“I will not have it recorded in my history that I sold Jerusalem.” [PA leader Abbas at emergency meeting of Arab League on February 1, 2020]
Ex US Mideast Envoy Greenblatt has stated that US wants Israel to earmark land for a future Palestinian state. This, despite according to the Wall Street Journal, after a previous visit to the ME when President Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner tried to “breathe life into the Middle East peace efforts”, administration officials suggested the plan wouldn’t guarantee full statehood for Palestinians.
Interestingly, the named paper by Bernice Lipkin PhD, which was published during July 20, 2002 is as relevant today as it was then. Selected clauses confirms this. At the commencement is the assertion that when the Palestinians have new leaders, new institutions and new security arrangements, the US will support the creation of a Palestinian state, subject to details to follow. Specifically, “A Palestinian state will never be created by terror. It will be built through reform.”
When addressing the idea of a provisional state, Charles Krauthammer in his “A Guarantee of more Violence” of June 20, 2002 astutely observes that the IDF had been able to significantly reduce terrorism by going into the Palestinian territories to seize and stop terrorists. However, after statehood, this would not be possible as it would constitute an invasion of another country, as the terrorists would have sanctuary.
The consequence would result in the Security Council being called in to an emergency session, with the US being censured unless it condemns the Israeli ‘invasion.’ “The net effect will be more terrorism and increased resentment of American diplomacy.”
Following Oslo and all agreed on commitments, the organized education of hate in the Arab schools continued, as did the training of young suicide bombers, the amount of effort in building bomb factories and the amount of money in buying weapons. Thus Oslo led to destruction rather than nation-building. Polls showed that hatred was not confined to a small segment of the Arab population.
According to a report in both the Jerusalem Post and Reuters by Lamia Lahoud on June 13, 2002, “The majority of Palestinians believe the aim of the current conflict should be to eliminate Israel and not just end the occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.”
Sherri Mandall, mother of Kobi Mandall, a young Israeli who was murdered by Arabs while out hiking, writing on Fashioned in the Womb in the Jerusalem Post comments:
“Now in the womb of Palestinian culture, Palestinians are being shaped to hate, to pervert their lives and national aspirations into the slaughter of innocent Jews. Too many Palestinian mothers are applauding their children’s deaths, appearing in nightly videos prior to suicide attacks while clutching rifles like Teddy bears, encouraging their sons and daughters to kill as many Jews as possible.
Those who could be creating life are destroying it. This cruelty has become so confused with the Palestinian national struggle in such a way, that it is a dominant expression of their community.”
From the time Transjordan occupied Samaria and Judea in 1948 until 1967, no one suggested this territory to become a separate state. In fact, given that Article 5 of the Palestine Mandate reads;” The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign power”, one has to question the validity of Article 25.
The addition of Transjordan was given legal form on March 21, 1921 when the British incorporated Article 25 into the Palestinian Mandate. It permitted The Mandatory “to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this Mandate as he may consider inapplicable—-”
Presumably the major “provision” was Israel’s lack of a majority Jewish population. That being so, could this not have been corrected in 1954 when Israel’s Jewish population was 1,498,950 while the Arab population of Jordan was 644,127? Forgetfulness, pragmatism or betrayal?
Following Israel’s great victory in 1967, the Arabs who mostly originated in neighboring countries but elected to dwell in Israel because of its attractive economy, “began calling themselves a people [‘Palestinians’].” By the time of the 2nd Intifada, “they had a cause; Israel had ‘occupied’ their homeland. They had discovered that the world resonated in sympathetic agreement whenever they talked about Israel ‘occupying’ the West Bank”. The supposed ‘occupation’ has become he weapon of choice to defame Israel.
Bernice Lipkin rightfully observes that the majority of Palestinian Arabs are in Jordanian hands. “Why not transfer the Arabs in Samaria and Judea to Jordan—-or move them to another under populated area in the region?” Further, she notes that many Arabs on the West Bank are Jordanian citizens.
However, today the King of Jordan will absolutely not entertain any additional “Palestinians”. He remembers well the assassination of his grandfather, Black September”, and the assassination of Sadat. “Black September” was a conflict fought in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between the Jordanian Armed Forces under the leadership of King Hussein, and the PLO under the leadership of Yasser Arafat, primarily between September 16 and 27, 1970. It was followed by further conflicts until July 17, 1971.
Groups within the PLO had started to openly call for the overthrow of The Hashemite Monarchy. There were even two attempts at overthrowing King Hussein.
On June 24, 2001, Faisel Husseini, the PLO representative in Jerusalem and PA minister, in an interview with the Egyptian daily, Al-Arabi, had this to say; “If we agree to declare our state over what is now only 22% of Palestine, meaning the West Bank and Gaza—–our ultimate goal is [still] the liberation of all historical Palestine from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] sea, even if this means that the conflict will last for another thousand years or for many generations.”
To this day, Saeb Erekat of the PA, persists in arguing the “Palestinian narrative”, insisting that the discrete Palestinian Arab people have resided in “Palestine” from time immemorial. Whose fault is it, his or ours? Throughout the years, Israel’s efforts at Hasbarah paled those of the Arabs. We failed to make use of findings in archeological digs, or even contrary statements by Arab leaders and historians.
Nadav Shragai cited 2 methods of constructing a national identity. The first is determining a grouping “on the basis of a shared culture and history. The 2nd method is used by nations, who do not have such a common history and thus need to invent it all from scratch.” This then, is the real criteria.
By way of an admission, Hamas [not PA] Interior Minister in the Gaza Strip, Fathi Hamad declared “every Palestinian in Gaza and all over Palestine can prove their Arab roots, whether they be in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, or anywhere else—–Speaking personally, half of my family is Egyptian.”
Walid Shoebat, a former Fatah member who converted to Christianity and speaks on behalf of his new religion and Israel, has said, “We knew full well that our origin was not Canaanite—-My grandfather would often remind us that our village, Beit Sahour, near Bethlehem, was empty when his father arrived there with 6 other families. Today, there are over 30,000 residents” in Beit Sahour, residents whose recent background was Arab, but not Palestinian.
What Netanyahu and Gantz need to do, once and for all, is to review the subject history with Trump’s ill chosen duo, clearly demonstrating that the Arabs have no claims. Further, since the Arab League were responsible for creating the PLO in Cairo in 1964, they should assume responsibility for resettling the PA. Bottom line, no more detaching segments of Jewish land, nor release of Palestinian terrorists.