Header Leaderboard

April 22, 2009: Mazel Tov!

June 24, 2009

Congratulations, that is.

The National Council of Young Israel (NCYI) — the umbrella organization of the Young Israel movement Orthodox synagogues in N. America — has released a statement saying that the “two state solution” being promoted by the US government is “untenable and unfeasible.”

This position is most welcome and long overdue.

The Jewish establishment in the U.S. has been, to a very large extent, toeing the line of the US government with regard to “two states” as the key to peace in the region. Now NCYI President Shlomo Z. Mostofsky, addressing the refusal of the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, says, “It is unconscionable for the United States to attempt to jump-start peace talks prior to recognizing a basic premise that must be accepted by all parties…”

NCYI is now mounting a campaign to encourage people to contact appropriate US leaders and urge them to oppose the creation of a Palestinian state.

At the bottom of this posting I will supply contact information for the individuals they recommend being in touch with, as well as key arguments to use.


The NCYI declaration is a response to President Obama’s push for that “two state solution.” Yesterday he made a statement indicating that he expects to see “concrete steps toward peace” made by both sides, because “we can’t talk forever.” Guess no one has told him that we’re not even talking right now, because after a year of Annapolis conversations nothing happened.

We know what he’s going to demand of us: some permutation of a freeze on settlements and a removal of checkpoints. May our government be strong enough to refuse. (The weak link, of course, is DM Barak.)

But what of the PA? The equation has been so one-sided that very little is demanded of the Palestinians. What we see is US-sponsored training of security forces, who will, in theory, combat terrorism. But this is highly problematic as there’s a very real question of which authority these forces will answer to. I’d like to see, at a minimum, a demand that all incitement be removed from PA textbooks.

The possibility for a “two state solution”is nil, but that won’t stop an arrogant Obama from trying to push it through.


I provide here major sections of a report on Day Two of Durban 2, by Anne Bayefsky of Eye on the UN:

“On Tuesday, the UN’s racist anti-racism conference ‘Durban II’ rammed through a final declaration three days before its scheduled conclusion. On Monday Iranian President Ahamadinejad had opened the substantive program by denying the Holocaust and spewing Anti-Semitism. A day later UN members rewarded Iran by electing it one of three Vice-Chairs of the committee which adopted the final declaration.

“The committee meeting was chaired by Libya and lasted fifteen minutes. No discussion of the merits of the Durban II declaration was tolerated.

“The document reaffirms the 2001 Durban Declaration which alleges Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism and mentions only Israel among all 192 UN member states. It also multiplies the anti-Israel provisions, using the usual UN code, by adding yet another rant about racist foreign occupation.

“Not surprisingly, such a manifesto encouraged the racists and Anti-Semites that had pressed for its adoption. Speaking on Tuesday the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Faysal Mekdad, alleged ‘the right of return’ of Jews to Israel – Jewish self-determination – was ‘a form of racial discrimination.’ He also objected to the ‘Judaization of Israel’ and to the ‘ethnic cleansing of 1948.’

“Palestinian Riyad Al-Maliki claimed that ‘for over 60 years the Palestinian people has been suffering under the ugliest face of racism and racial discrimination’ and said an Israeli government ‘declaration regarding the Jewish nature of the state is a form of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.’ Al-Maliki was delighted with the result of the conference and gloated by reading excerpts from the 2001 Durban Declaration that he was pleased to see had been reaffirmed.

“The remnants of the European Union which remained inside the conference – in particular France and the United Kingdom – entirely ignored their many promises not to accept anything which singled out the Jewish state. Though these Europeans undoubtedly enabled the hatemongering, their excuses in the coming days are predictable…”



We shouldn’t expect much of Britain, for certain. Right now, in light of Israel’s recent activities in Gaza, it is reviewing all arms exports to Israel. This is not a crisis, as all British arms exports to us constitute less than 1% of what we import. It’s a question of attitude.

What is more, in line with that same attitude, Britain is about to permit Hamas politburo leader Khaled Mashaal to address a meeting of MPs and peers in the British parliament via video link from Damascus.

The invitation to the event reads: “Most serious commentators now believe that there can be no peace in the Middle East without talking to Hamas. In addition, we may be facing the last chance for a two-state solution.”

I would love to ask the organizers of this event how a “two-state solution” can be achieved when Fatah and Hamas function separately, and Hamas is adamant about not recognizing Israel and not renouncing terror. It wouldn’t pay me, however. I’ve spoken to British officials, and find they are never at a loss for answers, convoluted though they may be.


We had heard during our Gaza operation that Hamas officials hid in Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. Now the IDF has revealed that Hamas PM Ismail Haniyeh set up a command center in that hospital. Hamas field commanders took advantage of the daily self-imposed IDF cessation of military activity, intended to permit humanitarian supplies to get into Gaza, to enter the hospital and receive instructions.


When Avigdor Lieberman assumed the post of Foreign Minister, the Egyptians were none too happy about it. In fact, they said they would have nothing to do with him unless he apologized because he had severely criticized Mubarak for never visiting Israel, except for Rabin’s funeral.

Well, Egyptian Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman is in Israel now, and apparently the Egyptians have had a change of heart, or of policy, anyway. Suleiman met during the day today with PM Netanyahu, and with Defense Minister Ehud Barak. And tonight he met with Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.


Remember the cartoons about Mohammad published in Denmark in 2005 that set off world-wide Muslim riots? The editor who originally commissioned and published them, Flemming Rose, is currently here in Israel, the guest of the Shasha Center for Strategic Studies of Hebrew University.

In a lecture at the Center, Rose said that the Organization of Islamic States is pushing at Durban 2 for “a new world order” that would impose “nondemocratic and illiberal values on the West.” The attempt is to re-write the rules of human rights and international law in a manner that undermines Western values of liberty: “We’re seeing an erosion of support in the West for freedom of expression in the guise of preventing incitement against Islam.”

The alarm that Rose is sounding should be heeded with utmost seriousness.


Those to contact regarding a “two state solution”:

President Barack Obama
Phone: 202-456-1111 Fax: 202-456-2461 e-mail form via: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
Phone: 202-647-6575 Fax: 202-647-2283 secretary@state.gov

Senator John Kerry (Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee)
Phone: (202) 224-2742 Fax: (202) 224-8525 e-mail form via: http://kerry.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Congressman Howard Berman (Chair of the Congressional Committee on Foreign Affairs)
Phone: (202) 225-4695 Fax: (202) 225-3196
CA district alternate fax: (818) 994-1050
Only receives e-mail from constituents at http://www.house.gov/berman/contact/index.shtml

Congressman Gary Ackerman (Chair of the Congress. Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia)
Phone: (202) 225-2601 Fax: (202) 225-1589
e-mail form via http://www.house.gov/ackerman/pages/contact.html


Reasons why the US should not be promoting a “two-state solution” follow. It’s sufficient to select just a few and appropriate to keep communication relatively brief.

Remember, arguments should be couched in terms that interest elected US officials — not in terms of what is good for Israel or what religious Jews believe about rights in Israel. You want to be heard; talk truthfully, but in their terms.

— If the US attempts this again, and fails, the administration loses international prestige.

— There is no reason to assume that the Palestinians are capable of establishing a stable nation. They do not have civil infrastructure in place and have relied upon international assistance rather than establishing a solid economic base

— There is no political stability. No one address for all Palestinians. This makes it complicated. There could actually end up being two Palestinian states between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. First this has to be worked out.

— Establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank under the auspices of Fatah will increase the risk of terrorism in the Middle East. Hamas is waiting to take advantage of the situation. Hamas in the West Bank will threaten the moderate state of Jordan.

— Fatah itself has not shown genuine desire for peace, as the PA still incites, and its textbooks teach Jihad. Peace cannot be imposed from the top — the people must accept it. And the Palestinian people have not been educated to this.

— If Hamas joins Fatah in a unity government, it says it will not renounce terrorism.

— Jerusalem is very stable as it is. Dividing it to be two capitals may sound like a good idea, but this is absolutely not tenable, as Jewish and Arab neighborhoods are intertwined.

— Israel has a sterling reputation for protecting holy sites of all religions. The PA has an abominable record on this. Turning religious areas over to the Palestinians is asking for trouble at an international level.

— The Palestinians are insisting Israel must retreat to the ’67 lines, even though these were only armistice lines and not borders. To push Israel back that way is to give it final borders that are not defensible.

— It is in the best interests of the US to keep Israel strong, as this nation serves as a democratic beacon in the area and a defense against terrorism.




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *