Israel, this tiny country in the heart of Middle East, has become the new target of diplomacy-abuse at the United Nations, headed by the Americans, the Europeans (mainly France) and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) -- 57 Islamic states plus "Palestine", which at the moment forms the largest bloc at the UN.
On December 23, 2016, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2334, which effectively sets the boundaries for the Palestinian state at the 1949 armistice lines. The Arabs had previously refused to accept the armistice line as a border, presumably because agreeing to it might preclude the Palestinians from trying to get the rest of "Palestine", defined by them as "from the river [Jordan] to the sea [Mediterranean]" -- meaning all of Israel. Just look at any Palestinian map -- It is identical to the shape of the entirety of Israel.
According to Res. 2334, not only are Jewish settlements are illegal, overnight, effectively making their Jewish residents criminals, but the Jewish Quarter, the Western Wall and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem's Old City -- the heart of Judaism for nearly 4,000 years and the seat of Christianity for more than 2,000 years -- are now grotesquely considered "occupied territory".
As Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer noted:
"It's as if the U.N. passed a resolution declaring Mecca and Medina to be sovereign Jewish or Christian territory. It's absurd. It's an insult to the intelligence of the world and is supremely damaging to the Israeli claim to its own holy places."
Krauthammer then wondered why the resolution included East Jerusalem, site of the Old City and the western retaining wall of the Temple Mount -- all that is left of the Jews' Second Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D., and at which Jews pray every day. Hmm. As Res. 2334 rejects Res. 242's founding assumptions that peace can only be negotiated between belligerents, could it be that President Obama and the US administration, along with the Islamists, dictators, and many of Europe's Islamized leaders who now populate the UN, are planning to declare a Palestinian State, presumably with East Jerusalem as its capital at a UN Security Council meeting scheduled for January 17, three days before Obama leaves office? We sincerely hope to be proven wrong.
 A vote at the UN Security Council (illustrative). [Image source: U.S. State Department] |
Regrettably, the US-UN-OIC assault on Israel clearly seems to be the second prong of outgoing US President Barack Obama's lame duck campaign against Israel -- part of a larger plan to displace much of Israel, including its heart, the Old City of Jerusalem, with an Islamic state.
Already, on October 13, 2016, another branch of the United Nations, UNESCO, falsely declared the site of Judaism's two ancient temples, Islamic sites.
Before that, in 2015, UNESCO also falsely declared two ancient Biblical Jewish sites, Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs, "Islamic sites" -- despite Islam not even having historically existed until hundreds of years later in the seventh century.
The vote was unanimous, except for the US, which, after orchestrating and nurturing the entire assault, demurely abstained and then tried to deny that the US was behind it.
The denial played out like a bad film in which the wife hires a hit-man to kill her husband, and then tells the judge she is innocent because at the time of the murder she was having her hair done.
Secretary of State John Kerry's "candid thoughts" on December 28, 2016, tried to disguise the Obama Administration's treachery -- the US abstaining instead of opposing Res. 2334 -- with a lot of fake-friendly advice. But according to Kerry, the "interests of the United States" were not aligned anymore with the interests of Israel. Why is that? Because of settlement policy:
"We've made countless public and private exhortations to the Israelis to stop the march of settlements. In literally hundreds of conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu, I have made clear that continued settlement activity would only increase pressure for an international response. We have all known for some time that the Palestinians were intent on moving forward in the UN with a settlements resolution, and I advised the prime minister repeatedly that further settlement activity only invited UN action."
So because of the State of Israel's settlement policy, the interest of the United States is now to weaken the diplomatic position of Israel, and make the only free, open, pluralistic democracy in the region a pariah among other nations and every Israeli in the area a potential criminal or a potential target for a general boycott. Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick said:
"...contrary to what has been widely argued, 2334 does not strengthen the boycott of 'settlements.' 2334 gives a strategic boost to the boycott of Israel as a whole.
"2334 calls on states 'to distinguish in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967.' Since no Israeli firms make that distinction, all Israeli economic activity is now threatened with boycott. Tnuva is an 'occupation' dairy because it supplies communities beyond the 1949 lines with dairy products.
"Bank Hapoalim is an 'occupation' bank because it operates ATM machines in post-1967 neighborhoods in Jerusalem.
"Fox clothing chain is an 'occupation' chain because it has a store in Gush Etzion. And so on and so forth.
"Resolution 2334 gives Europe and its NGOs a green light to wage a complete trade and cultural boycotts against all of Israel."
Kerry finished his speech by enumerating six principles for peace, supposedly based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed equivalent swaps (but of course leaving Israel with nothing much to swap); recognition of Israel by the Palestinians as a Jewish state; help to solve the refugee issue; internationalization of Jerusalem as a capital for two countries; viable borders for Israel; end of the conflict and all outstanding claims. These "principles" can only be considered a monument to hypocrisy. These "simple" goals contradict resolution 2334. Why should Palestinians agree to land swaps if settlements have already been declared illegal?
Alarmingly, we probably have not yet seen the end of this mess yet. A third stage of this anti-Israeli rocket is in preparation and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has good reasons to think "that the United Nations Security Council could take fresh action against Israel during a meeting on January 17, three days before US President Barack Obama is slated to leave office".
France has protested that it is "not planning" an Israeli-Palestinian UN resolution, but of course that leaves other countries -- perhaps New Zealand, Venezuela, Malaysia or Senegal again -- to "help out"? The launch of this diplomatic Holocaust will start on January 15, in Paris, at a "peace conference"; it should immediately be postponed for at least a week.
Otherwise, at the initiative of France's equally lame duck, President François Hollande, an international conference will gather the foreign ministers of some fifty States to drive Israel to a fictitious "peace with the Palestinians". But one thing is for sure: All these diplomats can elaborate a resolution of their own, to be put forth by another hit-man, perhaps presented by France or Sweden or another "real friend" of Israel. And the United States can again disingenuously save face by abstaining.
Soon after Kerry's speech, Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May distanced the UK from Washington on Kerry's condemnation of Israel, in comments that appear to be designed to build bridges with the incoming Trump administration. Britain's ambassador, Sir Kim Darroch, has even said he hopes it will emulate the rapport between Margaret Thatcher and her US counterpart Ronald Reagan. It would be magnificently Churchillian or Thatcherian if May were to veto any further UN hijinks.
With a UN now run as if it is the universal caliphate, assisted mostly by dictators and despots, it is hard to see much good ever coming from it. No one has yet been made accountable for the $100 billion "oil for food" scandal, and peacekeepers still dole out food to children in exchange for sex. If the US separately wants to fund the World Health Organization as a spin-off, for example, that is always an option.
The UN does not solve the refugee problem; instead the UN perpetuates it, noted the great Soviet dissident, Natan Sharansky.
The UN also does not prevent or resolve world conflicts, instead, it seems to perpetuate them - take Syria, Iraq, the Sudan.
As the prizewinning Middle East historian Bat Ye'or recently wrote about the UN and UNESCO:
"Led astray from their primary mission, these organizations have become tools of corruption or terrorism, reinforcing global Islamic power. But let us not forget that those who vote are Heads of State, fully conscious and responsible individuals, motivated by interests and ideologies that are often criminal and not all of which represent the opinions of their people whom they tyrannize, including those from European 'democracies'. Their latest resolutions do not only confirm the victory of jihadism and illiteracy: they also express the success of the years of effort made by this post-war Europe that continues to destroy, defame and delegitimize the Jewish State in the name of Islamic justice. The beginning of this long journey dates back to 1967, in France.... Europe rushed to adopt the French position in 1973 and, along with the OIC, planned political measures designed to destroy the Jewish State by denying its sovereign rights and its cantonment on an indefensible territory. Resolution 2334 is now the icing on the cake of this policy, which forms the basis for a Euro-Islamic policy to merge in all EU political and social sectors, as well as in promoting globalism and the enforcement of the UN's supranational decision-making powers."
All freedom-loving nations should, unfortunately, abandon immediately before laws are made for them next -- or, second-best, at least de-fund it. Sadly, that is the only language the UN evidently understands.
On January 5, the US House of Representatives voted 342-to-80 to condemn the UN vote, with 100 Democrats joining the Republicans. Countries imagining that in US President-elect Donald J. Trump they have another pushover, watch out. You will be in for quite a shock.
Yves Mamou is a journalist and author based in France. He worked for two decades for the daily, Le Monde, before his retirement.
