Arlene Kushner on Moshe Ya'alon's Surprising Comments About Democracy in the Middle East and a Palestinian State

From Arlene Kushner:
September 9, 2013

Amazing!

You don't often find a person in a high government position -- who has aspirations to be even higher, and is serving at the pleasure of a prime minister who has publicly embraced a decidedly different position from the one he thinks proper -- who speaks truth to power.  And so, that is what is amazing.

That government official is Defense Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon (Likud).  I have long known that Ya'alon is one of the good guys, but I watched as he pulled back once he became Defense Minister, careful not to take positions that blatantly transcended what Netanyahu was saying.  Until now...

~~~~~~~~~~

The Mideast Media Sampler 12/4/2012: New York Times Hypocritical Critique of Netanyahu

From DG:

1) The New  York Times's vengeful screed

The editors of the New York Times criticize Mr. Netanyahu’s Strategic Mistake:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel seems determined to escalate a crisis by retaliating against the Palestinians after the United Nations General Assembly voted to elevate Palestine to observer state status. 

Instead of looking for ways to halt a downward spiral, Mr. Netanyahu on Monday defiantly dug in on his plans to build 3,000 more housing units in contested areas east of Jerusalem and in the West Bank, and to continue planning a development in the most contentious area known as E1.

The Middle East Media Sampler 11/29/2012: Mr. Abbas Goes To The UN

From DG:

2) The editors on the bid

The New York Times has an editorial, The U.N. bid from Palestinians. There is little to object to in the opening paragraphs of the editorial:

On Thursday, a week after the Gaza cease-fire between Hamas and Israel, the Palestinian Authority, which controls parts of the West Bank, is scheduled to ask the United Nations General Assembly to upgrade the Palestinian status to nonmember observer state. 

The 193-member body is expected to approve the application. That support has grown since the Gaza fighting, with France and other European nations declaring their backing for the Palestinian bid — in part as a way to bolster the more moderate Palestinian forces, which recognize Israel’s right to exist and seek a two-state solution. 

But passage of the resolution — which would allow the Palestinians to try to join the International Criminal Court, where they might be able to bring cases against Israel — would not get the Palestinians any closer to statehood. A negotiated deal with Israel is the only way to ensure creation of a viable Palestinian state and guarantee Israel’s security.

There is a notable omission.

Arlene Kushner On Muslim Assault On Freedom Of Speech -- And Other Issues

From Arlene Kushner
September 21, 2012

Before Shabbat

The day ends earlier now, and Shabbat comes in sooner.  By next week it will be considerably sooner yet, as we turn back our clocks here on Saturday night.

And so, here I wish simply to touch on a few themes, some of considerable concern:

The first issue to address today circles back on the matter of the Muslim attacks on US installations. I have already alluded to the pathetic rush to apologize that has been exhibited by members of the Obama administration, but it goes beyond that:

UN Recognition Of A Palestinian State? There's Just One Snag

From Foreign Policy, Steven Rosen writes about the one internal condition of the UN for recognizing a second Palestinian state that is lacking:

In a few weeks, an overwhelming majority in the United Nations General Assembly will likely vote for collective recognition of a Palestinian state. But which Palestinian state? Of the three Palestinian states the assembly could recognize, two are real and arguably could meet the requirements for statehood. But it is the third, purely imaginary one that the assembly will endorse, one that neither has a functioning government nor meets the requirements of international law.

According to the prevailing legal standard, the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, a "state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states." Both the Hamas-controlled Palestinian entity in Gaza and the rival Fatah-governed Palestinian entity in the West Bank can be said to meet all four of these criteria of the law of statehood. The one on which the United Nations will vote does not.

So how exactly do Hamas and the Palestinian Authority stack up?

For Immediate Release:

Contact:  Anne Bayefsky anne@hudsonny.org (917) 488-1558

Palestinian 'Head of State' at the U.N.

Get Ready for the Statehood Steamroller 

This article by Anne Bayefsky appears on Fox News.

The United Nations showed its hand this week and sent out a provisional list of speakers for the opening session of the General Assembly in September listing the speaker from “Palestine” as “H.S.” or Head of State. Everybody knows that U.N. goings-on concerning anything Israel-related are about as crooked as it gets. But the much talked-about Palestinian statehood bid threatened for September is being sold as a test of legitimacy. So much for that bill of goods. In the past, the speaker from Palestine has been given the title in the speakers’ list “H.L.” or High Level – short for high level delegation – precisely because Palestine is not a state member of the United Nations. Though the Palestinians themselves have put a cover page on their speeches that labels Mahmoud Abbas “President of the State of Palestine,” the U.N. has, until now, resisted following suit. Not this year, however. Negotiations are out. U.N.-imposed solutions on Israel are in. The U.N. founding document – the U.N. Charter – promises the equality of states “large and small.” But in reality, Islamic states and their cronies form an automatic General Assembly majority. In 2010, for example, this meant 78% of all the Assembly resolutions condemning any of the 192 U.N. members for human rights violations were directed at Israel alone. To date, the U.N. has pretended that the parties themselves must take responsibility for recognizing each other; dozens of U.N. resolutions and the U.N. Middle East Roadmap pay lip service to the necessity of negotiations. After all, negotiations require a willingness to live in peace and acceptance of the other party’s existential rights. But that has never gone down very well in the Palestinian and larger Arab world and the U.N. has been their safety net for any and all excuses for a six decade rejection of a Jewish state. Some Palestinians put it more clearly than others. As co-founder of Hamas and member of the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip, Mahmoud al-Zahar, declared on July 29: “we are not going to accept Israel as the owner of one square centimeter because it is a fabricated state." The Palestinian unilateral declaration of statehood without negotiations is most likely to play out in some combination of U.N. bodies. The guessing at this point is that the Palestinians will go first to the Security Council demanding full U.N. membership in order to embarrass the president and force an Obama veto and then will proceed to the General Assembly for a statement of support. This course will not result in official U.N. membership, since a Security Council blessing is required for that, but additional trappings of statehood will – they hope – have been endowed. Though the Obama administration is pretending they have little control of the Palestinian Authority or Mahmoud Abbas and company, it is clear that the Palestinians are proceeding apace because they have not been presented with sufficiently negative consequences. Obama isn’t leading from behind. He is hiding in the bushes. His shyness is partly a consequence of the fact that a U.N. end-run around a negotiated settlement challenges his administration’s foreign policy yardstick of multilateralism at virtually any cost. He joined the U.N. Human Rights Council and gave it American credibility knowing that half of its resolutions and decisions on specific states are dedicated to Israel-bashing. It waited for Security Council approval to do something about Colonel Qadaffi’s threatened genocide – a delay proving more costly by the minute. It has handled Syrian butchery by waiting for tepid noises from the Security Council. It put Iranian nuclear non-proliferation in the hands of U.N. entities that have no hope of preventing an Iranian nuclear bomb. So U.S. objection to U.N. action to undercut Israel – yet again – presents a problem for this president. The U.N. understands that very well, as do the Palestinians. So why not jump the gun on “Head of State”? American taxpayers pay 25% of the U.N. bills and the costs in 2010 represented a whopping 21% increase over the fiscal year 2009. The Palestinians see nothing but a president unwilling to put an end to their gravy train. Without a major pushback, steamroller here we come.

For more United Nations coverage see www.EYEontheUN.org.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Gaza and Hamas and Operation Cast Lead.