Total Pageviews

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Kerry Sides With Palestinians-A Mistake to Ask for Jewish Recognition

Nadene Goldfoot                                                              
Yasser Arafat (1929 in Cairo, Egypt- 2004)  started Fatah and then became the chairman of the PLO.  He fought against Israel all his life as well as having fought against Jordanians and Lebanese forces at other times.

Arafat married Suha in 1990.  She was able to receive from him $100,000 monthly.  $1.27  million from Switzerland went  to Paris for her.  Arafat had diverted $900 million to a special account for himself.  He had estimated his personal wealth at $300 million.  This must be why Fatah has no money and must get gifts from the other Arab states.  Even so, they have not been able to pay their utility bills to Israel who supplies them even while Hamas is raining down missiles, mortars and rockets on Israel and Fatah remains belligerent with the occasional deadly attacks on Israelis. What they manage to do is continue their education on their population of hatred for the Jews, TV programs teaching hate to the children, and geography lessons showing only Palestine and not Israel.

By 1994 was the Oslo accords.  Israel, for the sake of peace, recognized the PLO and made this terrorist group legitimate.  Unfortunately they did this right away instead of testing to see that "its deeds were consistent."   In return, Arafat recognized Israel, but not as a Jewish state.  He renounced terrorism, but it still continues in the hands of Hamas, which is a branch that broke off from Fatah.  Arafat made a promise to revoke the provisions of its covenant that calls for the destruction of Israel which Hamas still has and is following to the letter.
Last Thursday, March 13th, John Kerry told Congress that he thought it was unnecessary for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a "Jewish" state and even said that this was a mistake for the Israelis to ask this of them.  He then said that Arafat had agreed that Israel would be a Jewish state and did this in 1988 and 2004.  This is not the case.

Even the US administration then felt that Arafat didn't satisfy their goal of his recognizing Israel's right to exist.  In 1988 what he said doesn't even come close to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.  Toward the end of 1988, they tried to start a diplomatic dialogue between the PLO and USA.  Secretary of State Henry Kissinger then required the PLO to recognize Israel, accept UN 242 and renounce terrorism needed for any talking between the parties.

Arafat never issued a clear declaration recognizing Israel as a Jewish state.  He just summarized #181 and the US government said that Arafat's speech didn't meet the demand of recognizing the State of Israel.  So there was no meeting between the USA and the PLO then.

It was Tzipi Livni of Israel who insisted that "declared references must be made to Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State" in her official response to the 30 April 2003 Roadmap.

Kerry's remarks are copied from the Palestinian side and not the remarks of a mediator.  If Ambassador Alan Baker, Israel's ambassador to Canada, can explain the USA attitude taken at the time of the Oslo Accords, why couldn't Kerry's group of researchers?  Anyone that has followed or understands Israel's position would know the history involved and that the Palestinians have never recognized the state of Israel to be Jewish.  This is the crux of the matter between the two people. That's why Israel was asking for it.   If they were not a Jewish state they could then flood the country with Muslim Arabs and get away with it legally.  Israel would be dead.  It would then be renamed as Palestine.  Remember, without this recognition, there will not be an end to hostilities from the Palestinians.

Resource:  Amb. Alan Baker
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs []
Subject: Arafat and the Jewish State: Setting the Record Straight - Alan Baker Vol.14 No.6

1 comment:

Nadene Goldfoot said...

To the editor,
The Times urges Israel hasten to make an agreement with Mahmoud Abbas, because he “is aging; no one knows who will succeed him”. Considering that the Palestinian president’s elected term expired in 2009, that would seem to be an indication for caution not rushing to complete a treaty his successors readily ignore. The Times’ “two state solution” supports the Palestinian position that one country be Palestinian Arab and the other not “Jewish” while recognizing the “rights of Palestinian refugees”. Considering “Palestinian refugee” numbers have morphed from but a few hundred thousand in 1948 to a claimed several million now and the Arabs‘ history of violence, towards each other let alone Christians and Jews, such a pact is destined to failure for Israel’s Jews, who might as well pack up and go home if that is the deal.
Whoops. Israel’s Jews are home. Now what?
John R. Cohn
Philadelphia, PA 19107