Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, December 02, 2011

Syria opposition leader would cut ties with Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas

A Syria run by the country’s main opposition group would cut ties to Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, the group’s leader told the Wall Street Journal in an article published Friday.

This would remove a crucial Iranian military ally believed to play a key role in supplying Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Palestinian Hamas, potentially leading to a dramatic reordering of regional power.

The interview with Burhan Ghalioun, president of the Syrian National Council, came eight months into an increasingly violent uprising against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, with rebels seeking international support.

“There will be no special relationship with Iran,” Ghalioun, a 66-year-old university professor, told the Journal in an interview at his home in Paris.

“Breaking the exceptional relationship means breaking the strategic, military alliance,” he said, adding that “after the fall of the Syrian regime, (Hezbollah) won’t be the same.”

He also called for more robust international support for the rebels, including the possible establishment of a no-fly zone.

“Our main objective is finding mechanisms to protect civilians and stop the killing machine,” Ghalioun said.

“We say it is imperative to use forceful measures to force the regime to respect human rights.”

The rebels may well fail to topple the 40-year-old Assad regime established by Bashar’s father Hafez, but a reorientation of Syria away from Iran and towards the West would have major implications across the region.

Ghalioun said an opposition-run Syria would be committed to recovering the Golan Heights, a strategic plateau captured by Israel in the 1967 war, but would pursue its return through negotiations rather than armed conflict.

He also said it would work to normalize relations with neighboring Lebanon after decades of tense relations.

Meanwhile, the Syria/Turkey rift continues to wide. From Syria's SANA news:

In response to the measures announced by the Turkish Foreign Minister at his press conference regarding Syria Wednesday, the Syrian government decided to suspend the Free Trade Zone agreement between Syria and Turkey, official Spokesman of the Syrian Foreign and Expatriate Ministry stated on Thursday.

The Syrian Government studies taking other procedures that match with what has been declared by the Turkish Minster.

Turkey's Foreign Minister announced yesterday halting a loan by the Turkish Import & Export Bank to finance Syrian infrastructure projects, suspending relations between the central banks in both countries, freezing the financial assets of the Syrian government and halting deals of financial credits in Syria in addition to suspending the Higher Strategic Cooperation with Syria.

A devastating takedown of John Mearsheimer

From Counterpoint, a conservative publication from the University of Chicago:

When, after a long career built on a theory that domestic political relationships had a minimal impact on any state’s foreign policy, John Mearsheimer co-wrote The Israel Lobby, a popular book alleging the maximal impact of a small cabal on American foreign policy, we were perplexed at the incoherence. When the book was written without accompanying scholarship on the Turkish lobby which has had a hand in the failure to recognize the Armenian Genocide or push for a Kurdish state, the Irish lobby which greatly influenced the American policy in Northern Ireland for decades, or Arab, Chinese, Tibetan, Greek, Indian, or Pakistani lobbies that have all made their mark on American foreign policy, we were left wondering at the motives of his focus. When the book was finally read and its narrative of the Israeli-Arab conflict rested on shoddy history, a mix of long-ago refuted facts (whose falsehood was easily available over Google) and stark errors of omission, we began to question the animus of Professor Mearsheimer.

He built a robust theory of states seeking security through regional hegemony, no matter their domestic politics. Yet this theory could not explain many of the adventures of the United States in the Middle East. There had to be an exogenous factor. He labeled this factor “The Israel Lobby.” But he did not use this factor to complicate the original model; he did not further examine the role of domestic constituencies in international relations. He left “The Israel Lobby” an outlier, an asterisk. It was a strange Jewish exceptionalism he propagated: only the Jews had dual loyalties. He was attacked. He dug in. More and more of his output was devoted to the dealings of the Jewish State. He began to speak at the events of Palestinian nationalists, groups whose assumptions would have seemed so contrary to realism. He would speak recklessly and accuse Israel of awful motives. This was a different John Mearsheimer. Something was going on.

John Mearsheimer is now in the denouement of a tragedy of a great academic. Too stubborn to revise his long-time model, Professor Mearsheimer has instead endorsed the theories of a long-standing anti-Semitic conspiracy. We cannot say whether Professor Mearsheimer is an honest-to-goodness anti-Semite; we do not know his heart. We can only say that he has, from the perch of an endowed chair at our university, endorsed a grotesque theory of the doings of the modern Jew.

There are no reports of Professor Mearsheimer being anything less than cordial to his Jewish colleagues or reducing the grades of Jewish students. This is nothing like the anti-Semitism that bars Jews from country clubs; it is, indeed, an adaptation of an older anti-Semitism: a belief that old adages hold true, that the Jews are loyal only to one another and are not to be trusted with power. It is revealed, not in statements about usurers or admonishments about “kikes,” but in an unwitting animus against the prominent Jews in public life and the ascribing of much too much to their effect. This comes out in speeches segregating “Righteous Jews” (marginalized radicals) from bad Jews, “New Afrikaners” (all the heads of major Jewish organizations). It comes out in paranoid blog-posts about the potential ability of the Israel Lobby to cover-up his own assassination. It comes out in reading lists for classes featuring the most absurd rendering of Israeli-Arab revisionism (Ilan Pappe’s The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine) and a work of historical psychoanalysis that leaves the impression that Jewish dreams of self-determination are very near a mental disorder (Jacqueline Rose’s The Question of Zion). And it comes out in John Mearsheimer’s recent endorsement of a work by an undeniable anti-Semite, Gilad Atzmon’s The Wandering Who?.

...Professor Mearsheimer’s contribution to the study of powers regional and global will last, may even become canonical, but he has in recent years attracted a very sorry stain upon himself, his scholarship, and the University which enabled his many achievements. The charge of anti-Semitism is a durable one, especially when actions repeatedly fail to contradict it. Professor Mearsheimer is certainly entitled to study, author, and speak whatever he will (we do not think the approval of hateful ideas a fireable offense), but it will refract upon an institution that has done more for him than he has done for it. It lately refracts the most bigoted ravings of a British madman and the questionable animus of his endorsing professor. If Professor Mearsheimer is to retain any of the grace of an accomplished scholar and do right by his home for nearly thirty years, there is but a single option: retirement.

Read the whole thing.

(h/t Noah)

Epitaph for an Iranian general (updated)

Remember Major General Hassan Moqaddam, of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, who was killed in one of those "accidents" that have been happening so frequently at sensitive Iranian military sites?

It turns out he had a request his tombstone should say, "Here lies the man who wanted to destroy Israel."

Such a touching request cannot be denied.

Here's my version:

See also J. E. Dyer and Israel Matzav.

UPDATE: A funnier version by Xaxam at a Russian-language blog:

Lauren Booth splitting from UK's Palestine Solidarity Committee

It is so sad when rabid haters start turning against each other.

Pro-Palestinian activist Lauren Booth has launched a vitriolic attack on the Palestine Solidarity Campaign for dissociating itself from antisemitic musician Gilad Atzmon, saying the central office should be working "to end Zionism".

Her comments highlight the internal divisions in the PSC, between the national body and its more radical branches. Last week, PSC director Sarah Colborne said the organisation had "no links with Atzmon and does not work with him."

In response, Ms Booth, a recent convert to Islam and the half-sister of former Prime Minister Tony Blair's wife Cherie, wrote on her blog: "Britain is witnessing the rise of a new wave of pro-Palestinian activists. They need an organisation that is fit for purpose. One that does not pander to the emotional whims of the Jewish, Zionist lobby."

She added: "The PSC is ...attempting to create a pro-Palestinian organisation that does not hurt Zionist sensibilities. Campaigns of appeasement to the Israeli lobby can never, ever, co-exist as part of a determined campaign to end Israel's bloody and illegal occupation of Palestine. Let us be clear. A Palestine Solidarity Campaign should be working to END Zionism. Not ease it a little. Not work alongside it."

Lauren Booth's unhinged, raving blog post can be enjoyed here. It is especially funny to hear her accusing the PSC of collaborating with anti-Islamist blog Harry's Place, but there's lots of great stuff there to enjoy.

Kuwaiti TV preacher: Allah transformed Jews into apes and pigs

Kuwait is one of those moderate Arab states.

When moderate Arabs in moderate Kuwait sat to relax and watch their moderate TV stations last Friday, they got to watch this moderate cleric:

Sheik Nayef Najjaj Al-Ajami: Servants of Allah, let us be aware that our struggle with the Jews is one of faith, identity, and existence. Read the Koran, where Allah says: “Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with you until you follow their creed,” so that you may know what the Jews conceal within their hearts.

Read what Allah says: “Strongest among men in enmity to the believers you will find the Jews and the polytheists,” so that you may know the magnitude of their enmity towards the Muslims, and their hatred towards the followers of the Prophet Muhammad. These people...

Brothers and sisters, you should read history books, so you my know the history of this people, and so you may know that the Jews of the past were evil, and the Jews of today are even worse.

They are ungrateful, they distort the word [of Allah], the worshippers of the golden calf, the slayers of the prophets, the enemies of the divine prophecies, the scum of mankind, who incurred the curse and wrath of Allah, and whom Allah transformed into apes and pigs and into taghut worshippers.

"Taghut" means anything people worship besides Allah.

(from MEMRI)

Israelis saving the planet, again

From BBC:

As water gushes through the labyrinthine infrastructure of the London water supply system, an ageing pipe creaks, whines noisily, and finally bursts.

Within seconds, an alert starts flashing on a remote computer in the tiny office of Takadu - an Israeli start-up in Tel Aviv.

Once picked up, the information is transmitted to Thames Water - the utility company responsible for bringing water to Londoners.

Thanks to Takadu, as well as to other measures, Thames Water managed to achieve five annual leakage reduction targets in a row.

According to the World Health Organization, about three billion people on Earth - almost one in two - live in water-scarce conditions, with demand growing drastically while supply remains constant.

And out of all the water that's being supplied to consumers, more than 45 billion litres per day globally are lost to leakage - around 20-30% in developed countries, and close to 50% in developing ones.

And utility companies as well as consumers have to pay the price - it is costing the world's water supply firms approximately $14bn (£9bn) per year, according to the World Bank.

So to keep the consumer "watered" enough, it is estimated a global total of $23tn (£15tn) will be spent on improving public infrastructure that handles water and sewage from 2005 to 2030.

That is why utility companies are turning to innovative solutions and new technologies to detect leaks early - and eliminate them as soon as possible, to reduce operational costs.

"This is where Takadu comes in - it's a 24/7 computer watchdog," says Mr Peleg.

"We operate in big metropolitan areas, picking up data from different meters of the network, such as flow, pressure and others.

"If the data shows that something is wrong - a small leak, a big burst, faulty equipment, or just a technician who left a valve open - we determine the location, the magnitude, when it started, and then send the data straight to the repair team."

Takadu is not the only company that uses smart water technology, but according to Prof Hope, this tiny start-up is one of the market leaders.

The firm was first set up with the main idea of supplying enough water to Israel - located in a region where everyone is constantly aware of water scarcity

But the internet allowed it to work with countries all over the world.

For instance, one of the partners is Yarra Valley Water in Melbourne, Australia, and the firm's general manager of infrastructure services, David Snadden, says that TaKaDu's geolocation feature has really helped the company to quickly locate leaks in the field.

Another partner is Aguas Antofagasta, a water utility company in Chile.

With Takadu's help, Aguas Antofagasta has been able to reduce its total water losses from 30% to 23% over the past five years, saving some 800 million litres of water per year.

"And also, every cubic metre we save means we have one cubic metre less to produce in our desalination plant, which is very intensive in energy," adds Mr Kutulas Peet.

Poor BDSers, having to choose between boycotting of Takadu - and saving trillions of liters of water.

(h/t Dan)

Amnesty charges Saudi Arabia of suppressing dissent

From Amnesty:

The last nine months has seen a new wave of repression in Saudi Arabia as authorities have cracked down on protesters and reformists on security grounds, Amnesty International said today.

In Saudi Arabia: Repression in the Name of Security, the organization says hundreds of people have been arrested for demonstrating, while the government has drafted an anti-terror law that would effectively criminalize dissent as a "terrorist crime” and further strip away rights from those accused of such offences.

“Peaceful protesters and supporters of political reform in the country have been targeted for arrest in an attempt to stamp out the kinds of call for reform that have echoed across the region,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s interim Middle East and North Africa Director.

“While the arguments used to justify this wide-ranging crackdown may be different, the abusive practices being employed by the Saudi Arabian government are worryingly similar to those which they have long used against people accused of terrorist offences.”

So we can expect to see major protests outside Saudi embassies worldwide. Because we all know that embassy protesters are motivated by a sheer love of freedom.

In fact, there was a notable protest at a Saudi embassy recently.

Protesters on Saturday sacked the Saudi embassy in the Syrian capital of Damascus after the Arab League (AL) decided to suspend the activities of Syrian delegation in the pan-Arab body, the al-Jazeera TV reported.

The TV footage showed angry protesters break into the embassy building in the evening, smashing the windows and sacking the embassy's properties.

OK, that's not fair. Surely there have been protests against the Saudis in other countries.

Yeah, yeah, I'm still not being fair. I found a real protest against Saudi treatment of women, this year, in the Ukraine. However, it is not suitable for work.

According to Karl Vick's logic, Islamic Jihad is now peaceful!

Earlier this week, Karl Vick at Time Magazine came up with this piece of convoluted logic that only a self-described Middle East expert can conjure up:

Quite possibly biggest news out of Cairo was deep in the fine print: Efforts are under way to bring Hamas into the PLO, or Palestine Liberation Organization, the umbrella for all Palestinian factions. ...Hamas has wanted to join it since at least 2005. If Hamas finally gets in, the implications would appear to be immense. It would mean agreeing to the positions and agreements the PLO has already made. This includes recognizing Israel, and renouncing terror -- two things Hamas has never been willing to do.

As I mentioned at the time, this venerable journalist and analyst didn't even consider that Hamas' joining the PLO would mean that the PLO would change its position, not Hamas.

So who is right - an anonymous blogger with a ridiculously ironic name or the Time Magazine's Middle East expert analyst Karl Vick?

A hint can be seen in this article:

An Islamic Jihad delegation has arrived in Cairo to discuss national unity, party officials said Thursday.

The group, headed by the movement's general-secretary Ramadan Shalah, was invited for talks following a meeting between Fatah leader President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas chief Khalid Mashaal in the Egyptian capital last week, Islamic Jihad officials told Ma'an.

On Wednesday, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Palestinian Liberation Front said they had received invitations to send delegations to Cairo on Dec. 4 and Dec. 6 to discuss the unity deal. Later this month, the secretary-generals of all factions are due to attend a collective meeting in Cairo.

The Islamic Jihad delegation will discuss joining the Palestine Liberation Organization, officials said.

By Vick's logic, this means that Islamic Jihad is now a moderate, peace-loving organization! They want to join the PLO! And the other terror groups discussing unity are probably not far behind! "The implications would appear to be immense!"

But wait:

Senior leader Sheikh Khalid al-Batsh told Ma'an on Sunday that Islamic Jihad would be interested in joining the PLO, but only on condition that it is restructured and its new agenda does not include any recognition of Israel.

Following talks between Abbas and Mashaal on Nov. 24, it was announced that an all-encompassing leadership body tasked with reforming the Palestine Liberation Organization would hold its first meeting on Dec. 22. The body was first envisioned by a 2005 agreement among factions.

Hamas is not part of the PLO, which is dominated by the Fatah movement. Hamas, which is shunned by the West for its hostility to Israel, believes that joining the PLO would bolster its international standing.

That sound you hear is the sound of the entire mainstream media ignoring the facts.

Fatah is moving towards Hamas-style rejectionism; Hamas is not moving towards peace. And the PLO might be reformed to accommodate terror groups while keeping its international cachet.

This is pretty obvious to anyone - except to Middle East experts employed by major media outlets.

Great example of journalistic bias at Ma'an

Just came across this article at Ma'an in its entirety:

Farmers continue to grow produce in the Gaza Strip despite Israel's ban on exports, but productivity has plummeted.

Israel bans all exports from Gaza aside from a few trucks of berries and flowers each day during winter under an agreement with the Dutch government. Farmers are denied access to lucrative markets in Israel and the West Bank.

Meanwhile, Israel has leveled vast areas of arable land in the coastal enclave over the last decade.

But farmers continue to produce strawberries, carnations, cherry tomatoes and bell peppers to export in limited quantities to Europe, although shipping fees reduce the profit margins.

Mahmoud Ikhlayyil, chairman of the strawberry and carnation association in Gaza, says farmers used to plant 2,500 dunams of strawberries before Israel's siege, but only plant between 900 - 1,000 dunams today.

This year, farmers avoided growing potatoes after a disastrous season in 2010 when no potatoes were exported, Ikhlayyil said.

"Farmers paid storage fees equal to 1.5 shekels ($0.40) per kilo, and in the end they sold it in the local market for 1 shekel per kilo."

In 2010, 25,000 dunams of fields had been planted with potatoes, he added.

In 2009, Gaza flower and berry growers suffered big losses when Israel delayed export permission by two months.

The Palestinian Bureau of Statistics says the enclave's exports in 2005 were worth $41 million.

The figure plummeted to $30,000 in 2006 and $20,000 in 2007 and there was no significant export trade in 2008.

As I have been reporting, the amount of exports from Gaza through Israel has increased by orders of magnitude in the past couple of years. Gaza farmers are in better shape than at any time since the Hamas takeover of the sector. Yet from reading this article, especially its statistics, you would get the opposite impression.

Notice how Ma'an's research on Gaza exports seems to dry up after 2008. However, in March of 2011 I noted via YNet:

So far, Gaza's farmers have exported some 367 tons of strawberries worth €1.8 million ($2.5 million), about 5.3 million carnations worth €850,000 ($1.17 million) and 6 tons of peppers.

And I reported recently:

During the past year, Palestinians from the Gaza Strip have exported more than 399 tons of strawberries, 10 million carnations, 6.5 tons of Cherry tomato and 6 tons of red, green and yellow bell peppers to European markets. In the coming year, Palestinians are expected to export 1,000 tons of strawberries, 20 million carnations and 150 tons of red, green and yellow bell peppers. In the coming year, Palestinians are expected to export 1,000 tons of strawberries, 20 million carnations and 150 tons of red, green and yellow bell peppers.

A little math shows that in this coming year, Gaza exports should amount to $7.5 million for strawberries and $4.5 million for carnations. I don't know the prices for the peppers, nor for cherry tomatoes, and furniture exports are going to start on a trial basis, so I cannot estimate the total value of exports expected this season, but it looks like we are conservatively talking about well over $12 million.

True, this is far less than the $41 million reported before Hamas took over, but it is a great deal more than what Ma'an is reporting. And the entire tone of the article is to make Israel look bad, when in fact it would have been easier to write an article about how Gaza farmers are doing far better than at any time in the past six years.

Also, I have not seen anywhere that there were any plans to increase the exports to include potatoes. Why would Gaza farmers plant a crop when there was no expectation of export for that crop? The "disastrous season" seems to be the fault of poor planning by Gaza farmers, not because of anything Israel did, as the article implies.

And why are there no exports through Egypt? True, the Rafah crossing is not meant for commercial vehicles, but no one seems to be working on building a new crossing into Egypt where an entire new market could be built not only to Egypt itself but to the entire Arab world. And certainly a few small trucks filled with goods can go through the existing crossing, the same way that small trucks have been driven through the other way by Viva Palestina and other groups in the past couple of years.

This isn't journalism. It is a hit job.

Isfahan blast was NOT at nuclear facility

In a follow-up to yesterday's news from The Times of London that the large blast in Isfahan was at a nuclear facility, Missing Peace makes some very good observations:

The Times made headlines on Wednesday when it published an article about the mysterious explosion that took place in Isfahan Iran two days ago.

According to the Times a ‘second nuclear facility has exploded’ in Iran. The paper furthermore reported that the blast that rocked the city of Isfahan on Monday struck the ‘uranium enrichment facility’ there.

Sheera Frenkel the Times journalist who wrote the article based her story on ‘satellite images seen by the Times’. She also suggested that Israel was behind the blast.

The same journalist reported during the Gaza war in 2009 that the IDF was targeting Palestinian civilians with white phosphorous. That report proved to be false.

Now Frenkel reports that a second nuclear facility in Iran has exploded, and that the blast struck an uranium enrichment facility.

It is obvious that this is not true. The first blast in Iran that made the headlines, occurred two weeks ago in Bidganeh. It is now clear that this explosion took place on an air force base during tests with a long range missile, probably a Sjejjil 3 intercontinental ballistic missile.

This has been confirmed by Mohammed Teherani Moghaddam the brother of the senior Revolutionary Guard commander who was in charge with the Iranian missile defense, and who was killed in the explosion. So the first blast didn’t involve any nuclear facility.

As for the uranium enrichment facility. There is no such facility in Isfahan. Isfahan is a conversion plant where yellowcake is converted to hexafluoride, or UF6, and other compounds. This is then sent to Natanz, where the enrichment takes place.

The idea that the Mossad or another foreign intelligence agency would target Isfahan and not Natanz, does not seem to be logical at all.

Another point that cast doubt on Frenkel’s story was discussed by J.E. Dyer, a retired officer of the US naval intelligence. She pointed out that a very large bomb would have to be detonated to generate the window breaking blast experienced miles away in Isfahan.

It seems obvious that Frenkel’s story doesn’t hold water.

So what really happened in Isfahan?

Dr. Ali Reza Nourisadeh, an expert on Iran who writes for Al Sharq al-Awsat, told us on the phone from London that the explosion took place on air force base 8 near Isfahan. He said that 400 converted Chinese missiles were destroyed by the blast, as well as a rocket fuel depot.

He also reported that the explosion in Bidganeh two weeks ago, destroyed 180 long range missiles as well as warheads.

Nourisadeh based his comments on information he received from sources inside Iran.

Daniel Ashrafi, an Iranian expat now living in Canada, told us that Ayatolla Khamenei was supposed to be on the air force base in Bidganeh, when the first explosion took place. His arrival was delayed, however.

Ashrafi also said that after the humiliating events in Isfahan and Bidganeh, the regime deliberately created the crisis at the British embassy in Tehran in order to divert the attention to an external enemy,

Nourisadeh’s version of the story about the explosion in Isfahan makes more sense. Especially if one takes in account Dyer’s explanation about the large bomb that would have been necessary to generate the massive explosion that was necessary to cause significant damage at the yellowcake conversion plant.

The only thing which is really clear, is that the secret war against Iran has taken a new turn.

Now Iran is experiencing the same type of warfare that it has unleashed against its enemies since the Islamic revolution started. It could mean the opposition has decided that there are better ways to drive the mullahs out of power than a public uprising.

A scary photo mistake

Al Arabiya English has an article by AFP about how Islamists are gaining the upper hand in northern Africa and how the West is growing concerned.

What interested me more than the article was the file photo illustrating it:

When was this photo taken?

It turns out that Al Arabiya got the photo caption wrong.

It is not a recent photo of Islamist women in Egypt demanding an Islamist victory in the elections.

It was taken in February.

And these anti-democracy Islamist women are not demonstrating in Cairo, but in London.

Great speech by Ron Prosor at the UN yesterday

Here is what Israel's ambassador the the UN, Ron Prosor, said yesterday in a speech on the occasion of the General Assembly debate on "The Question of Palestine."

Mr. President,

A great Jewish sage once wrote, “The truth can hurt like a thorn, at first; but in the end it blossoms like a rose.”

His words came to my mind today. His insight could really benefit many in this hall.

It takes a well of truth to water the seeds of peace. Yet, we continue to witness a drought of candor in this body’s discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. On this historic day, real facts in the General Assembly remain few and far between.

For any who have been here on November 29th before, today is déjà vu. Some of you may have noticed that some minor changes have been taking place in the Middle East lately, but any changes in this body’s resolutions condemning Israel are very, very rare.

Indeed, it didn’t take a creative writer to craft the language in these resolutions. The exact same text is copied and pasted, year after year – much of it dating back five decades.

The account we heard today is one-sided. It is unilateral. It is unjust. And it is unhelpful. It presents a distorted and partial version of history. It transforms the cause of Palestinian self-determination into a deliberate attempt to denigrate, defame, and delegitimize the State of Israel.

The political dynamics in this body are sadly predictable. Every November, the leaves change color in New York, but the automatic anti-Israel majority never changes its votes.

Each and every responsible member of the international community that affixes its seal of approval on this exact same set of resolutions – which are irrelevant at best, and damaging at worst— should do a little soul searching. Is this the message that you want the General Assembly to send to the world?

Mr. President,

Let me take a moment to remind this Assembly about what actually occurred on this day 64 years ago – and in the days that followed.

On November 29, 1947, the United Nations voted to partition then British-Mandate Palestine into two states: one Jewish, one Arab. Two states for two peoples.

The Jewish population accepted that plan and declared a new state in its ancient homeland. It reflected the Zionist conviction that it was both necessary and possible to live in peace with our neighbors in the land of our forefathers.

The Arab inhabitants rejected the plan and launched a war of annihilation against the new Jewish state, joined by the armies of five Arab members of the United Nations.

One percent of Israel’s population died during this assault by five armies. Think about that price. It would be the equivalent of 650,000 dying in France today, or 3 million dying in the United States, or 13 million dying in China.

As a result of the war, there were Arabs who became refugees. A similar number of Jews, who lived in Arab countries, were forced to flee their homes as well. They, too, became refugees.

The difference between these two distinct populations was – and still is – that Israel absorbed the refugees into our society. Our neighbors did not.

Refugee camps in Israel gave birth to thriving towns and cities. Refugee camps in Arab Countries gave birth to more Palestinian refugees.

We unlocked our new immigrants’ vast potential. The Arab World knowingly and intentionally kept their Palestinian populations in the second class status of permanent refugees.

In Lebanon for many years and still today, the law prohibits Palestinians from owning land – and from working in the public sector or as doctors and lawyers. Palestinians are banned from these professions.

In Kuwait, the once significant Palestinian population was forcibly expelled from the country in 1991. Few remain.

In Syria, thousands of Palestinians had to flee refugee camps in Latakia last August when President Assad shelled their homes with naval gunboats.

In the vast majority of Arab Countries, Palestinians have no rights of citizenship. It is no coincidence that the Arab World’s responsibilities for the “inalienable rights” of these Palestinians never appear in the resolutions before you.

Mr. President,

The basic question underlying our conflict for 64 years has not changed. That question is: has the Arab World – and particularly the Palestinians – internalized that Israel is here to stay and will remain the Nation-state of the Jewish People?

It is still unclear whether they are inspired by the promise of building a new state, or the goal of destroying an existing one.

Two months ago, President Abbas stood at the podium in this very hall and tried to erase the unbroken and unbreakable connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel.

He said the following:

“I come before you today from the Holy Land, the land of Palestine, the land of divine messages, ascension of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the birthplace of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him).”

This was not an oversight. It was not a slip of the tongue. It was yet another deliberate attempt to deny and erase more than 3,000 years of Jewish history. The Arab leaders from those two nations that sought peace have offered a different message.

For example, in 1995, King Hussein came to the United States and said (quote): “For our part, we shall continue to work for the new dawn when all the Children of Abraham and their descendants are living together in the birthplace of their three great monotheistic religions.”

In 1977, President Sadat came to Israel’s Knesset and quoted this verse from the Koran: “We believe in God and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes and in the books given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets from their lord.”

President Sadat and King Hussein spoke of THREE monotheistic religions, not ONE or TWO.

Mr. President,

The resolution that gives the 29th of November significance – General Assembly resolution 181 – speaks of the creation of a “Jewish State” no less than 25 times. We still do not hear Palestinian leaders utter the term.

The Palestinian leadership refuses to acknowledge Israel’s character as a Jewish state. You will never hear them say “two states for two peoples”. If you ever hear a Palestinian leader say “two states for two peoples”, please phone me immediately. My office has set up the equivalent of a 911 number in the event of such an unprecedented occurrence.

Palestinian leaders call for an independent Palestinian state, but insist that the Palestinian people return to the Jewish state. This is a proposition that no one who believes in the right of Israel to exist could ever accept.

The idea that Israel will be flooded with millions of Palestinians is a non-starter. The international community knows it. The Palestinian leadership knows it. But the Palestinian people aren’t hearing it. At this very moment, the gap between their perception and reality remains the major obstacle to peace.

Let me repeat that: the so-called right of return is and will remain the major obstacle to peace. It is not settlements. It is not the laundry list of baseless accusations launched against Israel in today’s resolutions.

I’ll repeat it again: the so-called right of return is the major obstacle to peace. Everyone knows it.

Yet, all of those who were so vocal today in telling Israel what is has to do for peace – mumbled, stuttered and conveniently lost their voices when it came to telling the Palestinians that the so-called right of return is a non-starter.

For decades, this body has rubberstamped nearly every Palestinian whim, no matter how counter-factual or counter-productive. What has this accomplished? The lip service of this body has only done a disservice for peace.

Mr. President,

True friends of the Palestinians have a responsibility to tell them the truth.

They will stop promoting the distorted version of history that characterizes this day, and start delivering the real lessons of history that the Palestinian leadership now refuses to heed.

These lessons are clear: bilateral negotiations are the only route to two states, for two peoples – living side-by-side in peace and security; negotiations that resolve the outstanding concerns of both sides.

While bypass maneuvers may work for heart surgery and highway construction, they will not bring peace or security to our region.

Direct negotiations were the way of President Sadat and Prime Minister Begin, the way of Prime Minister Rabin and King Hussein. It has been the framework for advancing peace between Israel and the Palestinians for the past two decades.

Time and again, we have extended our hand in peace to the Palestinians. Prime Minister Netanyahu stood in this very hall last September and declared his commitment to the cause of Palestinian self-determination – and his vision for establishing a Palestinian state, alongside the Jewish State of Israel – two states for two peoples.

Yet, today we wait for the Palestinians to give up the false idol of unilateralism – and get back to the real hard work of direct negotiations. And – as they continue to run away from the negotiating table, the Palestinian leadership continues to move closer into their embrace of Hamas – an internationally recognized terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel.

This development brings to my mind Groucho Marx’s famous line: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them … well, I have others." The Quartet has long applied three principles that Hamas must adopt. It must renounce violence, recognize Israel and abide by prior agreements. At no point has Hamas satisfied these conditions – or indicated any intention to do so.

Those who advocate recognizing a Government that includes Hamas are urging a Groucho-Marxist policy in a complex, unstable region. If Hamas is too extreme to accept these principles, they argue, we must tailor our principles to match Hamas's extremism.

The bar has been set very low. On these basic requirements for peace, there can be no adjustments. There can be no bargaining. There can be no Holiday Season discounts – in this hall or anywhere else.

Mr. President,

Even more than the words spoken in the speeches here today – or the words in the resolutions before you— it is the words not spoken that speak volumes. This Assembly has made clear that it does not stand in solidarity with many people in our region today.

In this hall, I hear no solidarity with the one million Israeli men, women and children who live under the constant rain rockets, mortars and missiles from the Gaza Strip.

I hear no solidarity with the 16-year old boy who was killed last April when a Hamas anti-Tank Missile struck his school bus. Or the thousands of other Israeli civilians who have been killed and injured.

I hear no solidarity with the Israeli children who learn the alphabet at the same time that they learn the names Kassam, Grad, and Katyusha – the rockets that keep them out of school for weeks at a time.

I hear no solidarity with the Palestinians who are victims of brutal Hamas rule – with the political opponents who are tortured, the women who are subjugated, or the children who are used as suicide bombers and human shields.

And – Mr. President, today I hear no solidarity with the many people in the Middle East who are being repressed and slaughtered every single day for demanding their freedom. From Syria to Iran to Yemen, these people are no longer content with their leader’s explanations that Israel is to blame for all the problems of the Middle East – a fiction that is advanced through resolutions like those before us today.

Today the People of the Middle East demand real answers for their plight.

I also heard no discussion today about the incitement that continues to fill the West Bank and Gaza, where the next generation of Palestinian children is being taught that suicide bombers are heroes, that Jews have no connection to the Holy Land, and that they must seek to annihilate the State of Israel.

From cradles to kindergarten classrooms; from the grounds of summer camps to the stands of football stadiums; from the names of public squares to the public pronouncements of Palestinian leaders, these messages are everywhere.

Just last month, President Abbas declared that the Palestinian Authority would provide a grant of up to $5,000 to every terrorist released in exchange for Gilad Shalit, Israel’s kidnapped soldier.

These are people like Ibrahim Shammasina, who helped to murder four Israelis, including two teenagers. People like Walid Anajas, who planned bombings in the heart of Jerusalem and Rishon Lezion, which killed 32.

People like Wafa-al Bis, who unsuccessfully tried to blow herself up in an Israeli hospital.

Washed in the blood of innocents, these terrorists are being held up as role models for the next generation of Palestinian children.

Palestinian Authority television broadcast President Abbas’ remarks to these released terrorists last October. He said, “You are people of struggle and Jihad fighters for Allah and the homeland... Your sacrifice and your effort and your actions were not in vain.”

Mr. President,

Sustainable peace must take root in homes, schools, and media that teach tolerance and understanding so that it can grow in hearts and minds.

It must come from a Palestinian leadership willing to tell its people about the difficult compromises that they will have to make for statehood.

It will come through the hard work of state-building, not the old habit of state-bashing.

Today none of these truths have been spoken.

Today I hear no solidarity with the principles of peace.

I know that the truth can be a burden. I know that old habits die-hard. I know that the convenience of the moment sometimes weighs heavy on the interests of the future.

Yet, only the truth will set us free. After years of darkness, I call on this Assembly to bring new light to this debate.

I call on each and every delegate in this hall to embrace pragmatic solutions, not automatic resolutions; to speak with candor, and not slander; to grapple for a new vision, and not old divisions.

I call on this Assembly to finally glean truth from this historic day, nourishing the seeds of peace in our region that can blossom into a brighter future.

Thank you, Mr. President