Sham, here we go again (re Annapolis Conference)

Toronto Sun ^ | 2007-11-24 | Salim Mansur

[Clive]

The upside about the Mideast conference to be hosted by the Bush administration at Annapolis, Md., is the low expectation of all parties for any dramatic breakthrough to bring to an end the Palestinian-Israeli dispute over land and refugees prior to establishing the Palestinian state.

The downside is predictable. Failure on the part of the United States to meet the one-sided Palestinian demands -- by leaning on Israel -- without any assurance or evidence that Palestinians cease supporting terrorism, will be grist for terrorists, their supporters and apologists in the region.

The plain truth about such Mideast conferences is the ganging up of the Arab states against Israel as a show of verbal force on the diplomatic front to compensate for their miserable record on wars they have precipitated with the one lonely outpost of democracy in their midst.

For anyone with a sense of Mideast history, there is irony in the timing of the Annapolis conference.

This month marks several anniversaries for Arabs and Jews. It was 90 years ago in November 1917 that Britain, through the Balfour declaration, committed itself to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Then 60 years ago in November 1947 the UN passed the resolution on partitioning Palestine, held by Britain under the League of Nations mandate into two states: One Arab and one Jewish. Twenty years later in November 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242 as the basis of mediating an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Finally, 30 years ago in November 1977, president Anwar Sadat of Egypt visited Jerusalem, addressed the Israeli Knesset, and opened negotiations with prime minister Menachem Begin resulting in the peace accord between Egypt and Israel.

At any time during this period the Arab states could have acknowledged the rights of Jews to a state in Palestine, accepted the UN resolution on partition, negotiated the details of coexistence, assisted the Palestinians with their state, and received support of the great powers, including the United States, in meeting the needs of their people and bringing prosperity to the region given the resources available.

But the Arab position was a resounding "three nos" as duly spelled out after the over-reaching ambition of the Egyptian leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser, and his supporters crashed in the humiliating defeat of the June 1967 war: No peace and no negotiation with and no recognition of Israel.

The great lie repeatedly told in the Mideast, and swallowed whole or in part in the West, is that the United States' unconditional support for Israel stands in the way of just peace in the region.

What is implicit in this lie is the meaning of just peace. For the Arab and Muslim supporters of Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaida and the Iranian acolytes of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, just peace requires the rollback of Israel and returning Jews to the secondary status of "dhimmi" (protected people) as provided by Islamic laws when Arabs were empire builders.

Until and unless there is a change of mind and heart among Palestinians and Arabs as demonstrated by president Sadat in acknowledging the Jews as equal partners, and reconciling with Israel, public diplomacy as arranged for Annapolis will remain an illusory exercise in which Arab states one-sidedly seek American appeasement and Israeli concessions as vindication of their rightness.

[Clive]

-

[jwparkerjr]

It would be different if these things came and went with no one coming out ahead, even without a peace agreement. But the sad fact that is that the Arabs come out way ahead in their propaganda fight by showing the world they can get the superpower of the US to beg and grovel.

George Bush has fallen for the same siren song that Bill Clinton did. I would like to think that Bush has an ace up his sleeve and will be able to bring some concrete change for the better to the situation. But I fear that’s only dreaming.

I can’t imagine how long it’s going to take for the US, and the rest of the world, to realize that peace will come only when one side or the other has been convinced of their inability to get their way any other way than through a cessation of hostilities. And since it’s always been a one-sided conflict that gives shame to the idea of a give-and-take relationship it’s not going to be Israel that has to get the snot kicked out of them before peace becomes an attractive alternative.

[rbg81]

I think its even worse than what you imagine. I think the State Dept has come to the conclusion that there will never be peace with the Islamic world while Israel exists. So the “solution” is to dismantle Israel slowly, piece by piece, until the situation is so untenable, the Jews up and leave. Problem solved from their end. Except once Israel is gone, the next frontier for conquest will be Europe.

[nyyankeefan]

this conference is like a seinfeld episode....a show about nothing...what a waste of time/effort and US taxpayer funds!!!

[jwparkerjr]

Please, don’t get me started on the State Department. Talk about the enemy within! I’m not sure why it’s allowed to go merrily on its way thwarting and obstructing every American interest in the world, but something has to be done.

Changing the Sec. of State is not the answer. It’s the layer after layer of entrenched bureaucrats, hold overs from previous administrations who hate the current administration and will do anything to ensure their position and to mess with the current president.

[ricks_place]

Pray that the real purpose of Annapolis is the final exposure of the Palestinian murderers and the introduction of a policy to send all Palestinian Muslims out of the West Bank and Gaza and into the Arab lands. Israel from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River!

[popdonnelly]

We’re negotiating over whether Israel disappears now or disappears later. Either way, there’s no benefit to the World.

[Freee-dame]

IIRC, every conference held during the reign of Pres. 42 was hailed before, photographed during and praised after for whatever little it did. Just holding it was a plus for him. Not so today, it’s all doom and gloom.

[phillyfanatic]

Exactly. The Islamofascists can only win if the West appeases them with more and more while never in a million years deserving any civil attention. They are bloody murderers and only liberals think things should be, ‘even-handed.’ No matter what, Israel must be maintained as the only real ally we have in the ME.

[Joan Kerrey]

No matter what, Israel must be maintained as the only real ally we have in the ME.

---

Agree 100% and there is more to it besides having an ally.
Appeasement is viewed as a weakness in the arab world and they’ll use any weakness as another opportunity to destroy Israel in any way they can. All the Arab states and the Palestinian leadship continue to preach hatred of Jews. As long as this continues there can be no peace as generation after generation know little else than hatred of Jews. How in the world can these conferences work when one side doesn’t want peace and never has. Arabs had 19 years of total control over the land they demand and during that 19 years there was no peace, no improvement of their status and no interest in Jerusalem as an important holy site. Isn’t it interesting that only when Jews won control of these lands did Arabs cry foul and claim that Jews took their land, a land hardly given a second look when they controlled it. Here’s my suggestion. Arab states and Palestinian leadership stop preaching hate from every fibre of your society and we’ll talk but not a moment before then.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

[Convert from ECUSA]

"It was 90 years ago in November 1917 that Britain, through the Balfour declaration, committed itself to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Then 60 years ago in November 1947 the UN passed the resolution on partitioning Palestine, held by Britain under the League of Nations mandate into two states: One Arab and one Jewish. Twenty years later in November 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242 as the basis of mediating an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Finally, 30 years ago in November 1977, president Anwar Sadat of Egypt visited Jerusalem, addressed the Israeli Knesset, and opened negotiations with prime minister Menachem Begin resulting in the peace accord between Egypt and Israel. At any time during this period the Arab states could have acknowledged the rights of Jews to a state in Palestine, accepted the UN resolution on partition, negotiated the details of coexistence, assisted the Palestinians with their state, and received support of the great powers, including the United States, in meeting the needs of their people and bringing prosperity to the region given the resources available. But the Arab position was a resounding "three nos"

What was it Abba Eban said, "the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity?" Or something like that. I wish our "leaders" would get it through their heads that no Arab nation wants any type of genuine peacd with Israel and never will, and stop trying to get blood from the proverbial turnip and just accept that fact. But every "leader", especially when their tanking in the polls, gets a bee in their drawers about conjuring some type of "legacy" by attempting "peace" in the Middle East, usually at Israel's expense.

[Convert from ECUSA]

" Arabs had 19 years of total control over the land they demand and during that 19 years there was no peace, no improvement of their status and no interest in Jerusalem as an important holy site. Isn’t it interesting that only when Jews won control of these lands did Arabs cry foul and claim that Jews took their land, a land hardly given a second look when they controlled it."

Exactly! You nailed it. Before Israel's victory in 1967, we never heard a peep about the so-called "west bank" or how "holy" Jerusalem was to the heathens. Before 1967, their howls were for "returning of the land", which wasn't the "west bank" and eastern Jerusalem, but the whole of pre-1967 Israel.