One Holocaust is enough for a couple of centuries.

Predicable! It would seem only a corrupt PM and Mr Singer want this. The rest of the world still want a two-state solution and the end of the endless bloodletting!
Alan B.

The forced exodus (ethnic cleansing) of undesireables in the Holy land has failed.
I guess one can only hope we won't have to hear this broken violin any longer.
David will be having heart palpitations no doubt.

I guess there's always the seemingly tried and true policy of so-called Gods chosen people engaging in racial vilification and unprovoked attacks

Maybe next week well see the new policy become the old policy
- poisoning wells, wrecking olive groves and bulldozing homes?

Yawn.

Gods so-called holy land is drenched in blood and misery.

"These three leaders have chosen to prolong - not end - the conflict between Arabs and Jews started in 1897 that still remains unresolved today."

Israel prolongs the conflict itself by being uncompromising.
Funny how you provided a link to when and where the conflict started, in 1897 at The First Zionist Congress.
Based on your own admissions, the conflict was started by the Jews themselves.

The League of Nations no longer exists.
There's no binding obligations to an organisation no longer in existence.

e.g no nation would have to adhere to UN sustainable development goals if the UN ceased to exist an no nations were active members.
The agreements would no longer exist, and no-one would have authority to enforce them as no-one would be a active member of the UN.
In my opinion Article 80 is an illegal amendment, since article 1 ratified years earlier already acknowledges the right to self determination.

It seems pro-Israel proponents wanted to tack on an amendment years later that nullified the rights already given and agreed upon by many nations years prior.

Surprised you didn't bang on about the Balfour Declaration.
If you had've I'd have pointed out the document text says

'it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.'

The Balfour declaration clearly stated you have no right to prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities.
- That doesn't mean you can.
Secondly it has no right to impose it's own rules on other sovereign nations, who are free to determine their own laws.

So you're stuffed on every front.

Balfour, you broke the rules, and secondly it has no jurisdiction or authority to make other nations laws for them.
League of Nations doesn't exist, so any past agreement is obsolete and irrelevant as no active members exist with authority to enforce it.
UN Article 80 is not-applicable based upon the previous rights of self determination granted in Article 1.

Dear Critic,

«Funny how you provided a link to when and where the conflict started, in 1897 at The First Zionist Congress.
Based on your own admissions, the conflict was started by the Jews themselves.»

Sadly, not only you respond to this AI robot, but you also believe it:
Arguing about the date this "conflict" started and who started it, implies that you essentially agree with the robot that such a conflict exists.

Also, by speaking of "the Jews themselves", you seem to agree with the robot that such an entity even exists, as if all people who happen to be born Jews are in agreement and have some common interests.

The only conflicts in that region are internal, between Jews and Jews and between Arabs and Arabs.

Attempting to present the internal Jewish-Jewish conflict as a "Jewish-Arab" one, is just a tactic used by the fanatic Jewish tribe which is now in power against the liberal Jews which they hate more than any Arab. Similarly, attempting to present the internal Arab-Arab conflict as an "Arab-Jewish" one, is just a tactic used by fanatic Arab tribes against liberal Arabs which they hate more than any Jew.

I wonder what brings you to support these fanatics.

#Armchair Critic

Your opinion on the validity of Article 80 of the UN Charter is of little interest.

Article 80 has been part of the UN Charter since its founding in 1945. It was inserted to ensure that people like you would not try to deny the Jewish people the rights that had been granted to them by the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine-once the League of Nations was wound up - which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.

The Jews were given the right under articles 6 and 25 of the Mandate to reconstitute their national home on territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea - some 23% of the Mandate territory - without prejudicing the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.

In denying Jews that right in 2023 - the UN is acting in breach of Article 80 of its own Charter - which preserved that right.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine solution (HKOPS) is proposing a division of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) between Israel and the newly created Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine. That is a solution that should be welcomed to end more than 100 years of conflict.

The fact that the UN has not mentioned HKOPS once since its publication in 2022 - as an alternative to replace its own failed 2016 two state solution contained in Resolution 2334 - has made the UN the epicentre of Jew-hatred.

The UN bears a heavy responsibility for allowing the conflict to continue - rather than seeking to end it by replacing the two-state solution with HKOPS.