The Ultimate Alternate Israel-Palestine Solution

T. Belman.  This article was written just a month after Pres Trump was inaugurated.  Six months later I hosted a conference at the Begin Center in Jerusalem called The Jordan Option. All aspects of this option were discussed. The Jordan Opposition Coalition was represented by its founder Dr Mudar Zahran and Abed Amaala, the head of a million man Bedouin clan in Jordan. Close attention to the ideas presented, was paid by the PMO in Jerusalem and the Trump team in DC.

These ideas were further developed in my article, Memo to Kushner, published in Feb 2019.   Dr. Mudar Zahran addressed members of the EU Parliament (video) and debated at the Oxford Union delivering a pro-Israel message.  Be sure to watch both.

I like to believe that it was our initiative and our ideas that lead to the Abrahamic Accords and their progeny of peace deals yet to be born. Dr Mudar Zahran strongly believes in cooperation, not confrontation, just as King Feisal proposed and the Abrahamic Accords formalized. Jordan may yet become the Palestinian State under his leadership.

With a new U.S. president, new ideas are emerging on how to resolve the Israel-Palestine debacle. One of the most promising comes from Jordanian Opposition Council who favor a new Palestinian state — in Jordan. 

By Ted Belman, (First published in slightly different form on Apr 1/17)

The GOP unanimously approved a pro-Israel platform at their convention in July 2016 which stipulated:

“The U.S. seeks to assist in the establishment of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, to be negotiated among those living in the region,”

David Friedman and Jason Greenblatt, representing Donald Trump, participated in the drafting and were in complete agreement with the final text.

Gone was any reference to the Palestinian people or to a two-state solution. In addition, the platform included the words “We reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier.” If not an “occupier,” then presumably Israel is a sovereign.

Accordingly, the search is on for an alternate solution. Such a solution could take inspiration from the short-lived Feisal/Weizmann Agreement of 1919. The essence of this agreement was that Palestine as it then was, was to be divided into two states, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews. Chaim Weizmann on behalf of the Jews agreed to help develop the Arab state and King Feisal agreed to welcome Jewish settlement in the Jewish state and favored friendly cooperative relations.

Although the British didn’t breathe life into this agreement, they did separate Trans-Jordan from Palestine in 1922 with the Jordan River being the boundary between them. Trans-Jordan (Jordan) thus got 78% of the lands promised to the Jews. The remaining 22% consisting of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean was to be the Jewish state. This was enshrined in the Palestine Mandate signed by the League of Nations in 1922.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

With respect to the Arabs living in Jewish Palestine, the Congressional Record contained the following:

“(2) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, they shall be required to sell their lands at a just valuation and retire into the Arab territory which has been assigned to them by the League of Nations in the general reconstruction of the countries of the east.

“(3) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, under conditions of right and justice, or to sell their lands at a just valuation and to retire into their own countries, they shall be driven from Palestine by force.”

The US was not a member of the League of Nations at this time. In order to be able to protect American interests in Palestine, she entered into the 1924 Anglo-American Convention in which the U.S. bound itself to the terms of the Mandate. This of course meant the recognition of Jewish right to close settlement of Palestine and that all of Palestine was to be the Jewish homeland.

Since then, there were a number of unsuccessful attempts, contrary to the terms of the Mandate, to further divide Jewish Palestine into two states.  UN General Assembly Resolution 181, passed in 1947, recommended partition, but was rejected by the Arabs. The Jews on the other hand took advantage of it and declared their independence in 1948. Israel owes its independence to that declaration and not to Resolution 181, which was only a recommendation, precipitating the move.

Nothing has happened of any legal consequence since, to cancel the right of the Jews to settle and be sovereign over all the land to the Jordan River.

To date, Israel has been reluctant to claim sovereignty over these lands as the Arabs living there would then demand citizenship resulting in a binational state. This is unacceptable to most Israelis. They also reject the two-state solution.

So what is the alternative?

Consider for a moment, that if Jordan agrees to grant citizenship to all Palestinians, as their law currently provides, and invites the return of all of them to live and work in Jordan, the conflict would soon be ended. While King Abdullah isn’t about to do so, the Jordan Opposition Coalition (JOC) would. This coalition represents all opposition groups in Jordan that back a secular state. The JOC since its creation six years ago has supported good relations with Israel. It does not include groups that support terrorism. This alliance has agreed to work together in order to form the government of Jordan should King Abdullah abdicate. Although at least 75% of Jordanians are Palestinians, the King has disenfranchised them to a great extent in favor of the ethnic Hashemites and Bedouins.

The JOC has produced a detailed plan, Operation “Jordan is Palestine,” which clearly identifies their goals and the operational steps needed to implement their plan.  Copies are available upon request.

All that is necessary for this to come to pass is for the U.S. to instruct the king, who currently spends most of his time outside Jordan, to not return home. Then it would arrange for the Jordanian army, which it controls, to support the next popular Palestinian uprising, and to designate who among them would form the interim government.

The JOC, puts it this way:

“This plan seeks to execute a feasible two-state solution where Jordan is the natural homeland for all Palestinians, and Israel becomes sovereign over all soil west to the River Jordan. This could only happen if the corrupt, terror-supporting and double-speaking Hashemite royal family leaves Jordan. The Palestinians often revolt against the regime but the king’s police force puts them down. The American media ignore this solution to the unrest in Jordan.

“What is needed is for the U.S. to influence the Jordanian army and security agency to stand with the revolution the next time it breaks out.  The security agencies and army are already securing the country without any influence from the king who is mostly abroad.  Under these conditions, the king would not return.  Once that happens an interim government of secular Palestinians who want peace with Israel could be appointed.

“Once the interim government is installed, it will strengthen the economy by stopping theft of government money and ending corruption. It will fully enfranchise the Palestinians. All Palestinians around the world would be welcomed to return to Jordan pursuant the current Jordanian citizenship act, which already recognizes all Palestinians as citizens of Jordan. Many Palestinians will emigrate to Jordan in part because many have family members and friends living in Jordan. Work opportunities as well as a rewarding benefits/welfare system will be made available to them by the new interim government as further inducement. “

Israel, with many international partners, including the U.S., could finance the building of a new Jordanian city of 1 million people. This would greatly stimulate the Jordanian economy and would provide work for the returning Palestinians. The new homes could be made available to the returnees and locals at subsidized prices further incentivizing people to return. The ending of King Abdullah’s discrimination against Palestinians living in Jordan, would also contribute to making Jordan a desired emmigration destination.

Michael Ross, a Republican, wrote after the election of Donald Trump, “Trump Must  Speak to Mudar Zahran because Zahran offers the alternate solution that Pres Trump is looking for.

As part of this solution, all Palestinian refugees enrolled with UN Relief And Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East could be repatriated to Jordan and given citizenship. Thus UNRWA could be wound up and the current UNRWA funding could be transferred to Jordan to assist in the resettlement.

According to Moshe Feiglin, the head of the Zehut Party in Israel, the Oslo Accords have cost Israel over 1 trillion shekels since they were signed. In addition, Israel has borne the cost of three military campaigns in Gaza. Finally, Israel supplies to the Palestinians their energy, water and sewage treatment for free or at greatly subsidized prices.

Last summer, Moshe Feiglin proposed a Solution in which Israel extends Israeli law from the Mediterranean to the Jordan:

“We will give the Arab population in those territories three options: The first is voluntary emigration with the aid of a generous emigration grant. The second is permanent residency, similar to the “Green Card” status in the US – not like what is currently the practice in East Jerusalem. This status will be offered to those Arabs who publicly declare their loyalty to the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish Nation. We will safeguard their human rights and will not do anything like we did to ourselves in Gush Katif. The third option will be reserved for relatively few Arabs, and only in accordance with Israeli interests. Those who tie their fate to the fate of the Jewish Nation, like the Druze, can enter a long-term process of attaining citizenship.”

Recently, Feiglin’s Party, Zehut, published The Diplomatic Plan.

Martin Sherman has published his plan which he calls the “Humanitarian Solution” as opposed to a strictly political solution. He summarized all his writings in support of such a plan and published them here.

With an estimated $300,000 per family grant, both he and Feiglin have estimated that incentivized compensated emigration will cost Israel over $200 billion USD but both argue it is feasible and worth doing.

The repatriation of Palestinians to Jordan, as proposed by JOC, would greatly facilitate the Palestinian emigration and greatly reduce the grants needed to incentivize it. UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority would both be wound up.

1.75 million Palestinians live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank). They should be induced to emigrate to Jordan.  The same goes for all Palestinian refugees living in Lebanon, Syria and elsewhere.

Considering the subsidies that the West provides to UNRWA, Gaza and the PA, this would be a bargain. Given that JOC has tied its fate to Israel, Israel would be happy to contribute to such a solution as the present conflict costs her hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Currently the US gives $370 million to UNRWA, $300 million to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and $1.3 Billion to Jordan annually. The EU also gives money to the PA and to Jordan.  These monies could be redirected to Jordan to kick start this repatriation.  Others, including Israel could contribute. In time, the US and EU subsidies could be phased out.

It really is that simple.  There is much more that can be said in support of it.

Prof. Hillel Frisch, a senior research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and Yitzhak Sokoloff, a fellow of the Ingeborg Rennert Center for Jerusalem Studies at Bar-Ilan University recently wrote Trump and the Jordanian Option.

“The inauguration of an American administration uncommitted to the principle of an independent Palestinian state provides Israel with the opportunity to advocate a long-term strategic vision of building up a prosperous Jordan that could provide an alternative to the model of a two-state solution based on the Palestinian Authority.”

They are wrong to suggest that this can be done with King Abdullah. I believe, as does the JOC, that the king is part of the problem and must be replaced by Palestinians.

Gideon Saar, a touted future Prime Minister of Israel, in his recent article, Goodbye Two-State Solution, wrote:

“A Jordanian-Palestinian federative solution would offer the Palestinians space in addition to their autonomy. We could also consider adopting a joint Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian economic framework. And there are many other ideas that could be constructed as a result of quiet, serious work with the backing of a supportive US administration.”

He is right but the ultimate alternate solution is the one put forward by the JOC.

If anyone wants more information or can help this solution get traction, please write me (


After publishing this article, I heard from a reader who had done considerable work on a plan of his own similar to the Jordan Option described above.  I spent many hours with him discussing his research. We also met with a few movers and shakers in Israel.

Whereas I merely suggested the possibility of building a new Jordanian city to house one million people, he went further and researched a location for such a city and researched the cost of housing in Jordan.

According to his research, an 800 sq ft apartment in Jordan costs $40,000.  Thus if 1.5 million Palestinians in the West Bank, Jerusalem and the camps could be induced to move to Jordan, 300,000 homes (5 people per family) would be needed costing $12 billion; a far cry from the $200 Billion needed to induce emigration according to Feiglin and Sherman. These homes can be given to the Palestinians, free of charge.

Based on the enormous benefit caused by the plan to the Jordanian economy Abdullah can be convinced to invite all Palestinians to return to Jordan just as the JOC plans to do if they get into power.  Most people believe that Abdullah would never do it. But due to the poor Jordanian economy he could  be forced to do it

Prof Hillel Frisch, BESA, agrees. He recently wrote, Becoming Part of Jordan and Egypt: A Palestinian Economic Imperative which included this summary:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Reintegrating into the Jordanian state is an economic imperative for the Arab inhabitants of the Palestinian Authority. Only by once again becoming citizens of Jordan will they be able to challenge the economic stone wall imposed by domestic Jordanian economic lobby groups barring West Bank exports. A two-state solution would lead, not to an economy of peace, but to an economy of violence as lobby groups in both Israel and Jordan shut out the Palestinian state’s exports. The Palestinian state would inevitably react by threatening and committing violence to extract the international aid to which the PA has become accustomed.

This reader also makes the novel suggestion that Israel can offer a water incentive to Jordan tied to the number of immigrants it absorbs. This would increase the water supply to Jordan and lower the cost per litre.  More on this later.

When presenting this plan to others, many mention that US Congressmen love King Abdulla. That may be so but they are ill informed. Recently Edy Cohen of BESA wrote Sorry but Jordan is not a friend?

Gaza and Egypt

Independent of this proposal or perhaps in tandem with it the same opportunity exists for helping all Gazans to emigrate to Egypt. There are approximately 1.5 million Gazans living in Gaza and the average family size is 6. Thus 250,000 apartments are required.

An 800 sq. ft. apartment in the new cities adjacent to Cairo that would accommodate 15 million people,  costs about $16,000 USD: i.e, half the Jordan cost. This adds up to $4 billion USD.

Thus the Gazans would need only 10% of those homes. A 10 year plan would mean that 150,000 Gazans would emigrate there every year. This represents just 0.16% of the population of Egypt.1.5 million Gazans represent only 1.6% of the Egyptian population.

Other incentives might be pensions and welfare payments financed by the international community.

Considering how much it costs the EU and the US to support the current wave of migrants to their shores, this could well be a model for them to consider, i.e., a “Marshall Plan” for the Middle East as a means to get the migrants to stay where they are.

The obvious question is why would al Sisi agree to this, given how much trouble he is now having with Hamas that rules Gaza and is perceived as a threat to Egypt along with ISIS.

The obvious answer is that al Sisi needs help to meet its financial obligations and its security threats emanating from the Sinai and from Libya. The international community could provide that help.

Given that Saudi Arabia and other gulf states have started an initiative at Pres Trump’s urging, to stop the flow of funds to terrorists. They have severed relations with Qatar one of the biggest funders of terror demanding that it cease and desist. Specifically, they have demanded that Qatar stop funding Hamas.

Thus if Hamas is starved for money they will be less of a threat to Egypt too.

The reader above mentioned, is currently preparing a report in support of his Plan. It is 25 pages long and when completed in a few weeks will approach 35 pages. This Plan will make the case for why this is in the best interest of the US too.

October 28, 2020 | 143 Comments » | 9,636 views

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

43 Comments / 143 Comments

  1. @ vivarto:
    Or like Jesus of Nazareth advised his followers to live:

    “39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. ”

    “43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[i] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you… If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others?

    “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life[n]?

    28 “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
    Sermon on the Mount

    or Ghandi:

    “And for doing this, I should not wait for the fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance but would have confidence that in the end the rest are bound to follow my example. If one Jew or all the Jews were to accept the prescription here offered, he or they cannot be worse off than now. And suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and joy which no number of resolutions of sympathy passed in the world outside Germany can. Indeed, even if Britain, France and America were to declare hostilities against Germany, they can bring no inner joy, no inner strength. The calculated violence of Hitler may even result in a general massacre of the Jews by way of his first answer to the declaration of such hostilities. But if the Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary suffering, even the massacre I have imagined could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy that Jehovah had wrought deliverance of the race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the godfearing, death has no terror. It is a joyful sleep to be followed by a waking that would be all the more refreshing for the long sleep.

    ‘It is hardly necessary for me to point out that it is easier for the Jews than for the Czechs to follow my prescription. And they have in the Indian satyagraha campaign in South Africa an exact parallel. There the Indians occupied precisely the same place that the Jews occupy in Germany….”

    Ghandi: Zionism and the Jews, November 26, 1938 (Kristallnacht was Nov, 9-10, 1938)

    How many ways can one say:

    Cookoo Cookoo Cookoo

  2. @ vivarto:
    Sadat wasn’t an Islamist either. They are both Pan-Arabists. So what? There’s more than one way to cook a goose. (that’s us.)

  3. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    With regard to Ghandi, Jesus, and people who still honor Sadat and believe in the Two State Solution, Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, I am reminded of Lin Yutang’s quip:

    “While in the West, the insane are so many that they are put in an asylum, in China, the insane are so unusual that we worship them, as anybody who has a knowledge of Chinese literature will testify.”

  4. “While in the West, the insane are so many that they are put in an asylum, in China the insane are so unusual that we worship them, as anybody who has a knowledge of Chinese literature will testify.”

    Sorry, it once again, ate my comment and then spat it out again, hence the duplication, the duplication, the duplication, etc. ad nauseum. number 9, 9, 9

    cheap laugh

  5. @ Sebastien Zorn: Fascinating. I have read some of Bregman’s stuff and know he is a real rat-an anti-Israeli Israeli, probably in the pay of British intelligence. The Brits also probably had Marwan assassinated, or at least facilitated his assassination. Eli Zeira also seems to have been a real rat. Just the kind of Israeli intelligence officer who needs to be weeded out if Israel is to survive. A leftist? On the other hand, the fact that an Egyptian billionaire and son-in-law of Nasser would be a faithful Israeli spy for decades proves that not all Arabs are anti-Israel or anti-Semitic. If he were really that rich and well-connected, he could not have been motivated by money. It must be that he was a sincere friend of Israel and the Jews, to the point of being willing to risk his life for us. I have learned of several other Arabs, even Palestinian Arabs, who have sacrificed their lives to help protect Israel. Considering all the antisemitic brainwashing that every Arab is subjected to, this is truly amazing and grounds for hope.

  6. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    Sebastian, what does all this Jesus drivel have to do with our conversation. Are you sure you meant to be directing it to me?

    I mean you could as well start talking about Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer’s adventures. All very nice, but totally unrelated to our subject.

  7. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    Sebastian I think you are barking up the wrong tree.
    I don’t warship Sadat, and I certainly don’t believe in any “Two State Solution”.
    How did you get this impressions?
    I have no idea what Chine do with their idiots, and I don’t find it relevant.

  8. After Israelis criminally and idiotically revealed Marwan identity he was visited by the Egyptian secret service and given a choice to die and have his whole family murdered, or just to have an accident and fall out from his balcony.
    He chose the later.

  9. @ vivarto:
    Exactly. I was just giving other examples of insanity. Doing the same stupid thing over and over and expecting different result is the definitionj of insanity somebody once said. Israel made a big mistake. You just said who knows what could have happened? Essentially, you brushed off the entire question. In the words of Georges Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

  10. @ vivarto:
    My metaphors were a bit of a stretch, granted. The “worship” here I refer to is that of a paradigm. Sisi is doing what the Saudis, what Sadat did. It’s why I keep asking everybody to read the d*mn Eidelberg already and then comment. Don’t you know that Sisi, while “cooperating,” however incompetently, in security and suppressing Islamists at home, is playing footsie with Hamas now, and has been part of the diplomatic offensive against Israel to relinquish more land all along?

    Did you read the quote from the Eidelberg excerpt of the top U.S. intelligence official at the time who said that the Arabs remain uniformly committed to the extermination of Israel as a nation and as a people but having lost 4 wars have decided to resort to diplomatic duplicity instead?????? Is anybody reading anything?

  11. @ adamdalgliesh:
    Thank you. Excellent comment. Yes. And why was Zeira never convicted of anything. And why wasn’t Breghman brought up on charges. He betrayed a key asset and got him murdered in the process of slandering him while outing him. Really shocking. And this is recent, too!

  12. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    Yes I have read and it is excellent.
    At the same time I see Arabs as not fundamentally different from other people.
    They are driven by their self-interest.
    And I believe that they have realized that Israel is not a threat to them, or the contrary, Israel might actually be an asset to them in their joint stand against Iran.

  13. @ vivarto:
    Two Israelis. The London Based Israeli Journalist, Breghman who outed him in order to slander him based on the information by Zeira, who had been the head of intelligence during the Yom Kippur War who had been sacked and brought up on charges at the time for ignoring all the intelligence saying that war was coming.

  14. vivarto Said:

    Really? How on earth did you arrive at that? Moreover, if you believe that, what about the Eidelberg strikes you as “excellent?”

  15. Yes, I read it, and it important.
    At the same time, it seems like you have not read what I wrote. Al Sisi is a true Egyptian patriot, he is not an ideological Islamist idiot.
    Unlike many Arabs, he does not appear antisemitic, or not anti-Christian for that sake either. I am not even sure if he sees himself as Arab primarily; rather I think he sees himself an Egyptian first.

    There are some people in Egypt who are beginning to wake up to the reality that the anti-Israeli hysteria and the pretense that Israel is their greatest problem has been harmful and above all totally false.

    It is dangerous to be pro-Israeli in Egypt as they have been fed anti-Israeli and even antisemitic propaganda for the last 70 years, but I see the possibility of change.
    Arab leaders no longer see Israel as a beachhead of Western imperialism pointed at them.
    There is a growing acceptance of us as part of them.
    And in fact the more we act like them, the more they’ll accept us.
    The more we act like politically correct Western idiots, the more they will be hating and attacking us.
    But if we practice real politics and stand up for our real interests they’ll understand and respect.
    No, they are not necessarily our friends, but they are not the implacable enemies they once were.

    The above is certainly not THE truth, it is my opinion.

  16. @ vivarto:
    No question you are right about relying on Israel against Iran in the short run. But, they are still engaging in the diplomatic offensive against Israel to relinquish land and the UNESCO resolutions erasing Jewish history. Nothing has changed there except that the Arabs, including Egypt, now, under Trump’s influence, have, for the moment, merely called for a freeze of new Jewish settlement while allowing unlimited Arab settlement, presumably. Another way of getting to the same place incrementally.

    From the end of last year — this is Sisi not Morsi, mind you —
    “3 DECEMBER 2016
    Egypt: Trump convinced Sisi to withdraw UN resolution”

    “Egypt agreed to postpone a vote on a UN Security Council resolution against Israeli settlements after US President-elect Donald Trump called President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the Egyptian president’s office said.

    ‘Egypt had circulated the draft late on Wednesday, demanding Israel halt settlement activity in the occupied West Bank, and a vote was initially scheduled for Thursday.”

    And now, more recently,



    “The resolution was submitted by: Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar and Sudan, on behalf of the Palestinian Authority.”

    “UNESCO vote disavowing Israel’s sovereignty in Jerusalem that passed with only 38% of the voting countries actually supporting the measure represents a diplomatic victory for Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday, soon after the vote.”

    MAY 2, 2017

  17. @ vivarto:
    I will give Sisi credit for one thing that Sadat couldn’t say. He voted for Israel once in the UN. Sisi is just fair-minded enough to admit one place where Jews can be allowed to live and thrive. Even before Trump. Of course, he had to do it to get the Arabs on board. Normalization huh? What a laugh.

    “For the first time since 1948, Egypt votes for Israel at UN”
    “November 1, 2015 at 12:27 pm”

    “Egypt’s representative at United Nations voted on Friday in support of Israel’s bid for membership of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), Israeli media reported.

    Since the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and its acceptance to membership of the UN, Egypt had never voted in its favour at the UN before last Friday.

    One hundred and seventeen countries voted in favour of Israel, 21 abstained, while only Namibia voted against the decision. Countries that abstained include: Qatar, Tunisia, Syria, Mauritania, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Iraq and Algeria.

    Israeli sources said that they were accepted to this UN committee after “intensive diplomatic efforts” exerted at different levels.

    Prior to the vote, spokesman for the Egyptian ministry of foreign affairs Ahmed Abu Zeid refused to comment on the matter. However, in the face of fierce domestic criticism, he said that voting for Israel was necessary in order to secure the membership of a number of Arab countries to the committee.

    Egyptian politicians and activists widely rejected this move and severely criticised Egyptian Military President Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi.

    In 1973, Egypt and Syria started a war against Israel that paved the way for peace talks between Egypt and Israel. It ended up with a peace treaty in 1979 that ended state of war between the two sides, reciprocal recognition and normalisation of ties.”

    Maybe Sisi got the idea from Caroline Glick. From 2010:

    “Obama sings for Israel – Under the Sea” – Latma TV

  18. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    Of course I am aware of all this antisemitic Jew-hating garbage in both Arabs and UN.
    I think you missing my point.
    My point is that at this time the Arab leaders do no longer see Israel as a threat to them.
    They are paying the lip service to the “Palestinian” bulshit, but they don’t give a shit about the Pals.
    They could not care less even if we put all of them on boat and sent them to Sweden.
    Of course hey’d bitch, but they’d not start a war over it.

    So my message is that they are driven by real-politics.
    At this point they are starting to realize that blaming Israel for everything that is wrong with their society is not serving them.

    Conquering and destroying Israel would not improve their situation in the least, and they know it well.

  19. Well, Sebastian, you tell me:
    Do you really that the life of Egyptians is going to be any better if they managed to destroy Israel?
    Do you think that their lives will be better if Israel gave Judea and Samaria to the Arab colonists?
    Do you think that the Egyptian and other Arab leaders really want a “Palestinian” state?

  20. @ vivarto:
    Just the other way around. They don’t attack because they see Israel as a potential threat. They attacked when they didn’t.

    They don’t care about a better life for themselves if it means letting us live.

    Nobody wants a Palestinian State. It’s a trick to get rid of us using salami tactics.

    PLO Ten point plan (1974)

    Article 3: The Liberation Organization will struggle against any proposal for a Palestinian entity the price of which is recognition, peace, secure frontiers, renunciation of national rights, and the deprival of our people of their right to return and their right to self-determination on the soil of their homeland.

    Sadat – upon returning home from Jerusalem: “We have to settle for what we can get so that we can get everything we want.” –

    And, a year later:

    “Nor, at home, did he cease from threats and anti-Semitic attacks upon
    Israelis and Jews, between which he clearly has difficulty distinguishing.
    For example, in an interview with October magazine on January 14, 1978,
    over a year after his supposed decision that there would be “no more war”
    with Israel, Sadat said: “What the Israelis in particular and the Jews in general do not understand is that the tolerance and wish for peace which
    appeared after my initiative could, I fear, turn into something else against
    them. Then the Jews would complain anew of a wave of hatred, bitterness
    and mistrust of them …They are a people who do not desire peace, nor
    do they desire natural coexistence among peoples because they want
    war and hatred to continue in order to profit from them…. Fear is the
    second skin of every Israeli or Jew who is not content with fear but seeks
    to frighten or make others afraid also.”

  21. Excerpt:

    “A prudent observer would have to admit that all the available evidence
    points to the second alternative. Sadat has made it clear to his “internal”
    audience, i.e., those who read Arabic, that he is engaged in what is for the
    Arabs a new strategy to win the traditional Arab goal of Israel’s
    destruction. In a section of his memoirs published in October on
    September 11, 1977, two months before the peace initiative, Sadat wrote:
    “Al Qaddafi has chosen to make the same terrible mistake
    that Arabs committed several years ago when they rejected
    everything and anything—when the Arabs turned the word `no’
    into an idol which they worshipped, burned incense around,
    and in the process, burned all their bridges and were halted …
    all this because the Arabs pinned the fate of the Arab nation
    and three of its generations to the word ‘no.’ In the field of
    politics, just as in the field of sports, the best player is not the
    one who kicks the ball out of the playground every time he gets
    it. This is escapism; he prefers to escape from the situation
    rather than take the ball, maneuver it through his opponents
    and then score a goal.”11
    Notice Sadat makes no objection to Qaddafi’s goal, repeatedly trumpeted
    as the annihilation of Israel, but to the methods by which the goal
    has been pursued. On the contrary, in the same passage Sadat goes on to
    say that he tries to avoid getting involved in minor and peripheral battles
    precisely because the coming war with the Jews should be the only thing
    that preoccupies him, and he is unwilling to become distracted “from this
    confrontation which will be much more violent than the October War.”12
    There were other hints shortly before Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem that he
    was planning a new strategy. On September 3, 1977 Foreign Minister
    Fahmi (whose later resignation suggests that even he was not aware of
    the dramatic form the strategy would assume) argued against another
    Arab summit meeting.
    “The world is opposed to Israel’s actions in the territory—our
    main aim must be to exploit intelligently this international
    attitude. We must differentiate between the possible and the
    impossible; we must address the world in its own language and
    go with it as far as we can go… We must besiege Israel and
    isolate it internationally … It is absolutely not in our interest to
    allow Israel to escape from this impasse. We could raise issues
    which we know, without even thinking about it, that the world
    atmosphere is not prepared for—issues which would provide
    Israel with new arguments to convince sections of world public
    opinion that throughout the history of the conflict the Arabs
    have thought only about the destruction and elimination of
    Israel … Briefly it is not right…to allow Israel to escape the gripof world society by raising ideas which would make the world
    forget Israeli extremism by pointing to what it might imagine to
    be Arab extremism …We must not take steps unless we are
    sure they bring us closer to our goal.13”

  22. Well, OK, that was Sadat, but what does that have to do with as Sissi, I don’t think he is an asshole.

  23. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    Are you saying that Al Sisi sees himself as an Arab rather than an Egyptian?
    Do you really know that much about him, and about the Egyptians national identity in general?
    I would not be so sure.

  24. Awesome article in today’s A7. Worth reprinting in full:

    “There may be hope for Sweden, after all”
    ‘Time for international community to acknowledge Six-Day War is over and that Jerusalem is, has been, will always remain capital of Jews.’
    Contact Editor Mordechai Sones, 13/07/17 14:53

    ‘Swedish magazine Världen idag (“The World Today”) ran an article entitled Time for the UN to Accept the Outcome of the Six-Day War by Tomas Sandell. Arutz Sheva brings a translation of the article in its entirety for the wholly lucid dedication to truth Sandell demonstrates herein:

    This week, the international community will mark the 50th anniversary of the Six-Day War and the reunification of Jerusalem. But despite the fact that Israel won its war against three Arab armies in early June 1967 in record time, the war seems to continue. Indeed, the international community still has difficulty accepting that the small country of Israel, against all odds over the Arab armies, and as a result of winning this war, received new lands.

    The war ended formally after six days, June 10, 1967, but still fifty years later, the international community demands that the “occupied” territories of Israel should be returned even though it was not Israel who started the war. Thus, the Israeli “occupation” is considered to be the root of the entire Israel-Palestinian conflict.

    The statement is incorrect for two different reasons. According to international law, one can not occupy an area already belonging to a legal entity. Judea and Samaria were assigned to the Jewish state in the 1922 Palestine Mandate in the land area that remained when the original mandate was divided into two parts, a Jewish Palestine (1948 Israel) and an Arab Palestine, today Jordan.

    The United Nations partition plan of 1947, on the other hand, had been rejected by the Arab neighbors of Israel and thus never came into force. The lands that Israel regained in the Six-Day War therefore already belonged to it according to international law after being illegally occupied by Jordan for twenty years.

    Secondly, international law expressly prohibits a war of aggression. On the other hand, it does not say anything about land areas gained after a regular war of defense. Thus, a country, or a group of countries, can not start a war of aggression and if they lose the war, the counterparty be called out for occupation. Public law can not reasonably forbid countries to defend themselves, or encourage countries to initiate a war of aggression with the promise that they can later regain all the territories that they lose. This would be a recipe for complete chaos where aggressive states are rewarded while the law-abiding ones have no legal rights.

    Now it is therefore time for the international community to accept the outcome of the Six-Day War.

    Indeed, in UN resolution 242, the Government of Israel has agreed that certain lands should be returned in a peace agreement, but the allegation that Israel is currently occupying Palestinian land is wrong because they “occupied territories” that never belonged to a Palestinian state.

    When you repeat in international relations next week that the Six-Day War is the root of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, you are wrong.

    If the Palestinian people (actually Arabs living in the Palestine Mandate) had been interested in their own state, one such was founded in 1947 when the UN partition plan offered them everything they are asking for today and more. In other words, one had twenty years, from 1947 to 1967, to create a state, but there was no interest. Therefore, it is intellectually unsound to claim that the war in 1967 is the core of the conflict.

    As an external columnist, it is not my job to decide how to resolve the conflict, but the Israeli government has announced that it is prepared to negotiate with the Palestinians about a state, but insists that Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel, and that today’s status will not change and the Temple Mount be preserved under Jordanian administration. This is no unreasonable bargaining position.

    After almost fifty years, it is time for the international community to acknowledge that the Six-Day War is over and that Jerusalem is, has been, and will always remain the capital of the Jews. This fact is acknowledged, de facto, every time a head of state travels to Jerusalem to meet the government of the country. These meetings do not happen in Tel Aviv but in Jerusalem. When you talk about partition of Jerusalem between East and West, you forget that only East Jerusalem with the Western Wall is the historic Jerusalem holy to the Jewish people. If you think Israel’s demands on Jerusalem are unreasonable, one has to consider the options, to share Jerusalem, and to create a new Mecca in East Jerusalem where no non-Muslim may enter.

    For those who want to safeguard universal legal principles and values, it is therefore important to safeguard Jerusalem’s current status as a united city open to all religions as well as to those who do not belong to any religion. Jerusalem’s reunion is an event worth celebrating, for Christians, Muslims, as well as Jews.”

  25. @ Sebastien Zorn:
    SZ, the Swedish magazine article cited in A7 is impressive enough to be regarded as a favorable harbinger for Israel.

    But I remind anyone who chooses to read my thoughts, that the future of the Jewish state depends not nearly so much upon the pro-semitic posture of the goyim, as it does on the intrepid will power of the Jewish nation itself. First for self-defense, and then for an expanded land area upon which to build the Jewish nation that we should wish to develop in coming centuries.

    Arnold Harris, Outspeaker

  26. @ ArnoldHarris:
    Yes, well if you read my Kopenik/Pimpernel comment just now under the article about the crazy Port idea, you will see that I concluded with precisely the same thought.

  27. Seeing as Jordan was part of the Balfour Agreement to be part and parcel of Israel, Palestinians if they were ever serious about peace (and we know the real answer to that), would jump at the chance to have control of a country nearly 3x the size of Israel (even with her borders extended to the banks of the Jordan river and wiped of the vestigial strip of Gaza). But we know the real reason, nothing except the annihilation of the Jews will be satisfactory to them. So forget this pipe dream, wipe the Islamic presence off the Temple Mount, annex Jerusalem, and do what they should have done in ’48 and ’67, send the populous packing. Let them have the property of the million Jews expelled from Israels Arabic neighbors in compensation. But go they must. Force is the only thing they comprehend. Sad but true.

  28. I did not know about your Kopenik/Pimpernel comment. Consequently, I did not read it. Unfortunately, Ted’s comments apparently are not indexed by keywords.

    Arnold Harris, Outspeaker

  29. @ ArnoldHarris:
    I tend to look at the comments first on the side. Anyway, take a look at the exchange between me and Edgar G. which has just concluded. I think you may find it interesting.

  30. It is important to eradicate the notion of Palestinian Nation.
    If Pals move to Egypt or Jordan but retain the notion that they are Pals, they’ll still whine over losing the promised land. Muslim Arabs can never be as successful as Jews because Islam is deeply stupid and creates stupid society. So they’ll continue to be envious of Jews, and blame their failures on Jews.

    The deconstruction of Palestinian identity must be integral part of resettling.
    Pals with Egyptian ancestors can become Egyptians.
    Same for the Pals with Iraqi, Moroccan, etc ancestors,
    Only after they are no longer Pals but Egyptians etc. can they qualify for financial assistance.

  31. @

    Hi, Robin

    I don’t think many people actually believe in a “two state soluition”. It’s just a politically correct buzzword. It contains two logical fallacies:

    1. “two-state”, and
    2. “solution”

    Neither is an answer to any good question; and what’s more, I don’t think anyone knows what the question is.

    Israel’s enemies are interested in a “zero state” solution, and they will try with all their might to achieve it. They will fail, and the Jews will invent a new feast, like Hanukkah or Purim, along with a new food to eat.

    Chag Sameach Shtei Medinat
    (Happy Two State Holiday)

    …and pass the baklavah?

  32. Said:

    Anyway you do it is fine with me.

    So, it’s alright with you if the Arabs of Judea and Samaria should become citizens overnight and have representation in the Knesset? Actually, nobody wants to talk about Gaza. One state would really have to include Gaza, wouldn’t it?

    Don’t get me wrong. I’m in favor of one state, throughout all of historical Israel with few or no Arabs limited in scope only by practicality. It’s the phrase, “Anyway you do it.”

  33. Who else is in the JOC besides Zahran? Is he the only spokesman? What if something happens to him? Who takes over? Are there any videos of his speeches in Arabic with English subtitles? Has he been on Arabic TV? Has he published articles in Arabic papers?

  34. The Mandate to establish a Jewish National Home was given to Great Britain in July, 1922. Transjordan (78%) of the “Jewish National Home” was chopped off in September, 1922. Here is the original map of the Mandate:
    The UN decided to (further) partition Palestine into 2 states on November 29, 1947.
    It is impossible to understand why this 2-state farce has been going on this long when it is abundantly clear that the Arab state was already created in September 1922 by a virtual slight-of-hand on the part of the British (unless the unstated and real reason was and is the destruction of Israel).

  35. @ Reader:

    Israel must end the incessant negotiations with the Palestinians. So long as Israel owns a gun, no need to negotiate with a pen.

  36. @ yamit82:
    Why don’t they just stand up in the UN and say openly the same thing I wrote here, plus:
    “We are taking the whole territory remaining to us as of September, 1922, and we are being nice because the British, in fact, reneged on the Mandate then by stealing 78% of our National Home, and in other ways up to 1948. Jordan IS “Palestine”. We are willing to subsidize the relocation of the Arabs to their state to the tune of xx$$, and, in fact, the British owe us reparations to help with the subsidy. That’s all, folks!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.