By Evelyn Gordon

There’s really only one suitable Zionist response to last week’s UN Security Council resolution on the settlements: massive settlement construction. That’s the appropriate response for more than one reason, but I’ll focus here on the most obvious one: The resolution proves conclusively that Israel gets no credit for showing restraint on this issue, so there’s no earthly reason why it should continue suffering the costs of restraint.

As I’ve written repeatedly in the past, data from Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics shows that there has been less settlement construction under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu than under any of his predecessors. Nor is this a matter of partisan dispute: The left-wing daily Haaretz, a virulent opponent of both Netanyahu and the settlements, used the same data to reach the same conclusion last year.
Read more…

Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) President Morton A. Klein released the following statement:

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s speech today essentially was a proposal for a Hamas-Fatah-Iranian-Palestinian-Arab terrorist state, which divides Jerusalem in two, forcibly evicts Jews from their homeland, and requires Israel’s retreat to indefensible borders. His speech was filled with anti-Israel vitriol and falsehoods. Neither the U.S. nor Israel nor any of our allies would benefit from establishing another Iranian or Iraqi or Libyan or Syrian-style state in the Middle East – and that is exactly what Kerry’s proposal entails.  Kerry’s proposal endangers Israel’s safety and security – and would reward the Palestinian Authority (“PA”)/PLO for promoting the murder of Jews, honoring murderers of Jews, and paying pensions to families of murderers of Jews.

Kerry also called for easing the Gaza weapons blockade, which he called “restrictions” on Gaza.  This would enable Hamas to bring in more military equipment, further gravely endangering Israel’s citizens.
Read more…

Read full transcript:

Thank you all. It’s good to be here even in the middle of a holiday week. I wish you all a happy and productive new year. Today, I want to share candid thoughts about an issue that for decades has animated the foreign policy dialogue here and around the world – the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Throughout his administration, President Obama has been deeply committed to Israel and its security, and that commitment has guided his pursuit of peace in the Middle East. This is an issue which I’ve worked on intensely during my time as Secretary of State for one simple reason: because the two state solution is the only way to achieve a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians. It is the only way to ensure Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state, living in peace and security with its neighbors. It is the only way to ensure a future of freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people. And it is an important way of advancing U.S. interests in the region.
Read more…

By Jordan Blashekr, AMERICAN THINKER

President Obama is clearly not yet finished destroying what remains of the U.S.-led international order.  By allowing a harmful UN Security Council resolution to pass declaring Israeli settlements to be “a flagrant violation under International Law,” he reverses decades of U.S. policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and makes a future negotiated settlement even more difficult for the parties to achieve.  More importantly, the move strikes a devastating blow to the credibility of the UN and international law.

Eight years of Obama’s foreign policy have left the world on fire.  Now, with his final foray into geopolitics, he has attacked the last remaining vestiges of a rules-based order.

For a president who prides himself on the long-game, this was an incredibly short-sighted and selfish move.
Read more…

[Dror Eydar wrote a critique of this article under this title. It’s time for a changing of the guard]

Will the top brass and the military and the intelligence services be replaced with loyal officers? Will the incitement against artists and political rivals be translated into indictments, imprisonment and dismissals?

By Aluf Benn, HAARETZ

On May 14, 2015, exactly 67 years after the Declaration of Independence, a revolution began in Israel. Few people noticed the change at first. Benjamin Netanyahu remained prime minister, as he had been for six years. He used the same manner of speaking and had the same hairstyle, but he was different.

The conservative Netanyahu who had shunned adventures and risks ceded office to the right-wing radical Netanyahu seeking to fulfill his old dream of “replacing the elites.” But instead of forming a national-unity government with his rival, Zionist Union leader Isaac Herzog, after the election that year and sleepily settling back into “stability,” Netanyahu established a right-wing coalition with his former assistant and current bitter enemy, Habayit Hayehudi chief Naftali Bennett.
Read more…

DEBKA

Wednesday, Dec. 28, hours before US Secretary of State John Kerry was due to deliver a major speech on his vision for the Middle East, Turkey and Russia announced a ceasefire plan going into effect the same night for the whole of Syria, and in all regions, where fighting between pro-government forces and opposition groups were taking place – excepting for terrorist organizations.
Read more…

By Adam Kredo, FREE BEACON

Congress is already setting the stage to cut off U.S. funding to the United Nations in the wake of a contested vote last week in which the Obama administration permitted an anti-Israel resolution to win overwhelming approval, according to congressional leaders, who told the Washington Free Beacon that the current administration is already plotting to take further action against the Jewish state before vacating office.

Other punitive actions by Congress could include expelling Palestinian diplomats from U.S. soil and scaling back ties with foreign nations that voted in favor of the controversial measure, according to multiple sources who spoke to the Free Beacon about the situation both on and off the record.
Read more…

Amb. Alan Baker – The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

The December 23, 2016, resolution adopted by the UN Security Council regarding Israel’s settlement policy has been received with mixed and even extreme reactions.

The Palestinian leadership, having initiated the resolution, is celebrating its adoption as an affirmation by the international community, including the United States, of its claims against Israel.

Israel sees this resolution as a major impediment to continued peace negotiations in light of the fact that it by-passes the negotiation process in an attempt to prejudge central issues that are on the negotiating table. As such, it seriously prejudices any possible return to the negotiating process.
Read more…

By GERALD STEINBERG 27 Dec 2016, The Jerusalem Post

Once President Obama had signaled his readiness to join in this ritual, there was no reason to expect the other 14 members of the UNSC to break with the traditional Israel- bashing.
Israel’s angry response to the UN Security Resolution on Israeli settlements, and the abstention (de facto support) of the Obama administration is understandable, but it is unlikely to be very helpful and is probably counterproductive.

Such attacks in the UN have been commonplace for decades, reflecting both the power of the Arab and Islamic bloc, and the hypocrisy of many of the western democracies.

Once President Obama had signaled his readiness to join in this ritual, there was no reason to expect the other 14 members of the UNSC to break with the traditional Israel- bashing.
Read more…

By Shmuel Sackett, JEWISH LEADERSHIP BLOG

While I am no fan of Obama, I must state – loud and clear – that Obama did NOT betray Israel. Everything that happened in the UN on December 23 rd (the day of the vote) was due to one person and one person only. It was not Samantha Power, America’s ambassador to the UN. It was not John Kerry, America’s secretary of state and it was not even the President himself, Barak Obama. All of them were simply following the lead of the one person who is responsible for this terrible UN vote. His name is Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel. Allow me to explain.
Read more…

By Michael Snyder, CLOTHESLINE

Multiple media outlets are reporting that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is finalizing a document that the Obama administration hopes will form the basis for a UN Security Council resolution that officially recognizes a Palestinian state before the end of Barack Obama’s term on January 20th.  This comes on the heels of the UN Security Council’s adoption of resolution 2334 on December 23rd.  That resolution declared that all Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal, it stated that the Security Council recognizes the 1967 ceasefire lines as the border between Israel and “Palestine”, and it officially gave East Jerusalem to the Palestinians.  But it stopped short of formally recognizing a Palestinian state.  Resolution 2334 speaks of a Palestinian state in the future tense, but this new resolution that John Kerry is reportedly working on would give immediate and permanent UN Security Council recognition to a Palestinian state.
Read more…

By Morton A. Klein, ZOA

It was particularly painful and frustrating seeing President Barack Hussein Obama, Secretary Kerry and UN Envoy Samantha Power’s anti-Semitic act knifing Israel in the back at the UN – because so few people listened during the months when my organization (the Zionist Organization of America – ZOA) issued press releases, had press conferences, spoke on TV and radio, and published a full-page NYTimes and other nationwide newspaper ads warning that Obama would betray Israel at the UN after the 2016 election. (See ZOA’s October 29 New York Times Ad, entitled “After Elections Will Obama Betray Israel at the UN?”)

ZOA pleaded with other Jewish organizations and leaders and US Senators to join our campaign to stop Obama from doing grave damage to Israel at the UN – but those groups and leaders responded: “Don’t be silly, Obama will never do this.”
Read more…

By Prof Howard Adelman

On 23 December 2016, the UN Security Council passed UN Resolution 2334 included at the end of this blog. I have added the bolding. The relevant clause discussed in this blog is the first principle cited in the preamble and it reads as follows:

“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.”

Is it inadmissible to acquire territories by force?

The principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territories by force is embodied in UNSC Resolution 242 passed on 22 November 1967 in the aftermath of the Six Day War. Chapter VI of the UN Charter calls on member states to settle their disputes by peaceful methods (inquiries, negotiations, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, etc.) rather than war. In cases of failure to reach agreement, the issue must be referred to the Security Council. Chapter VI allows any state or consortium of states to bring a resolution before the UN Security Council. Note that Chapter VI only allows the UN to pass resolutions that are recommendations; resolutions that are passed, do not bind the member states engaged in a dispute. This is unlike resolutions passed under Chapter VII which are deemed obligatory. Resolutions under Chapter VI are commendatory, particularly since the UN has no enforcement mechanism.
Read more…

Trump must ensure there are consequences for supporting U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334.

By John Bolton, WSJ

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power abstaining, Dec. 23. Photo: European Pressphoto Agency

Last Friday, on the eve of Hanukkah and Christmas, Barack Obama stabbed Israel in the front. The departing president refused to veto United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334—a measure ostensibly about Israeli settlement policy, but clearly intended to tip the peace process toward the Palestinians. Its adoption wasn’t pretty. But, sadly, it was predictable.
Read more…

By Karin McQuinlan, AMERICAN THINKER

We’re now in the Trump era.  Time to drop the euphemisms.  Time for consequences.  Obama is not motivated by personal “pique” at Netanyahu.  Anti-Zionism is not personal; it is ideological, and it is widely popular among the Democrat leftist base.  Whereas anti-Semitism has shrunk to 3% of the white population in America, the ADL estimates that it is 22-36% among blacks and Latinos.  It is much higher than that among leftists.

Obama has chafed at the need to put on a mainstream front.  Now he is baring his leftist teeth.  The effect is more mean than frightening, and it will not have the outcome he wants.
Read more…

By Caroline B Glick,

Following outgoing US President Barack Obama’s assault on Israel at the UN Security Council last Friday, longtime UN observer Claudia Rossett wrote an important article at PJMedia where she recalled Kirkpatrick’s words.

In “How the PLO was legitimized,” published in Commentary, Kirkpatrick said that Yassir Arafat and the PLO worked “to come to power through international diplomacy – reinforced by murder.”

Kirkpatrick explained, “The long march through the UN has produced many benefits for the PLO. It has created a people where there was none; a claim where there was none. Now the PLO is seeking to create a state where there already is one. That will take more than resolutions and more than an ‘international peace conference.’ But having succeeded so well over the years in its campaign to delegitimize Israel, the PLO might yet also succeed in bringing the campaign to a triumphant conclusion, with consequences for the Jewish state that would be nothing short of catastrophic.”
Read more…

T. Belman. David Suissa is president of TRIBE Media Corp./Jewish Journal. I was pleased to see him take a strong stand against Obama’s abstention.

By David Suissa Jewish Journal of Los Angeles Dec. 25, 2016

After failing for eight years to get the Palestinians to come to the negotiating table, a lame duck President Barack Obama decided to punish Israel by allowing the United Nations Security Council to essentially declare Israel a criminal state.

By doing so, Obama has thrown Israel to the wolves– the wolves of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS), of the International Criminal Court and of all international bodies and movements that have an interest in harming Israel.
The U.N. action follows Obama’s theme of blaming Israel for the failed peace process and rewarding the Palestinians for consistently saying no to everything—to concessions, to peace talks, to recognition of Israel.
Read more…

By Cliff Kincaid, RENEW AMERICA

Liberal Democrats have been so busy accusing Donald J. Trump of being a Russian agent that they have missed the real Russian agent on the international scene – Germany’s Angela Merkel. Her pro-Muslim immigration policies have not only destabilized Europe and increased terrorism, but have also facilitated the rise of the right-wing political parties our media have expressed alarm about.

Our media, for example, were shocked over a reported meeting between a leader of the Austrian Freedom Party and Trump’s national security adviser, Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn. The Austrian Freedom Party had signed a cooperation agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party. Liberal Democrats saw this as more evidence of a pro-Russian bent by the incoming Trump administration.
Read more…

MOSAIC has an excellent series of articles on the subject which take some time to read. But they are still worth while.

Disorder in the court.
How Israel’s supreme court has effected its own constitutional revolution—and thereby undermined public confidence in the rule of law.

Response 1: The Problem Starts in the Knesset
Israel’s supreme court, and its overreaching and overactive judiciary in general, are not the cause but the symptom of a larger predicament.

Response 2 Israel’s Supreme Court Is Unusual, but Not That Unusual
The Jewish state is unique both in the strength of its democracy and in the self-assurance of the judges who challenge its democracy. It may be fated to remain so.

Response 3 The Erosion of Public Trust in Israel’s Judiciary Is Real—and Unusual
It’s hard to imagine a former justice in any other democracy trying to orchestrate a mass judicial resignation.