The farcicalness and insincerity of the Paris ‘peace’ summit

Having monitored and provided some of the most complete coverage of the summit held in Paris on Sunday, I couldn’t help but notice a number of concerning things in the final statement made at the conclusion of the convention.

Of course, like many pro-Israel advocates, I was expecting this UN. conference to be a deliberate gang-up against Israel. It almost always is.

Even Prime Minister Netanyahu called it “useless” and he’s totally right.

He told his Cabinet on Sunday that the conference was coordinated by the French and the Palestinians in an effort to “force terms on Israel that conflict with our national needs.”

Expressing hope for the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump later this week and the fading out of the spineless Obama administration, he said: “This conference is among the last twitches of yesterday’s world. Tomorrow’s world will be different — and it is very near.”

Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon also slammed the conference, saying it “is so detached from reality that it has extended a hand towards Palestinian obstructionism instead of towards peace.”

I would like to say right off the bat that the great majority of Palestinians do not want peace. They want the very land that the Jewish State stands upon.

Peace is achieved through love and respect, not the legitimisation, on the part of Palestinian leaders, of continued violence and terror. But peace will never be achieved because the Palestinians want Israel destroyed. This animosity toward Israel can be traced back to Bible times. That’s the cold hard truth of the matter.

And, on a different tangent, Israeli settlements are not the barrier to peace and your an find out more about that in this informative Prager University video.

Perhaps the most glaring thing about the summit was that instead of France addressing the ongoing Syrian conflict, the Muslim migrant crisis in Europe or the rampant anti-Semitic behaviour plaguing its own country, they deliberately and purposefully took part in the United Nations’ gang-up against Israel. Why Israel? Why not some other issue of more importance?

The entire conference was a farcical and insincere display of subtle anti-Israel hate where the confederacy of Israel’s world enemies could plot and plan their next move to eradicate the existence of a Jewish State.

Neither Israel nor the Palestinian Authority were in attendance, but a heap of Arab countries were – for obvious reasons of vested interest in the matter.

The Paris summit delegates released a brief concluding declaration unanimously calling on Israel and the Palestinians to restate their commitment to a peace settlement and to refrain from unilateral actions.

The Times of Israel reports that “Israeli officials on Sunday credited the efforts of the National Security Council and the Foreign Ministry for a ‘significant weakening’ of the text of the final joint declaration issued by the participants of a peace conference in Paris.”

Nevertheless, the text of that statement was anything but fair with numerous instances of anti-Israel implications.

The deliberate victimisation of Palestinians

In that report they deliberately drew moral equivalency between “acts of violence” which would include Palestinian terrorism targeting civilians, and “settlement activity,” meaning the construction of Israeli homes in the West Bank or east Jerusalem – land which is rightfully Israel’s.

They emphasized the importance for the parties to restate their commitment to this solution, to take urgent steps in order to reverse the current negative trends on the ground, including continued acts of violence and ongoing settlement activity, and to start meaningful direct negotiations.

As for “meaningful direct negotiations,” Israel’s already been doing that for a long time. Again, I will repeat that the Arabs and Palestinians are simply not interested in talking peace. They want the entire land that Israel stands upon. That’s precisely what the entire conflict boils down to. Arabs and Palestinians are the ones at fault here. Repeated past offers of land exchanges on the part of Israel have amounted to nothing.

The ending of Israeli occupation in the West Bank and east Jerusalem – homes to many holy sites in Judaism

The declaration calls for Israel to “fully end the occupation that began in 1967,” which seems to indicate that Israel would need to relinquish its occupation of the entire West Bank and east Jerusalem subsequently jeopardising the security of the country due to indefensible borders, not to mention losing many notable sites of religious/historical importance.

They reiterated that a negotiated two-state solution should meet the legitimate aspirations of both sides, including the Palestinians’ right to statehood and sovereignty, fully end the occupation that began in 1967, satisfy Israel’s security needs and resolve all permanent status issues on the basis of United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), and also recalled relevant Security Council resolutions.

Those sites are located in eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank, and include the Western Wall and Temple Mount in Jerusalem’s Old City; the Cave of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs in Hebron; the Tomb of Rachel in Bethlehem; and Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus – biblical Shechem.

Such territories are those that Israel captured in the Six Day War of 1967 where Israel, once again, was forced to fight for its existence.

This, to me, seems to be deliberately worded so as to cut off Israel from having anything to do with its religious and historical roots, thus delegitimising the existence of the nation in its entirety.

The Paris convention, either through ignorance, oversight or deliberate avoidance seems to sidestep a very important part of the UN’s Security Council Resolution 242, which today’s declaration affirms as the basis of a future Israeli-Palestinian deal.

After stating that Israel should “fully end the occupation that began in 1967,” the Paris declaration then references Resolution 242.

Resolution 242 calls on Israel – under a future final-status solution –  to withdraw its military “from territories occupied” as a result of the Six Day War of 1967. The resolution, however, does not call for a withdrawal from “all territories,” a designation deliberately left out to ensure Israel’s ability to retain some territory for security purposes under a future deal – if that ever occurs.

As succinctly puts it:

The Security Council did not say Israel must withdraw from “all the” territories occupied after the Six-Day war. This was quite deliberate. The Soviet delegate wanted the inclusion of those words and said that their exclusion meant “that part of these territories can remain in Israeli hands.” The Arab states pushed for the word “all” to be included, but this was rejected. They nevertheless asserted that they would read the resolution as if it included the word “all.” The British Ambassador who drafted the approved resolution, Lord Caradon, declared after the vote: “It is only the resolution that will bind us, and we regard its wording as clear.”

The patronisation of Israeli efforts at peace

They emphasized the importance for the parties to restate their commitment to this solution, to take urgent steps in order to reverse the current negative trends on the ground, including continued acts of violence and ongoing settlement activity, and to start meaningful direct negotiations.

What a patronising and ignorant statement. First of all, only one side has failed in its commitment to peace. And that side is the Palestinians, NOT Israel. No ifs or buts.

Israel has offered the Palestinians a state in much of the West Bank and Gaza Strip with a shared capital in Jerusalem on numerous occasions.

These offers, like I said before, were made repeatedly. First at Camp David in 2000, Taba in 2001, the Annapolis Conference in 2007, and more in 2008. In each of these cases, the Palestinian Authority refused generous Israeli offers of statehood.

The PA has also failed to respond to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unprecedented attempts to jump-start negotiations aimed at creating a Palestinian state, including freezing Jewish settlement construction in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem and releasing 26 Palestinian prisoners.

The declaration lends credibility to the so-called Arab Peace Initiative – a threat to Israel’s security

They underscored the importance of the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 as a comprehensive framework for the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, thus contributing to regional peace and security.

Aaron Klein, a Jerusalem-based investigative reporter succinctly broke down this dangerous anti-Israel “initiative” in a WND article published in 2009:

The Saudi Initiative, originally proposed by Saudi Arabia in 2002, states that Israel would receive “normal relations” with the Arab world in exchange for a full withdrawal from the entire Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights and eastern Jerusalem, which includes the Temple Mount. …

The Saudi plan also demands the imposition of a non-binding U.N. resolution that calls for so-called Palestinian refugees who wish to move inside Israel to be permitted to do so at the “earliest practicable date.”

Palestinians have long demanded the “right of return” for millions of “refugees,” a formula Israeli officials across the political spectrum warn is code for Israel’s destruction by flooding the Jewish state with millions of Arabs, thereby changing its demographics.

When Arab countries attacked the Jewish state after its creation in 1948, some 725,000 Arabs living within Israel’s borders fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel. Also at that time, about 820,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries or fled following rampant persecution.

While most Jewish refugees were absorbed by Israel and other countries, the majority of Palestinian Arabs have been maintained in 59 U.N.-run camps that do not seek to settle its inhabitants elsewhere.

There are currently about four million Arabs who claim Palestinian refugee status with the U.N., including children and grandchildren of the original fleeing Arabs; Arabs living full-time in Jordan; and Arabs who long ago emigrated throughout the Middle East and to the West.

According to Arab sources close to the Saudi Initiative, Arab countries are willing to come to an agreement whereby Israel absorbs about 500,000 “refugees” and reaches a compensation deal with the PA for the remaining millions of Palestinians.

The unanimous “welcoming” of the anti-Israel UN Resolution 2334

The declaration unanimously “welcomed” the clearly anti-Israel UN Security Council’s Resolution 2334 in the name of advancing Middle East peace. The declaration, which passed last month thanks to the U.S. abstaining from the vote, clearly does the opposite.

The resolution refers to the entire West Bank and eastern Jerusalem as so-called occupied “Palestinian territories” while demanding a complete halt to all Israeli housing construction in those areas.

As you can see, this summit was nothing less than a continuation of the perpetuation of targeted anti-Israel propaganda which the United Nations is so notorious for.

About the Author
Caleb Stephen is a widely-published Christian freelance journalist, columnist and the founder and Editor-In-Chief of TJ Media ( He is based in Adelaide, South Australia. He writes regularly for world-renowned websites such as WorldNetDaily (WND), The Daily Caller, The Times of Israel, The Huffington Post, Jerusalem Post, and Intellihub News. Visit his website and follow him on Twitter @CalebSOfficial
Related Topics
Related Posts