use actual history to change your mind and it would be a waste of time to try to. You have your opinion regarding the "evil"
Israeli's and I have mine. However, I would suggest that you do some studying on the real culprit for the angst in the Middle East and that is Saudi Arabia.
I would submit to you that it is really the number one U.S. ally in the ME, or alternatively the U.S. is their number one minion. The Saudi's have ample reasons for wanting this conflict to continue indefinitely.
Mike,
Somewhere in this present day mess one can find the Brits … dig deep.
I even *know
I just can’t be very sympathetic towards a religious state. It doesn’t really matter which religious state. If religious discrimination is built into a government, I am against it. As for Israel in specific, what the hell else do they want from us? It’s as if this is some sort of head game to see how far we will let them take this before we get overtly angry. Their government is doing a lot of things that go against the principals of our government theory, and what many of our citizens hold as personal values. As the number of states siding with them is on the decrease, and the number of states who have conflict with us partially because we support them is increasing, how far will they expect us to bend over back ward? I think this issue is absolutely at it’s tipping point, and it is volatile enough that I can’t say I even now what ANY possible outcome would be.
MikeS, Hopefully this is the last time I need to say this. I like Obama, I donated $ to him in 2008. However, like so many people, I am saddened by the president he has shown to be in many areas. Many others lambast Obama but apparently they have street…err Turley cred, to do so w/o being called “nonsensical.”
Let’s get to the subject @ hand. The CIA does foster demonstrations, unrest, and even government overthrows..that’s what they do! Dem and Repub. presidents have used those services. We have a president who has shown not only a willingness, but a proclivity to kill people w/ drones. I don’t like the overuse of this for the same reasons many here don’t, but also for practical reasons. Dead men give no information. Human intelligence is crucial in ferreting out future attacks. So..we have a president more than happy to kill people, including US citizens, from above. Why are you so sure he wouldn’t engage in this much less draconian measure. And your hatred of Bibi clouds your thinking.
Finally, is there a star chamber that decides who “is taken seriously”? Or is just you?
The sad part about this story is that it is entirely plausible that Obama would use surrogates to condemn Israel. The US is a great super power that hands Israel billions of dollars in aid and provides diplomatic cover internationally. Yet, we’re afraid to openly criticize Israel’s actions that undermine our foreign interests. AIPAC has way to much influence on our foreign policy.
“From a factual standpoint Israel has every right to the territories it conquered in the 1967 war when they were attacked by an overwhelming force consisting of the many nations that surround them.”
Your statement is simply incorrect. The UN Charter specifically denies any right of conquest to territory. Also, Israel launched the ’67 war and the Arabs surrounding them were hardly overwhelming force as Israel promptly crushed them militarily in six days (hence the name, the Six Days War).
“The interesting nuance in this ongoing problem is that the one most legitimate solution to it is never mentioned, nor desired by the States involved. The West Bank and East Jerusalem were prior to 1967 part of Jordan. Gaza was under the aegis of Egypt and considered part of it.”
It’s not a “legitimate” solution at all. The Palestinian people do not want to be ruled by Jordanians or Egyptians, so this idea fails the right of self determination. Second, the West Bank and East Jerusalem prior to 1967 were occupied by Jordan but never legitimately part of Jordan. Just as Israel did not acquire a right to land by conquering and occupying it, so to did Jordan never acquire a right to the land. Same goes for the Gaza Strip. You are correct however that neither Jordan or Egypt want to rule over Palestinians who don’t want to be a part of their respective countries. I suspect you’re wrong however that Israel would not welcome this solution provided that got to keep the parts of the West Bank and Jerusalem that they want for themselves as Jordan and Egypt have a lot more to lose than the Palestinians and are more likely to be able to maintain peace and security for Israel.
Sorry if I misread it Mike. cheers!
Mike S, says “However, Israel needs to use these territories as not only a bargaining chip for peace, via a “two-state” solution, but also needs to rid themselves of them and thus not have to deal with ruling over people who don’t want to be ruled. ”
I think we kid ourselves if we don’t at least admit the strong possibility that the “greater Israel” is the actual goal and precious little land with be “returned” to create some possible, weak, subservient, unarmed, future Palestinian state.
“I think we kid ourselves if we don’t at least admit the strong possibility that the “greater Israel” is the actual goal and precious little land with be “returned” to create some possible, weak, subservient, unarmed, future Palestinian state.”
DonS,
If you reread my comment perhaps you’ll see that your above statement is implicit in my thinking. I have no doubt that is where Netanyahu is trying to go. He is both wrong and stupid to think in that direction.
It’s like the US wears a big “Kick Me” around it’s neck where Israel is concerned.
I mean if the treacherous saga of the USS Liberty” could be shoved under the rug due to the “special relationship”, why would Israel feel free to treat the US like it’s vassal?
Perhaps Congress will pass a resolution of apology just because, you know, Israel would never tell a scurrilous lie to keep Uncle Sucker in line.
If Israel keeps on doing what it is doing, it will end up being occupied the other Semite people.:-)
“Sounds like Obama is getting in touch w/ his inner Nixon. He’s a Chicago pol, which comports w/ the Nixonian political philosophy.”
Nick,
I am sure your would wish to be an unbiased person who likes to reason with himself about the facts. I wish you all the best in your endeavour, as we all hope to get better and open minded, so that we can embrace the humanity sans bias.
I hope you know that this claim is totally false but you jumped on its bandwagon without giving it a second thought or reasoning with yourself for clarity.
Now, the question arises, why are we here today where Israel is blatantly in violations of any laws one may bring up, or better,in violation of human dignity by building settlements on an occupied land that does not belong to them?
It is because Israel is acting the same way as many people including the Jews were treated during the WWll by the fiendish people.
I have some questions for you and I hope that u answer them honestly.
1. How many Israelis are rotting in Palestinians jails without any due process?
2. How many Palestinian women, children and young men are rotting in Israeli prisons without any due process?
3. How many Palestinians have been killed so far by the Israeli armed forces in the past 10 years and the same goes for the Israelis having been killed by the Palestinians?
4. Who has the air, road and sea access to the West Bank and the Gaza at will, the Palestinians or the IDF?
5. How many Jews voted for President Obama in the last elections?
6. Who did PM Netanyahu want to win the US elections and for what purpose even though the polls in Israel showed the opposite wish of the Israeli people?
7. How many settlements have Israeli illegally built on the occupied land and how many have the Palestinians?
8. And, lastly; how did you come to the conclusion that the above news is based on facts? If you know the facts, please do not hesitate to share with us.
Please give it a thought to the above questions without getting emotional and respond.
OS,
My only disagreement with you is that to give the devil his due, George W. is in my opinion far better looking the Bibi. and both of them have that characteristic sneer. 🙂
Now to the issue at hand. Netanyahu is quite frankly a belligerent idiot who is the puppet for the extreme religious right wing in Israel and due to that is a danger to the existence of the country he leads. I write this as a life-long supporter of Israel’s right to exist. From a factual standpoint Israel has every right to the territories it conquered in the 1967 war when they were attacked by an overwhelming force consisting of the many nations that surround them. Indeed these territories were originally part of the U.N. Mandate, but were overrun in Israel’s war of Independence in 1948.
However, Israel needs to use these territories as not only a bargaining chip for peace, via a “two-state” solution, but also needs to rid themselves of them and thus not have to deal with ruling over people who don’t want to be ruled. The latter would continue to present Israel with an untenable, unsolvable problem if it wanted to maintain its identity as the “Jewish” State. Building the settlements began as the work of Menachem Begin and his Likud Party to prevent any return of these territories to Arabs. It was in my opinion an act of sublime stupidity. Even Meir Kahane, perhaps the most radically Right Wing of Israeli political leaders understood that you could not maintain a “Jewish” State by a system of apartheid.
His solution was to expel the Arabs, just as 600,000 Jews had been expelled from the surrounding Muslim States. His solution was not viable either, given World opinion, but he at least recognized the problem.
The interesting nuance in this ongoing problem is that the one most legitimate solution to it is never mentioned, nor desired by the States involved. The West Bank and East Jerusalem were prior to 1967 part of Jordan. Gaza was under the aegis of Egypt and considered part of it. If Israel is to give back the territories it won in the 1967 War as a condition of peace, it would make the most sense to give them back to the countries that lost them. The conundrum is that either Jordan nor Egypt wants them back. These territories would present difficulties for either country, as Jordan learned when the PLO via Black September tried to overthrow its regime and take over.
The only viable option for Israel is a “Two State” solution and unfortunately Netanyahu is not helping that to occur by his further building efforts.
So would Isreal prefer that we instead DIRECTLY confront it ? Sometimes people / govt’s get what they wish for.
Obey Propaganda…..
I try to stay out of I/P discussions, because no matter what one says, it is likely to start a flame war. However, I think Bibi’s current actions are way too deliberately provocative. In some ways he reminds me of George Bush, but much better looking. When you are sitting on an opened powder keg, it is a good idea to avoid lighting up a cigar.
“Sounds like Obama is getting in touch w/ his inner Nixon. He’s a Chicago pol, which comports w/ the Nixonian political philosophy.”
Nick,
That statement is errant nonsense and just your gratuitous way of insulting someone you dislike. If you want to be taken seriously, as you appear to desire, statements like this make it impossible to take your comments seriously.
What? An ally might disapprove of your administration acting to exacerbate a situation that could plunge all involved parties into war and is blatantly callous and provocative to the Palestinians and a threat to regional stability? Who’d have thunk it, Benjamin!
Sounds like Obama is getting in touch w/ his inner Nixon. He’s a Chicago pol, which comports w/ the Nixonian political philosophy.