+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

When the 'Times' calls for Kerry to move on, what does it 'really' mean?

If the Grey Lady is calling for Washington to reconsider its role as enabler of the occupation, then it is indeed a new approach — perhaps even a revolutionary one.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (Photo: State Dept.)

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (Photo: State Dept.)

A couple of days ago, a New York Times editorial called on the Obama administration to divert its attention away from the Israeli-Palestinian diplomatic process, which is failing to bring results, and onto other global issues. While congratulating Secretary Kerry and President Obama for the energy and time they have put into the process, the Times concludes that “after nine months, it is apparent that the two sides are still unwilling to move on the core issues of the borders of a Palestinian state, the future of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees and guarantees for Israel’s security.”

There is a sort of disconnect in the article between the events it describes, which assigns much of the blame for the failure on the Israeli side, and the careful conclusion, which talks about the “two parties” and “both leaders” who are not ready to take the bold moves necessary for peace. This is part of the permanent framing of the Israeli/Palestinian story in the states, as if we are talking about two equal sides who are fighting or negotiating on an equal playing field. In reality there is one side that is deprived of rights and another that is the absolute sovereign over the entire territory, and more importantly, one side that experiences the conflict on a daily basis and one side that, almost every day of the year, is indifferent to it and well protected from its effects. If you fail to acknowledge that, you’ll never get the negotiations right.

Read +972′s full coverage of the peace process

But the interesting part is the Times‘s policy recommendation. There have been several reports recently describing differences of opinions between the White House and State Department on the way to approach the negotiations. The president, it is said, prefers to present the parties with the details of a two-state agreement – a step further than Bush’s endorsement of a Palestinians state and two steps from the Clinton Parameters – while Kerry actually wants to get the parties to commit. If these reports are correct, Obama, who wanted to limit his dealings with Netanyahu to a minimum, has been proven right. Even Kerry must now admit that getting concessions out of Bibi is a futile task. Now the Times is calling to go back to the White House’s original plan: put something on the table and kick the can to the next president, the next prime minister and the next leader of the PA, assuming it doesn’t collapse first.

But much like the “equal blame” framing, this idea is blind to the major role the U.S. plays in maintaining the occupation. The real question is not whether Kerry pulls out from the talks or how many more trips to the region special envoy Martin Indyk makes. The question is whether the U.S. will continue to veto United Nation Security Council resolutions on the settlements, as it has; continue to block the Palestinian path to international institutions; continue to finance and arm the forces – Palestinian and Israeli – that provide Israelis with its sense of security, thus allowing it not to feel any urgency in resolving the issue of the occupation.

The fact of the matter is that without the most direct American involvement and support, the occupation wouldn’t last another year. If the Times is calling for the U.S. to reconsider its role as enabler of the military control and colonization of the West Bank, this is indeed a new approach, perhaps even a revolutionary one. If the Times is calling on the administration to halt the diplomatic process but keep all of its other forms of support for the occupation in place, then the Grey Lady is simply supporting what Bibi has been asking for all along.

US Envoy: Congress will punish UN if it recognizes Palestine
The diplomatic process is not real until this government falls

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. Average American

      The real question is WHY is United States government supporting The Jewish Lebensraum. I’m American and I don’t even know. My government doesn’t tell me. It’s certainly not a grass-roots fervor of average American citizens, contrary to media spin. And it’s certainly not religion, since Jews consider Christians idolators and something to spit at. What could be the reason why.

      Reply to Comment
      • Danny

        Domestic politics. Obama and Kerry would like nothing more than give Netanyahu a good kick in the ass and hand him his marching orders, but AIPAC and that old degenerate Adelson have put the fear of God into them.

        I’m waiting for the President who will look an Israeli prime minister in the eye, and tell him: “Here is my plan for Middle East peace. Here is a pen. Sign on that dotted line, please.” Because that’s all that’s required, really. Just a President with some backbone and the will to put Israel in its rightful place.

        Reply to Comment
        • shachalnur

          Idle hope,I’m afraid.

          As long as the owners of the Federal Reserve also own the American Presidency no heroics from the POTUS,like JFK who wanted to abolish the FED, can be expected.

          The Bankers own both(Dems and GOP) sides of the isle ,by the way.

          Israel and PA are just going through the motions,because any deal imposed by the Bankers will only lead to more war,like they’ve been creating chaos and wars for 200 years,and made trillions of Dollars out of it..

          As long as the POTUS and the official Israeli leadership are controlled by the same Bankers,this farce will continue.

          Much will depend on developments in Ukraine,which is an effort by the Bankers to put a wedge between energy-rich Russia and Eurasia on one side ,and energy-deplete Europe on the other.

          Or as retired German Airforce Lieutenant Colonel Jochem Scholz stated;”Washington’s objective is to deny Ukraine a role as a bridge between Eurasian Union and European Union…They want to bring Ukraine under NATO control and sabotage the prospects of of a common economic zone from Lisbon to Vladivostok”.

          It’s not surprising therefore that Israel officially doesn’t support the new Ukrainian coup and is in close consultations with Russia on Ukraine,Syria,Iran and other issues.

          Untill this big confrontation is over,hopefully without blowing up the planet,there will be no permanent agreement on Israel/Palestine.

          Both Israel and PA know this,and are waiting for the outcome,like the rest of the world.

          Reply to Comment
        • Reza Lustig

          Even better, we give him the Khmer Rouge’s famous line: “To keep you is no benefit, to lose you is no tragedy.”

          Reply to Comment
    2. NYT aka “Grey Lady” is much too timid. She says peace process is dead but recommends nothing except (I suppose) USA pull-back and, gulp, good will on all sides for rectifying the 20+ year failure to negotiate peace.

      Of course, what is needed is pressure on Israel either to make peace (I suppose one dictated by whoever applies the pressure — hence unlikely) or to remove settlers, settlements, weall, siege of Gaza, et al. (a very big “et al.”).

      But NYT will not (yet) say so. Still, perhaps the times (if not yet the Times) are achanging.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Rehmat

      Last week, in an open letter to John Kerry, some “Friends of Israel” asked him to stop bending on his knees in front of Netanyahu and the Jewish Lobby.

      The letter was signed by Henry Seigman, former president of American Jewish Congress, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former Polish national security adviser to the White House, Lee Hamilton, former Congressman and vice-Chairman of 9/11 Commission, Carla A. Hills, former senior White House official and currently Chairwoman of CFR, Thomas R. Pickering, former US ambassador to Israel, India, Jordan and Russia, and Frank Carlucci, former defense secretary and deputy director under president Ronald Reagan.


      Reply to Comment
    4. Abbs

      The biggest obstacle in the whole peace thing is the U.S Govt being the broker. It is not being fair and had hurt our reputation very badly. As a American born and raised, having two Palestinian parents, what needs to be done is my Govt tell Bibi, this is what is going to happen and if you do not agree, we are no longer supporting you in anyway, and no more help. Both PA and Israel, need to learn how to get along. All occupied territories needs to be removed. No more military occupation, no more walls, no more killings, no more bombs, Jerusalem will be the capital of both Israel and Palestine. Peace treaty needs to be signed ASAP. Palestinian, especially the Muslims if they understand the Qur’an, it says once a peace treaty is signed, it is more important to keep it than your religion. So they need to uphold that and as do Israel. Yes, many say Israel invaded Palestine and took their land, everyone knows that, but what is going to happen to the Israelis who live there? There are millions of innocent people who have absolutely nothing to do with the 1948 invasion. From an Islamic view, both sides suck it up and become neighbors and sign a treaty and get a long. What hurt Israel was the Oppression and treatment and Apartheid towards the Palestinians, Palestinians as the Jews, Christians and Muslims. Oppression is worse than killing someone. That is the reason Muslims keep fighting. I honestly worry about the innocent Jewish people in Israel, not from the Palestinians or Muslims but from God, as He delivers punishment like history if the transgression was being done. God Willing that soon there will be peace. No one should have to live this way…

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        “I honestly worry about the innocent Jewish people in Israel, not from the Palestinians or Muslims but from God, as He delivers punishment like history if the transgression was being done.”

        The God I know is just. So if he will punish, he will punish equally those who sin against each other, not just the Jews of Israel. And if that is the case, then I worry for ALL of humanity, including those who so readily accuse the Jews of Israel, who by the way, haven’t done what they have done in a vacuum but in reaction to what has been done to them too.

        But Abbs, you seem to be a good man. I don’t wish punishment for anyone. I wish peace and forgiveness for everyone.

        Reply to Comment
    5. Samuel

      There is a place in East Jerusalem called the JEWISH QUARTER. It has been known as that for nearly 2000 years.

      One has to wonder how come, the Arabs and their ardent supporters claim that Jews have no right to live in East Jerusalem?

      I bet none of the frequent posters who post here can give a plausible answer to that question.

      Reply to Comment
      • Well, I certainly qualify as a frequent poster, so I will acknowledge what you are saying. There is a Jewish Quarter in East Jerusalem because the city overall was obviously built Jewish and, after Roman destruction and centuries thereafter, local surviving Jews were crunched into a small area out of racial and religious discrimination and lack of power (of course, other groups suffered the same fate for the same overall reason–ethnicity without power).

        That happened.

        But it in no way excuses how Arabs in East Jerusalem are now being treated regarding water access, mail (lack of), garbage, and who knows what else. 1967 was about 47 years ago. Israel is now the exclusively dominant authority and has failed to redress these living standards.

        You see, I see Greater Israel as inevitable. The best route I can envision is a confederation, as that leaves more options open for the future. What won’t work is continued failure to address these life issues. It really doesn’t matter how much Jews have suffered in the land or elsewhere. It is no moral warrant to do what is now being done. Now, with no provocation intended, you may be religious and see such a warrant through YHWH. But I do not.

        So that’s my acknowledgement to you and reply. I’m so tired of the unending reciprocal attacks on threads that I probably won’t respond to anything. I can only hope I have shown I understand something of what you are trying to say, including the maltreatment and boxing in of Jews past.

        Any solution will be very hard and quite limited at first. But something has to be done for all of you. The costs of the present are too damn high.


        Reply to Comment
        • Samuel


          Thanks for responding but you didn’t answer my question. I’ll repeat it again.

          How come the supporters of Arabs deem Jewish presence in East Jerusalem illegal? How come they call Jewish dwellings in East Jerusalem, ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS? Greg, you seem to have heard about the ancient JEWISH QUARTER of East Jerusalem, do you think they haven’t? Or do you think they just make up rules as they go along? To me it seems to be the latter. What do you think?

          You raised another topic which is a legitimate topic. But it is ANOTHER topic which I am willing to talk about after I get a satisfactory answer to the question that I raised.

          Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            And Greg, this has NOTHING to do with religion. Till 1948, for nearly 2000 years, Jerusalem was a multi ethnic city. Jews too lived in it continuously till 1948 and in fact, around the mid to late 1800s Jews were in the majority.

            Then for a very brief period between 1948 -1967, the Arabs got rid of the Jews from East Jerusalem.

            And the supporters of Arabs are now trying to assert that East Jerusalem must remain Jew free and if Israel dares to allow Jews to live in East Jerusalem then their presence is deemed to be ILLGAL SETTLEMENTS.

            What kind of nonsense is that? One does not have to be religious to condemn such assertions as baseless propaganda. One just has to be fair and unbiased. Don’t you think Greg?

            After we lay this so called ILLEGL SETTLEMENT issue to rest, we can talk about the treatment of Arabs in East Jerusalem. Let me say in advance that I too favour fair treatment for them. It makes sense even from a selfish point of view let alone the humanitarian point of view. I won’t say more than that for now.

            Reply to Comment
          • I really don’t want to get very involved in these threads anymore. Remember Ginger Eis? And others have turned abusive as well, to me personally, so I’ve decided on another venue of communication. My presence is not much here, but what reason I have is not for such people.

            All I can say to your direct point is that ethnic turnouts of all kinds are going to have to stop. I am not real familiar with all the housing issues of E Jerusalem. I know that some have been evicted on ground of title owned by previously evicted Jews. I know that the Arabs were evicted in W Jerusalem in 67 and thereafter, but that present held titles are there stable. As to the E Jerusalem housing tenders, if E Jerusalem is still under contention for Two States, then the tenders do not help; if the land used to have other owners, now confiscated to the State through the fallow law–well, quite often the State made the land fallow by blocking access. More than that, while Israel has annexed E J, the world largely rebuffs that. Which means that the claim that the tenders are illegal rests on the general failure of the world to recognize E J annexation, which has nothing to do with prior expulsion. It is then not at all absurd to claim that importing Israeli citizens who happen to be Jews is illegal in international law, even if much of the land used to have Jews settled on it. And, to hold otherwise is a claim identical to the Palestinian Right of Return. So we end up affirming a principle in one instance but denying it in another.

            But to argue all of this becomes silly. For example, in the early 50’s you know the High Court ruled that (now) Arab Israeli citizens of a certain village can return to it, but the IDF or associated militia destroyed the village. The land is still there, with ruins (as a park?), but the now mostly children of the original residents cannot return to rebuild. This is well known, yet those arguing for a return of supplanted Jews to E J (actually, other Jews than the original or their descendants)will, generally, not hear of honoring that 50’s court order, although it involves a much smaller number of people and small amount of land. It is all a game of forced zero sum racial planting, on both sides.

            After the US annexation of land in the Mexican American war, parcels could have three or more titles: an old Spanish Crown grant, a title under the State of Mexico (which might have been the Empire of Mexico or the Republic of Mexico), a title issued by some American agency; even more, there were squatters who claimed ownership based on development. So who do you think won out? Bluntly, the richest white guy’s title, mostly. If there were no such title but a Mexican one held by a Mexican national but there were American squatters, who won? Not too hard to guess.

            What I think should happen right now is that titles should be frozen as is, save for contests involving Israeli citizens against Israeli citizens, under a ethnically neutral definition of prior title. The law confiscating fallow land to the State should be suspended, as the State in other form is largely responsible for making it legally fallow.

            Unfortunately, I think religious claim is a rather powerful motive for these settlements; that and de facto population encirclement, so to speak, to make the eternal capital, well, eternal. And let us remember that Arab Israeli citizens are not invited to E. J. housing. It is a demographic game with religious national overtones.

            And it doesn’t matter. If Greater Israel is inevitable, the status of E. J. becomes less relevant over time. I do not live in the present word war. I can not be coopted into it.

            The realpolitik is that Israel may plant who it wants in E. J. while prior Arab residents still often have no adequate access to standard resources. Greater Israel will be a very painful process, not least for Israeli law.

            I am sorry, but there will be no other replies. I will not walk into the war others want to fight. Make of that what you will.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            No problems Greg. I did not address my original post to you directly but in any case you at least responded and I do appreciate that.

            Unfortunately I don’t believe that your response really answered my question as to why Jewish presence in East Jerusalem is somehow illegal. That of course is not your fault. As I said, anyone without bias would concede the point that such a claim is a nonsensical political ploy designed to force Israel to make concessions. Some people call such tactics as LAWFARE.

            See Greg? I did not resort to personal insults. Not only because I don’t see the point of doing so but also because my point stands on it’s own merit.

            Reply to Comment
      • Johnboy

        Samuel, your question is actually nothing more than a stra. man.

        Israel is the occupying power’ and international law is very clear on this point: WHILE Israel is the occupying power THEN Israel is prohibited from colonizing this territory with…. Israelis.

        That the ONLY Israelis that are used to colonize this territory are “100% kosher Israeli Jews” is irrelevant to the illegalityof this colonization.

        After all, this is a fact: over half of all the Jews in the world are forbidden BY ISRAEL from colonizing this territory, precisely because a Jew MUST make aliyah to Israel BEFORE they are allowed to be a Jewish settler a.k.a. an Israeli colonizer.

        That isn’t Abbas’ choice, nor is that Kerry’s doing. It is ISRAEL that made the decision that it would only choose ISRAELI Jews as it’s colonists, even though it new very well that it is illegal to colonize an Israeli-occupied territory with…. Israelis.

        Nobody made Israel do that, indeed, even it’s best buddies told Israel that this is wrong.

        Reply to Comment
        • Samuel

          “Israel is the occupying power’ and international law is very clear on this point: WHILE Israel is the occupying power THEN Israel is prohibited from colonizing this territory with…. Israelis.”

          “Prohibited from colonizing?” ROFLMAO!

          How can a country colonize a place in which it’s people lived since time immemorial?

          What Johnnyboy is trying to say here is that a single illegal act by the Arabs in 1948, the expulsion of the Jews of East Jerusalem has given the Arabs the right to exclude Jews from living where we always lived even after Israel got rid of the Arab invading army which perpetrated the crime against the Jewish population of East Jerusalem.

          Johnnyboy is condoning Arab supremacism and discrimination based on ethnicity.

          What next? He will prohibit Greeks or Turks from living in parts of Cyprus where Greeks and Turks always lived?

          But we cannot really blame Johnnyboy himself. He just parrots the LAWFARE arguments made up by the politicized UN which is dominated by the Arabs, their allies and self interested countries who hope to benefit from supporting the large Arab/Muslim voting bloc in the UN. What they are doing has NOTHING to do with International Law. It has everything to do with International Power Politics.

          Their LAWFARE argument is based on the mis-application of the 4th Geneva convention relating to “the transfer of Own Civilian Population into Occupied Territory”.
          This rule was never designed to apply to civil wars. How could it? After all, it would lead to ridiculous conclusions. For instance, it could lead to accusations that French Protestants are colonizers in France if a civil war would break out in France between French Catholics and French protestants who would opt to secede from Catholic France.

          I deliberately picked on the French example to illustrate the absurdity of the LAWFARE claims in the Palestine conflict which was also a civil war. A better example is Cyprus where there has been a dormant civil war going on between Greeks and Turks for decades. Yet the accusations that are being levelled against Israel in the UN don’t seem to have the same prominence as the Arab Israeli conflict. Obviously because neither the Greeks nor the Turks have oil, petro dollars or as much influence in the UN as the Arabs do, at least when it comes to Israel.

          Reply to Comment
          • Johnboy

            Samuel asks: ” How can a country colonize a place in which its people have lived since time immemorial”?

            That country being, of course, “the state of Israel”.

            In which case, of course, “its people” are “the Israelis”.

            Israel has only existed for 66 years and so, axiomatically, “the Israelis” have likewise existed for only 66 year. Certainly not “since time immemorial”.

            But Samuel is far to conceited to have meant that. It is obvious that he meant “the Jews”, because in his mind:
            Israel = The Jews
            Which would require that:
            The Jews = The Israelis

            But that is a ludicrous proposition, since over half of all the Jews are not Israelis, and fully 20% of all Israelis aren’t Jewish.

            Israel is a state, and it is also “Israel, the occupying power”.

            And like all states it can only answer for itself, and act only in the name of its own citizens: it can no more claim to act on behalf of “the Jews” than the Peoples Republic of China can claim to act on behalf of “all the Chinese people in the world”.

            But, heh, the PRC is run by grown-ups, not by religious nut cases who still live in the 19th century.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            “But Samuel is far to conceited to have meant that. It is obvious that he meant “the Jews”, because in his mind:
            Israel = The Jews
            Which would require that:
            The Jews = The Israelis”

            I am the one who is conceited, not you Johnnyboy eh?

            Here is a bit of history lesson for you, which no doubt you want to conveniently ignore:

            The country of Israel arose out of a civil war that Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews fought. And which the Arabs started. So the Jews of the rest of the world have nothing to do with the issue that we are discussing. The Israeli Jews on the other hand have everything to do with it because many Israeli Jews used to be Palestinian Jews or children of Palestinian Jews. And many of those Israeli Jews used to live in East Jerusalem or are children of Jews who used to live in East Jerusalem. Or they have title deeds to properties in East Jerusalem.

            So you see? Because of that “inconvenient” historical fact (inconvenient for the likes of you), the Palestinian Arabs and their faithful allies can gripe all they want but they will not force Israel to make East Jerusalem free of Jews again just to perpetrate the illegal ethnic cleansing of Jews which the Palestinians and their Arab allies committed in 1948 and which they enforced till 1967 when they were defeated in another war which they started.

            I’ll say it again. The Arabs managed to keep East Jerusalem free of Jews who previously used to live there or were children of people who used to live there or had title deeds to properties there. For a mere 19 years. And that was just a blink in historical terms as compared to the thousands of years in which the ancestors of those Jews lived in East Jerusalem till 1948. So You don’t have to like it but Israel had every right to re-populate East Jerusalem with it’s rightful owners. And unlike what the Arabs did to Jews, Israel did not depopulate the Arab inhabitants of East Jerusalem. In fact, after it annexed East Jerusalem to Israel, it offered the Arab population of East Jerusalem Israeli citizenship. The Arabs could learn a lesson from that. Instead, they are making up nonsensical propaganda which people like you faithfully parrot on the internet.

            Reply to Comment
          • Johnboy

            Gee, you do like moving those goalposts, Samuel.

            One more time, because this never gets old, the statement:
            “How can a country colonize a place in which it’s people lived since time immemorial?”
            can only be construed to mean that you consider the words “Israel” and “Jews” to be synonyms.

            They are one, and they are indivisible.

            Only, of course, they aren’t one and the same thing whatsoever.

            I’ll repeat, one more time, yet again, that this is axiomatic: Israel is “a state”, it is not “a people”.

            And like all states Israel can only act in its own name, and in the name of its own citizens.

            Who are, of course, “Israelis”.

            Your original claim that you can rebut me by way of a crude sleight-of-hand is clearly wrong, and I’ll note that you have now abandoned it.

            Israel is a state, and it is also “Israel, the occupying power”.

            And like all occupying powers Israel is absolutely and unconditionally prohibited from colonizing an occupied territory with its own citizens.

            You know, “Israelis”, irrespective of their ethnicity or their religion.

            Which leads to this simple Q&A…

            Q: Are all these “Jewish settlers” also “Israeli colonists”?
            A: Why, yes. Yes, they are.

            Q: Which means?
            A: That for as long as this occupation continues then this act of colonial expansionism is…illegal.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            Oh boy, Johnnyboy, logic is not your strong point. LAWFARE is.

            Forget for a minute that we are talking about Israel. Let’s pretend we are talking about France.

            Say one day the French protestants have had enough of living with French Catholics. They convince the UN that France should be partitioned into Protestant France and Catholic France. With me so far Johnoyboy?

            The Catholics don’t like it and no sooner the Protestants declare their state, the Catholics attack the new state. Still with me Johnnyboy?

            After a year of fighting, a ceasefire is declared and signed. Paris is divided into two parts, the old city and the new city. The Catholics control the old city and they kick out ALL protestants from the old city. Still with me Johnnyboy?

            After 19 years, the Catholics attack the Protestants but they suffer a major defeat and the Protestants end up controlling ALL of Paris, including the old city and all of the rest of France. Still with me Johnnyboy?

            The Protestants then restore the demographic balance in the old city and allow BOTH French Catholics and French protestants to live in all of Paris.

            Along come the LAWFARERS, people like you Johnnyboy, and start chastising the French protestants. They tell them that because the Catholics managed to cleanse the old city of ALL Protestants, 19 years before, Protestants are no longer allowed to live in The old city of Paris. And if they do, they are just colonizers …

            Are you OK with the above scenario Johnnyboy? Sounds familiar? Do such claims sound kosher to you? If they do, then French Protestants would look at you as a mad man …

            Reply to Comment
          • Johnboy


            The **partitioning** into two states defines the territory that belongs to *this* state or *that* state, and neither state can “acquire” additional territory by resort to war.

            So if either state seizes territory that does not belong to it then THAT IS BELLIGERENT OCCUPATION, and the state that has seized that territory is nothing more – nor less – than an “occupying power”.

            And the laws of belligerent occupation are very clear on this point: an occupying power is unconditionally prohibited from colonizing territory that it holds under a belligerent occupation.

            The ethnicity of those colonists matters not.

            The “settlement rights” of those colonists matters not one bit.

            The territory is under a belligerent occupation, and FOR AS LONG AS THAT OCCUPATION CONTINUES then the occupier is prohibited from transferring its own citizens into that occupied territory.

            Now, *one* *more* *time*….
            Q: Are all of these “Jewish settlers” also “Israeli colonists”?
            A: Every. Single. One. Of. Them. Is. An. Israeli. Colonist.

            Q: And is that illegal?
            A: That is unconditionally, no-excuses-allowed, 100%, no-shadow-of-doubt a grave violation of the laws of belligerent occupation.

            Reply to Comment
          • Samuel

            No, Johnnyboy, you got it wrong again. This was a case of civil war to determine the borders of the two states. It wasn’t a war between two sovereign countries. So the relevant Geneva convention relating to population transfer was not applicable. It could have been decided in a more civilized way, without war. But the Arabs chose war.

            If one party, in the case of Palestine, the Arabs, do not accept the referees decision about borders (the UN’s recommendation) and following an act of war they commit a crime by ethnically cleansing the other party’s population, then they cannot be rewarded for that crime by requiring the other party (the Jews) to perpetuate the crime against their OWN population which was the victim of that crime.

            Only cynics, or people who care more about dirty politics would make such a demand against the side which was a victim of aggression but which had a chance to restore justice because they managed to regain control of lost territory. They (we) restored justice by repatriating the population which was illegally evicted by the other side, the Arabs.

            You see Johnboy, the purpose of international law is to restore justice not to reward aggressors who start wars (the Arabs in our case).

            The French Protestants in my example would tell you that and you can expect nothing less from us than to look after our own people not to reward the Arabs for their aggression against us by keeping our population away from places which we owned a mere 19 years before.

            Reply to Comment
          • Average American

            Samuel, the ancestors of Naftali Bennett did not live in what is now Israel, they lived in Poland. The ancestors of Benjamin Netanyahu (real name Mileikowsky) did not live in what is now Israel, they lived in Poland. The ancestors of Avigdor Liberman did not live in what is now Israel, they lived in Russia. These people have no right to tell everyone Israel is the home of The Jews, Any Jews, From Anywhere. Jews born and raised in other parts of the world do not have ancestors who lived in what is now Israel. The entire concept that every Jew from everywhere have ancestoral roots in what is now Israel and therefore are entitled to the land, is ridiculous and unsupportable.

            Reply to Comment
    6. richard witty

      I think your analysis is wrong, noam.

      I think that the reality is somewhat the right-wing contention that without us un veto and aid, that israel would come under terror and/or military attack. Its an argument for deterrence, that groups like hezbollah only restrain from terror from deterrence, not from humane convictions.

      I think that the Obama administration, including kerry, do see themselves as mediators, and to facilitate breaking the cycle of violence.

      The cycle of violence is not fundamentally of oppression. It sees a bicycle wheel with force adding to the turning of the wheel from both communities.

      The primary fallacy thatvi disagree with is the assumption that the us has the power to compel anyone. It has influence, but thats all.

      Inherent in that request is an admission of powerlessness, a statement of “we are not capable”, implied about israel as a whole, and about the left or left-center’s ability to persuade electorally.

      Reply to Comment
      • Rehmat

        I think your analysis is wrong Richard.

        Hizbullah came into existence as result of Israeli occupation during the 1980s. They’re “terrorists” because they’re convinced and proved that the only way to fight Israeli occupation and terrorism is to military resistance to throw the occupiers out of Lebanon – And Hizbullah proved that in 2000 and 2006.

        Israel’s those two military humiliations have in fact have become Lebanon’s “deterrence” against Israel’s future invasion.


        Reply to Comment
    7. Barry Meridian

      Labor and Meretz still haven’t learned from appeasing Arafat.
      Abbas’ Office Scrambles to Deny Reports He Condemned Passover Terror Attack
      by Omri Ceren

      My Comments.

      The PA rushes to make sure that no one actually thinks Abbas condemned the murder of a Jewish man and the attempted murders of his wife and children.

      How humiliating that would be for Abbas?
      But don’t worry, the Israeli left will support the Munich Massacre financier.

      Reply to Comment
    8. Barry Meridian

      This is the same Rehmat thats writes the Mossad was behind 9/11, the Madrid train bombings in 2004 and the London train bombings in 2005.
      Rehmat also claims Israel gassed the Syrians in Syria last year and not Assad.
      Rehmat also claims Lyndon B Johnson or the Mossad killed JFK.
      Rehmat = a Looney

      Reply to Comment
      • Rehmat

        Barry ….. Did you ever hear of Israeli author Barry Chamish? If not, then you will be glad to know that in 1 2012 interview Chamish admitted that Israelis with the help of US Zionists committed 9/11.

        As for as your bet on Holocaust is – I recommend you to study British Jewish writer and blogger Paul Eisen who denies the Zionist narrative of Holocaust – and is kind enough to follow my blog and have reblogged some of my postings.


        Reply to Comment
    9. Barry Meridian

      Samuel, the answer is very simple.
      Because the Arab want to destroy all Jewish history in Jerusalem.

      Jerusalem has had a Jewish population majority since the late 1850s – that’s 130 years already, before ‘Palestinianism’ was invented:

      Jews were expelled from East-Jerusalem by the Jordanian occupation at 1948. They lived in East-Jerusalem for thousands of years. They returned to their homes after Israel liberated the city in 67.Jerusalem was never in history the capitol of any Arab country. Jerusalem has been only the Capitol of Israel.

      ISRAEL which is defending itself against Pan-Arabism, Arab imperialism and Arabization of the Middle East – that is the “problem the left don’t like.

      The real problem is global Arab/Moslem insistence to spread hate, violence, wars, terrorism, lies, false accusations against Jews and reducing Jews to subhumans or second class citizens – slaves or servants – without any human rights.

      PA TV: Western Wall area to be turned into Arab housing neighborhood.
      Palestinian Authority TV:
      Western Wall area to be turned into Arab housing neighborhood -Jewish presence in Jerusalem will be erased from history.
      Aug. 17, 2011

      PA officials: Jews have ‘no right to pray’ at Western Wall
      Judge Tayseer Al-Tamimi says Al-Aqsa Mosque, including Jewish holy site, is Islamic and belongs to Muslims alone
      March 27, 2014

      Reply to Comment
      • Average American

        Barry, “Arabization of the Middle East”? Arabs are more populous in Middle East than Jews imported from Europe. “Arab imperialism”? It’s not Jewish Lebensraum that’s happening? It’s Arab Imperialism?

        Reply to Comment
    10. Barry Meridian

      Palestinians are the racists and even target Arabs who look like Jews.
      972 will never tell you about this.

      I’m always reminded of one thing to describe Palestinian racism.

      In 2003 Yasser Arafat’s Fatah faction shot and killed a Palestinian named George Khoury as he was jogging in Jerusalem’s French Hill neighborhood.

      Arafat, in a clear racist gesture, stated that this was a case of mistaken identity – because their victim turned out to be an Arab instead of a Jew.

      Muslim family attacked in Jerusalem – because attackers thought they were Jewish
      December 01, 2013
      From YNet:

      Jerusalem Terror Victim: “I said ‘Shema Yisrael'”

      Dept. Minister of Religious Affairs Rabbi Eli Ben-Dahan visits Tisha B’Av stabbing victim in hospital, vows to fix security situation
      David Lev and Ari Soffer

      Deputy Minister of Religious Affairs Eli Ben Dahan, along with members of the Bayit Yehudi party, on Thursday visited with a hareidi man who was stabbed by Arabs in a terror attack that took place on Tisha B’Av. The 33 year old man is still hospitalized in moderate condition, suffering from stab wounds to the chest and back.

      East Jerusalem man accused of trying to blow up apartments
      Shin Bet arrests suspect for attempted sabotage of gas lines in several Jewish-inhabited Jerusalem buildings
      March 12, 2014

      Reply to Comment
    11. Ken Kelso

      Rehmat, Israel did not lose the war in 2006.
      Hezbollah was the one who called for a ceasefire first.
      Hezbollah was losing the war, then Hezbollah decided to make all of South Lebanon human shields for Hezbollah.
      This is what Hamas does in Gaza.

      It put Israel in a difficult situation.
      As Nasarallah said. Hezbollah loves death and the Jews love life.

      For Israel to totally win the war, they would have had to kill hundreds of thousands of Lebanese civilians, since Hezbollah pretty much used all of South Lebanon as human fodder.

      – Sabrina Tavernise, “Christians Fleeing Lebanon Denounce Hezbollah,” the New York Times, July 28, 2006
      Hezbollah came to Ain Ebel to shoot its rockets,” said Fayad Hanna Amar, a young Christian man, referring to his village. “They are shooting from between our houses.” Mr. Amar said Hezbollah fighters in groups of two and three had come into Ain Ebel, less than a mile from Bint Jbail, where most of the fighting has occurred. They were using it as a base to shoot rockets, he said, and the Israelis fired back.

      Jon Lee Anderson, “The Battle for Lebanon,” the New Yorker, August 8, 2006
      Near the hospital, a mosque lay in ruins … A man approached and told me that he was a teacher at the Hariri school. I asked him why he thought the Israelis had hit a mosque, and he said, simply, “It was a Hezbollah mosque.” … A younger man came up to me and, when we were out of earshot of others, said that Hezbollah had kept bombs in the basement of the mosque, but that two days earlier a truck had taken the cache away.

      Photos, footage expose Hezbollah tactics
      Prove intentional use of civilians to shield its weapons, equipment
      Declassified IDF Photos and Footage Expose Hizbullah Tactics
      Dec 06, ’06
      The IDF has decided to release photos, documents and videos proving Hizbullah’s intentional use of civilians to shield its weapons, missile-launchers and surveillance equipment. A selection follows at:

      Look at today how Hezbollah uses South Lebanese as human shields.
      May 18, 2012
      Hezbollah’s positioning of weapons in the heart of civilian areas in around 100 Lebanese towns and villages along the border.

      As an Israeli soldier said.

      “In the villages there are three-story houses: on one floor there are rockets, then there is a family on the next floor, then a (military) headquarters then another family. The people that live there are human shields….

      “Every Shiite village has become such a compound. The great challenge will be to deal with all these compounds.”

      Reply to Comment
    12. Barry Meridian

      Rehmat, quoting Barry Chamish.
      Thats pretty funny.
      Barry Chamish also claims Aliens on UFO’s are abducting Israelis.

      Now Rehmat, you also said the Mossad was behind the Madrid train bombings in 2004, the London train bombings in 2005 and that Israel gassed the Syrians in Syria last year and not Assad.
      Am i correct on this?

      Reply to Comment
      • IlonJ

        Poor old Rehmat. He seems delusional. He reminds me of a blind man who is being led by other blind men, the ones he so readily quotes.

        Reply to Comment
    13. Barry Meridian

      Rehmat even more crazier then I thought.
      On his site he has this article.
      Mossad blasts 7 Israeli tourists in Bulgaria
      July 19, 2012

      This was the terrorist incident 2 years ago where Hezbollah terrorists blew up a tourist bus in Bulgaria murdering 5 Israeli tourists and the Bulgarian driver.
      Bulgaria announced this week who the Hezbollah terrorist was behind the bombing.

      If you look at the Rehmat link i put above, he also claims in the article.

      Besides the London and Madrid train bombings, he claims the Mossad was also behind the bombing of the Hotel Paradise Mombassa in Kenya in 2002,
      He claims the Mossad was behind the the bombing of Jewish Center in Buenos Aires Argentina which killed 85 people and injured hundreds others.
      Argentina itself showed proof that Hezbollah and Iran were behind the bombings.

      What next from Rehmat, the Jews killed Lincoln, JFK and sank the Titanic.

      Its not looking good for Rehmat.

      Bulgaria says bomber in Burgas attack was Algerian: report
      Apr 7, 2014

      The man who blew up a bus in a Bulgarian Black Sea resort in 2012, killing five Israeli tourists, was of Algerian origin and trained in camps in South Lebanon, the Bulgarian daily Presa said, quoting sources familiar with the investigation.

      Sofia has said Lebanese militant group Hezbollah was behind the attack at the Burgas airport. The European Union last July put the group’s armed wing of the group on its terrorism blacklist over the incident. Hezbollah denies any involvement.

      The EU country has named two men of Lebanese origin as suspected accomplices of the bomber, who died during the attack.

      “The assailant was born in Algeria, lived in Morocco and was trained in camps in South Lebanon. He also studied at a Beirut university with the other two suspects,” the newspaper said, quoting sources who declined to be named.

      The Balkan country has identified the suspects as 32-year-old Meliad Farah, also known as Hussein Hussein, an Australian citizen, and 25-year-old Hassan El Hajj Hassan, a Canadian citizen, both of Lebanese origin.

      The prosecutor’s office, that is preparing an indictment for the attack, declined to comment.

      Bulgarian Chief Prosecutor Sotir Tsatsarov said last Friday there is a new information on the bomber, which is likely to extend the investigation into the attack.

      Reply to Comment
      • shachalnur

        About Argentina being a Mossad job in the nineties, Rehmat is right.

        About Burgas most probably as well.

        Does this mean Israel is responsable for these attacks?
        Not necessarily,since ultimate control over Mossad’s actions is not in Israel.

        Sometimes Mossad operates without Israel knowing exactly what they are doing,and who they are working for.

        Prisoner X(Ben Zygier) is an example of a Mossad operative/operation going wrong and damaging Israel,and therefore he was imprisoned by Shabak.

        If a Mossad agent goes rogue or astray,Mossad will solve it,no need for Shabak to do that.

        Reply to Comment
        • Tzutzik

          “Sometimes Mossad operates without Israel knowing exactly what they are doing,and who they are working for.”

          Then How do you know all this Shakhalnur?

          Obviously if your claims would be even remotely right, you would have no way of knowing what you profess to know as an outsider. And if you would be an insider gone rogue, you would have woken up dead by now.

          Now do you understand how most sane people see you for what you really are? A crude propagandist with propaganda that might work in fourth world countries. It would not work even in third world countries because people are smart enough to distinguish facts from crude fabrications.

          If I would be your handler I would fire you because you are not doing a good job for the Arabs. Ooops, I shouldn’t have said that because now they might just do that LOL …

          Reply to Comment
    14. Barry Meridian

      Shachalnur is Rehmat using another screen name

      Reply to Comment
    15. Click here to load previous comments