12-26-2016, 10:34 PM
*** 27-Dec-16 World View -- Furious Israel retaliates against UN for condemning West Bank settlements
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
****
**** Palestinians declare a defeat for the forces of darkness
****
![[Image: g120221d.jpg]](http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2010/g120221d.jpg)
When Netanyahu and Obama met in Washington on May 20 2011, it didn't go too well.
The United States Security Council on Friday passed Resolution 2334,
which says that Israel's West Bank settlements constitute "flagrant
violation of international law." Similar resolutions in the passed
have failed because of a United States veto, but in a major reversal
of policy by the Barack Obama administration, the United States
abstained on Friday's vote, allowing the resolution to pass.
The Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, interviewed on the BBC, was
ebullient, and said that the resolution was a major victory for
Palestinians and the "two-state solution, and a defeat for the forces
of darkness (my transcription):
> [indent]<QUOTE>"This is a day for peace. This is a day for hope.
> This is a day when the international community stood tall. To
> tell the Palestinians and Israelis that peace is possible.
> Through the establishment of a two-state where the state of
> Palestine can live side by side with the state of Israel in peace
> and security on the 1967 line.
>
> This is a day where the international community unanimously have
> told the Israeli government stop the settlements. Stop the
> dictation. Stop the occupation. This is a day when the
> international community have told the Israeli people if you want
> to live in peace and security, it's not going to be through
> dictation and occupation and settlements. It's going to be
> through fairness, through neighborly relations, through the
> freedom of the Palestinian people, through international law. I
> hope this clearcut message to the Israeli government will be
> understood. I think that this is a major defeat for the forces of
> darkness and extremism and dictation. [Inaudible] for
> Palestinians and Israelis in peace. So today, it's really a day
> of hope not only for Palestinians and Israelis, but for the whole
> region as a whole, for the people of this region as a
> whole."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
Resolution 2334 contains the following text:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter
> of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the
> inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,
>
> Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to
> abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities
> under the Fourth Geneva Convention ...,
>
> Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic
> composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory
> occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter
> alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of
> Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and
> displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of
> international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,
>
> Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement
> activities are dangerously imperiling the viability of the
> two-State solution based on the 1967 lines ...
>
> 1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in
> the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East
> Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant
> violation under international law and a major obstacle to the
> achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and
> comprehensive peace;
>
> 2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely
> cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian
> territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all
> of its legal obligations in this regard. ..."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
In another interview, Saeb Erekat said that the Palestinians will pull
membership in the United States for the State of Palestine. United Nations
and WAFA (Palestine News & Information Agency)
****
**** Statements by diplomats show they live in fantasyland
****
One can't help but laugh at the statement by Saeb Erekat quoted above,
and his victory over the forces of darkness, but statements by other
diplomats were equally idiotic.
The problem is this "two-state solution" fantasy. The very first Generational Dynamics prediction that I
wrote was in May 2003, when President George Bush announced his
"Mideast Roadmap to Peace." President Bush called for a Palestinian
State by 2005, to live in peace and security side by side with Israel.
It provided a series of steps for both sides to follow, mostly having
to do with eliminating violence against both Palestinian and Israeli
civilians.
As I wrote at that time, the Jews and Arabs were headed not for a
two-state solution, but for a full-scale war, as the generations of
survivors of the 1949 war that followed the partitioning of Palestine
and the creation of the state of Israel died off. Since I wrote that
analysis, there are certainly no signs of a two-state solution, as
there have been numerous Mideast wars in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon,
Gaza and Libya, with skirmishes in other countries. The Mideast is
still headed for full-scale war, pitting Jews against Arabs, Sunnis
against Shias, and various ethnic groups against each other.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see all that. Talking
about a two-state solution today is nothing more than political
posturing in order to gain power and votes. Any politician who
actually believes what he's saying is living in fantasyland.
Here's what Samantha Power, US Ambassador to the UN, said after the
Security Council vote:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"One cannot simultaneously champion Israeli
> settlements and champion a viable two-state solution that would
> end the conflict. One has to make a choice between settlements
> and separation. In 2011, the United States vetoed a resolution
> that focused exclusively on settlements, as if settlements were
> the only factor harming the prospects of a two-state solution.
> The circumstances have changed dramatically. Since 2011,
> settlement growth has only accelerated. Since 2011, multiple
> efforts to pursue peace through negotiations have failed. And
> since 2011, president Obama and secretary Kerry have repeatedly
> warned publicly and privately that the absences of progress toward
> peace and continued settlement expansion was going to put the
> two-state solution at risk and threaten Israel's stated objective
> to remain both a Jewish state and a democracy."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
This statement, which attempts to explain the Obama administration's
complete reversal of policy, makes no sense at all. There are no
prospects for a two-state solution, or Power would have been more
specific. Instead, Power uses her statement to blame, by implication,
Israel for the failure of the two-state solution.
Even under the most benign interpretation of Obama's policy reversal,
I cannot see how it improves chances for any peaceful solution, or for
how it benefits the Israelis, the Palestinians, the UN, or anyone
else. Under any reasonable interpretations, all of those groups are
hurt by the policy reversal.
It was clear from the start that this policy reversal would have
consequences that would have to be dealt with. If Obama had made the
policy reversal a year or two ago, then he would have had to deal with
the consequences, and Power's statement might be more credible.
Instead, Obama waited until three weeks before leaving office, so that
other people will have to deal with the consequences, while he sits on
the sidelines and probably provides commentary.
Barack Obama and Israel's president Benjamin Netanyahu have always had
a visceral dislike for each other. President Obama comes from an
activist community of black leaders many of whom are openly
anti-Semitic (google the words "anti-semitic black leaders" for plenty
of examples). This doesn't mean that Obama himself is anti-Semitic,
but the company he keeps certainly inflames the situation. Netanyahu
has returned the favor by being openly hostile to Obama, including
open support for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election. So
it's possible that Obama may simply have been looking for a way to get
revenge against Netanyahu before leaving office.
Anti-Semitism has always been prevalent in America, as I wrote in 2006. In the Catholic Church,
it was official policy for centuries that Jews were responsible for
the murder of Jesus Christ, and that all Jews must be punished for it.
A Papal bull issued by Pope Paul IV on July 14, 1555, began:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"As it is completely absurd and improper in the utmost
> that the Jews, who through their own fault were condemned by God
> to eternal servitude, can under the pretext that pious Christians
> must accept them and sustain their habitation, are so ungrateful
> to Christians, as, instead of thanks for gracious treatment, they
> return contumely, and among themselves, instead of the slavery,
> which they deserve, they manage to claim
> superiority."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
This teaching, which goes on to justify forcing Jews to live in
ghettos, was never withdrawn and was certainly known to Hitler. It
was only reversed on April 13, 1986, when Pope John Paul II gave a major speech at the Great Synagogue of Rome.
In this generational Crisis period, it appears that anti-Semitism is
reviving, just as all forms of racism, xenophobia and nationalism are
increasing in countries around the world. This is undoubtedly part of
the scenario that will lead the Mideast to full-scale war as described
above.
Dennis Ross, a Mideast diplomat who served under both Presidents
Clinton and Bush, said in a BBC interview that the UN Security Council
resolution was the wrong way to go (my transcription):
> [indent]<QUOTE>The language in the resolution equates all settlement
> activity beyond the June 4 1967 lines, and yet the position of the
> US as stated by the president in the two speeches he gave in 2011
> was that the final border should be determined by settlement
> blocks and swaps. ...
>
> What I'm suggesting - if you turn this into a legal question, then
> you're not going to find a simple way, or any way, of actually
> resolving this through negotiations. When you turn this conflict
> into a legal conflict, when in fact it is a historic conflict
> between two national movements, then you move away from being able
> to come up with compromises that would be able to resolve the
> issues. I think what we want to do is find a way to have
> negotiations, not find a way try to try to impose things from an
> international perspective, meaning from a UN perspective, or even
> from a legal perspective, because that isn't going to produce an
> outcome."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
Of all the statements from politicians that I heard, this is probably
the closest to making sense. None of the politicians that I heard who
praised the UNSC resolution explained how the resolution in any way
promoted peace. Ross's statement that it's a "historic conflict
between two national movement" comes closest to the Generational
Dynamics analysis.
Related Articles
****
**** Israel's Netanyahu orders retaliation against the United Nations
****
After the UNSC vote, a furious Israeli prime minister Benjamin
Netanyahu ordered that steps be taken to respond:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"I share ministers' feelings, anger and frustration
> vis-à-vis the unbalanced resolution that is very hostile to the
> State of Israel, and which the [UN] Security Council passed in an
> unworthy manner. From the information that we have, we have no
> doubt that the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it,
> coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be
> passed."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
Reports indicate that Israel has suspended working ties with 12 of the
Security Council countries that supported the resolution: Britain,
France, Russia, China, Japan, Ukraine, Angola, Egypt, Uruguay, Spain,
Senegal and New Zealand.
Even if these suspensions are only temporary, what this shows is that
this reversal of US policy has not only harmed the Palestinians and
Israels, it's harmed the United Nations itself. Israeli Prime Minister and The Hill and Jerusalem Post
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, UN Security Council, Resolution 2334,
Saeb Erekat, Palestinians, Mideast Roadmap to Peace,
Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, Samantha Power
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- Palestinians declare a defeat for the forces of darkness
- Statements by diplomats show they live in fantasyland
- Israel's Netanyahu orders retaliation against the United Nations
****
**** Palestinians declare a defeat for the forces of darkness
****
When Netanyahu and Obama met in Washington on May 20 2011, it didn't go too well.
The United States Security Council on Friday passed Resolution 2334,
which says that Israel's West Bank settlements constitute "flagrant
violation of international law." Similar resolutions in the passed
have failed because of a United States veto, but in a major reversal
of policy by the Barack Obama administration, the United States
abstained on Friday's vote, allowing the resolution to pass.
The Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, interviewed on the BBC, was
ebullient, and said that the resolution was a major victory for
Palestinians and the "two-state solution, and a defeat for the forces
of darkness (my transcription):
> [indent]<QUOTE>"This is a day for peace. This is a day for hope.
> This is a day when the international community stood tall. To
> tell the Palestinians and Israelis that peace is possible.
> Through the establishment of a two-state where the state of
> Palestine can live side by side with the state of Israel in peace
> and security on the 1967 line.
>
> This is a day where the international community unanimously have
> told the Israeli government stop the settlements. Stop the
> dictation. Stop the occupation. This is a day when the
> international community have told the Israeli people if you want
> to live in peace and security, it's not going to be through
> dictation and occupation and settlements. It's going to be
> through fairness, through neighborly relations, through the
> freedom of the Palestinian people, through international law. I
> hope this clearcut message to the Israeli government will be
> understood. I think that this is a major defeat for the forces of
> darkness and extremism and dictation. [Inaudible] for
> Palestinians and Israelis in peace. So today, it's really a day
> of hope not only for Palestinians and Israelis, but for the whole
> region as a whole, for the people of this region as a
> whole."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
Resolution 2334 contains the following text:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter
> of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the
> inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,
>
> Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to
> abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities
> under the Fourth Geneva Convention ...,
>
> Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic
> composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory
> occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter
> alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of
> Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and
> displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of
> international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,
>
> Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement
> activities are dangerously imperiling the viability of the
> two-State solution based on the 1967 lines ...
>
> 1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in
> the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East
> Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant
> violation under international law and a major obstacle to the
> achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and
> comprehensive peace;
>
> 2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely
> cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian
> territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all
> of its legal obligations in this regard. ..."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
In another interview, Saeb Erekat said that the Palestinians will pull
membership in the United States for the State of Palestine. United Nations
and WAFA (Palestine News & Information Agency)
****
**** Statements by diplomats show they live in fantasyland
****
One can't help but laugh at the statement by Saeb Erekat quoted above,
and his victory over the forces of darkness, but statements by other
diplomats were equally idiotic.
The problem is this "two-state solution" fantasy. The very first Generational Dynamics prediction that I
wrote was in May 2003, when President George Bush announced his
"Mideast Roadmap to Peace." President Bush called for a Palestinian
State by 2005, to live in peace and security side by side with Israel.
It provided a series of steps for both sides to follow, mostly having
to do with eliminating violence against both Palestinian and Israeli
civilians.
As I wrote at that time, the Jews and Arabs were headed not for a
two-state solution, but for a full-scale war, as the generations of
survivors of the 1949 war that followed the partitioning of Palestine
and the creation of the state of Israel died off. Since I wrote that
analysis, there are certainly no signs of a two-state solution, as
there have been numerous Mideast wars in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon,
Gaza and Libya, with skirmishes in other countries. The Mideast is
still headed for full-scale war, pitting Jews against Arabs, Sunnis
against Shias, and various ethnic groups against each other.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see all that. Talking
about a two-state solution today is nothing more than political
posturing in order to gain power and votes. Any politician who
actually believes what he's saying is living in fantasyland.
Here's what Samantha Power, US Ambassador to the UN, said after the
Security Council vote:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"One cannot simultaneously champion Israeli
> settlements and champion a viable two-state solution that would
> end the conflict. One has to make a choice between settlements
> and separation. In 2011, the United States vetoed a resolution
> that focused exclusively on settlements, as if settlements were
> the only factor harming the prospects of a two-state solution.
> The circumstances have changed dramatically. Since 2011,
> settlement growth has only accelerated. Since 2011, multiple
> efforts to pursue peace through negotiations have failed. And
> since 2011, president Obama and secretary Kerry have repeatedly
> warned publicly and privately that the absences of progress toward
> peace and continued settlement expansion was going to put the
> two-state solution at risk and threaten Israel's stated objective
> to remain both a Jewish state and a democracy."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
This statement, which attempts to explain the Obama administration's
complete reversal of policy, makes no sense at all. There are no
prospects for a two-state solution, or Power would have been more
specific. Instead, Power uses her statement to blame, by implication,
Israel for the failure of the two-state solution.
Even under the most benign interpretation of Obama's policy reversal,
I cannot see how it improves chances for any peaceful solution, or for
how it benefits the Israelis, the Palestinians, the UN, or anyone
else. Under any reasonable interpretations, all of those groups are
hurt by the policy reversal.
It was clear from the start that this policy reversal would have
consequences that would have to be dealt with. If Obama had made the
policy reversal a year or two ago, then he would have had to deal with
the consequences, and Power's statement might be more credible.
Instead, Obama waited until three weeks before leaving office, so that
other people will have to deal with the consequences, while he sits on
the sidelines and probably provides commentary.
Barack Obama and Israel's president Benjamin Netanyahu have always had
a visceral dislike for each other. President Obama comes from an
activist community of black leaders many of whom are openly
anti-Semitic (google the words "anti-semitic black leaders" for plenty
of examples). This doesn't mean that Obama himself is anti-Semitic,
but the company he keeps certainly inflames the situation. Netanyahu
has returned the favor by being openly hostile to Obama, including
open support for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election. So
it's possible that Obama may simply have been looking for a way to get
revenge against Netanyahu before leaving office.
Anti-Semitism has always been prevalent in America, as I wrote in 2006. In the Catholic Church,
it was official policy for centuries that Jews were responsible for
the murder of Jesus Christ, and that all Jews must be punished for it.
A Papal bull issued by Pope Paul IV on July 14, 1555, began:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"As it is completely absurd and improper in the utmost
> that the Jews, who through their own fault were condemned by God
> to eternal servitude, can under the pretext that pious Christians
> must accept them and sustain their habitation, are so ungrateful
> to Christians, as, instead of thanks for gracious treatment, they
> return contumely, and among themselves, instead of the slavery,
> which they deserve, they manage to claim
> superiority."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
This teaching, which goes on to justify forcing Jews to live in
ghettos, was never withdrawn and was certainly known to Hitler. It
was only reversed on April 13, 1986, when Pope John Paul II gave a major speech at the Great Synagogue of Rome.
In this generational Crisis period, it appears that anti-Semitism is
reviving, just as all forms of racism, xenophobia and nationalism are
increasing in countries around the world. This is undoubtedly part of
the scenario that will lead the Mideast to full-scale war as described
above.
Dennis Ross, a Mideast diplomat who served under both Presidents
Clinton and Bush, said in a BBC interview that the UN Security Council
resolution was the wrong way to go (my transcription):
> [indent]<QUOTE>The language in the resolution equates all settlement
> activity beyond the June 4 1967 lines, and yet the position of the
> US as stated by the president in the two speeches he gave in 2011
> was that the final border should be determined by settlement
> blocks and swaps. ...
>
> What I'm suggesting - if you turn this into a legal question, then
> you're not going to find a simple way, or any way, of actually
> resolving this through negotiations. When you turn this conflict
> into a legal conflict, when in fact it is a historic conflict
> between two national movements, then you move away from being able
> to come up with compromises that would be able to resolve the
> issues. I think what we want to do is find a way to have
> negotiations, not find a way try to try to impose things from an
> international perspective, meaning from a UN perspective, or even
> from a legal perspective, because that isn't going to produce an
> outcome."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
Of all the statements from politicians that I heard, this is probably
the closest to making sense. None of the politicians that I heard who
praised the UNSC resolution explained how the resolution in any way
promoted peace. Ross's statement that it's a "historic conflict
between two national movement" comes closest to the Generational
Dynamics analysis.
Related Articles
- Pope Francis visits Mideast to reconcile with Jews, Orthodox, and Muslims (25-May-2014)
- The World View of President Barack Hussein Obama (15-Mar-2016)
- Obama and Netanyahu in sharp disagreement after speech (20-May-2011)
****
**** Israel's Netanyahu orders retaliation against the United Nations
****
After the UNSC vote, a furious Israeli prime minister Benjamin
Netanyahu ordered that steps be taken to respond:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"I share ministers' feelings, anger and frustration
> vis-à-vis the unbalanced resolution that is very hostile to the
> State of Israel, and which the [UN] Security Council passed in an
> unworthy manner. From the information that we have, we have no
> doubt that the Obama administration initiated it, stood behind it,
> coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be
> passed."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
Reports indicate that Israel has suspended working ties with 12 of the
Security Council countries that supported the resolution: Britain,
France, Russia, China, Japan, Ukraine, Angola, Egypt, Uruguay, Spain,
Senegal and New Zealand.
Even if these suspensions are only temporary, what this shows is that
this reversal of US policy has not only harmed the Palestinians and
Israels, it's harmed the United Nations itself. Israeli Prime Minister and The Hill and Jerusalem Post
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, UN Security Council, Resolution 2334,
Saeb Erekat, Palestinians, Mideast Roadmap to Peace,
Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, Samantha Power
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
