Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu condemned the UN Security Council Resolution introduced late Wednesday by Jordan as a unilateral move that would result in “a Hamas takeover of Judea and Samaria.”  Foreign Minister Leiberman blasted the resolution as an act of aggression against Israel.  Strategic Affairs and Intelligence Minister Steinitz branded it an “act of war.”

What can one conclude except that this resolution is manifestly anti-Israel?  It must, for example, reject Israel’s right to exist and endorse a full Palestinian “right of return.”  It must deny any Israeli or Jewish claims to Jerusalem and require Israel to leave its security in the hands of its erstwhile enemies.  And no doubt it includes text justifying violence and terror against Israel.  More broadly, this resolution must seek to impose on Israel a “solution” to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, along lines defined unilaterally by the Palestinians.  How could Israel respond to such a text with anything less than outrage?   

Netanyahu, Leiberman, Steinitz, and others critics of the effort must be hoping that people won’t bother to actually read the text of the resolution, because, in fact, it is nothing of the sort. 

This week, Alpher discusses Jordan's draft resolution to the UN Security Council regarding Palestinian statehood; last week's request from Tzipi Livni to Secretary Kerry to delay the UNSC vote and thereby keep the Palestinian statehood issue off Israel's election agenda lest this generate more votes for the Israeli political right and whether this makes sense; whether there is still an Israeli consensus against UN intervention in the conflict; and why last week's firing of a rocket from the Gaza Strip at an Israeli community on the Gaza periphery was cited by a number of Israeli security commentators and authorities as a step toward renewed escalation of fighting between Israel and Hamas.

JERUSALEM — Uneasiness inhabits Israel, a shadow beneath the polished surface. In a violent Middle Eastern neighborhood of fracturing states, that is perhaps inevitable, but Israelis are questioning their nation and its future with a particular insistence. As the campaign for March elections begins, this disquiet looks like the precursor of political change. The status quo, with its bloody and inconclusive interludes, has become less bearable. More of the same has a name: Benjamin Netanyahu, now in his third term as prime minister. The alternative, although less clear, is no longer unthinkable.

“There is a growing uneasiness, social, political, economic,” Amos Oz, the novelist, told me in an interview. “There is a growing sense that Israel is becoming an isolated ghetto, which is exactly what the founding fathers and mothers hoped to leave behind them forever when they created the state of Israel.” The author, widely viewed as the conscience of a liberal and anti-Messianic Israel, continued, “Unless there are two states — Israel next door to Palestine — and soon, there will be one state. If there will be one state, it will be an Arab state. The other option is an Israeli dictatorship, probably a religious nationalist dictatorship, suppressing the Palestinians and suppressing its Jewish opponents.”

Continue Reading

The prospect of a U.N. Security Council vote on parameters and a timeline for Israel-Palestinian negotiations, coming as it does in the lead-up to Israeli elections, is eliciting this tricky argument: “We can’t pressure Israel when Israelis are going to the polls, because it will only help the Right.”

That argument fits neatly into the list of memes that time and time again have been used to justify U.S. inaction in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. Memes like: “We can’t press for peace with the region in upheaval.” “We can’t ask any Israeli prime minister to take action that could destabilize his government.” “This is a losing issue that will cost any president and his party dearly.”

APN's daily news review from Israel

Wednesday December 24, 2014
 

Quote of the day:

“I’m a soldier in the army of conscience/I’ll shoot you with bullets of poetry/I’ll assassinate you with a monologue/I’ll commit suicide with the bomb of a dance troupe and I’ll torture you with the beat of drums/”
--Lyrics from the song ‘Search Me’ by Israeli-Arab rappers Wala Sabit and Jowan Safadi who fought for two years against charges of incitement to violence and support for a terror organization based on the song until they were declared ‘not guilty.’**

Americans for Peace Now (APN) today reiterated its call on the Obama administration to support French-led efforts to gain consensus around a United Nations Security Council laying out terms of reference and a timeline for Israeli-Palestinian, two-state negotiations. APN urged the Obama administration to reject efforts to delay such a resolution until after Israeli elections (March 2015).  APN President and CEO Debra DeLee commented: 

"As a true friend of Israel, the Obama administration should be working closely with the French and other parties to achieve consensus around a new Israeli-Palestinian peace resolution in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and to help pass such a resolution expeditiously.  Passage of a two-state resolution by the UNSC offers an historic opportunity for friends of Israel in the international community, including the Obama administration, to breathe new life into the two-state solution.  It can go a long way to strengthening those Israelis and Palestinians – among both the general population and among the current and potential leaders – who stand firmly with such a solution.  It can also send a much-needed message to rejectionists on both sides, making clear that the world is out of patience with ideologies and actions that prioritize land over peace, and prefer perpetual war in pursuit of zero-sum outcomes to a negotiated compromise.