"Wafted by a gale of Jew hatred that seeks the elimination of the Jewish state..." --no,David, it's in fact a humanitarian breeze that you noticed, that might,hopefully, bring justice to the Palestinians by ending predatory Zionism.It was the Zionists who first sowed the wind after all.

Hyperbole is contagious.

Yes, Mac, the big problem is that pity for the Israelies, mostly over sorrow for horribly persecuted German Jews, has linked up with a radical Western Zionism that has even gained Christian Rightist following.

Pity the UNITED NATIONS was not kept as it was intended to be a powerful Kantian democratic peacemaker, without singular top nation authority.

Singer seems to overlook the fact that Israel is not the authority appointed by the League of Nations to exercise the Palestine Mandate. Britain was.

He doesn't give enough details of these other legal opinions to enable us to ascertain whether they, equally, ignore this fact.

Also, if he alleges that the League of Nations Mandate survived the evants of 1947-8 (ie, the departure of Britain, and the UN Partition plan), it would make sense for him to explain why it is so - it seems rather far-fetched to me.

I rather think there is a good reason why he avoids giving any relevant historical details to his claims!

It is a pity that Mr. Singer trivialised, through the lines of Gilbert and Sullivan, the likes of the Secretary of the UN and his efforts. Is it any wonder that if Mr. Singer suggests that his writing is the current philosophy of Israel, the UN and the world sees Israel as a pariah state.
What a rare distinction it must be to be the most disliked country in the world.

The Middle East problem is hardly a trivial matter for any legal nation in that part of the world. The apartheid, road blocks, the withholding of supplies and medical services and the generating of hate on both sides, certainly does not auger well for either party. The longer it goes on the less chance that there will ever be a solution, any solution.

The clear dislike for the US based on recent surveys in Israel should indicate to Americans that the country they have propped up for decades has become so arrogant and self-righteous that perhaps it is time to cast the line adrift and let them stand on their on own feet. What price UN support then?

We have grown to expect such arrogant reactions from Israel.
Even recently the disrespectful treatment of the VP of the US, Joe Biden, the very cool reception for Netanyahu in Washington as he once again used meetings in his host country to promote his philosophies among the tame but insidious Zionist lobby group, the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee. Such statements are the very things that have caused Americans to realise that they have been duped for years into paying billions in aid and support.

The writings of Mr. Singer and his disdain for a two nations solution and the outrageous commentary last weekend by that Israel apologist for The Weekend Australian, Greg Sheridan, are becoming an anathema to the whole world as Israel digs itself into a self-destructive hole. They are not wise enough to see it.

The pity of it all is when they do self-destruct, no one will even shed a tear.

REXW, keep it up, mate, for democratic middle-road reasoning, needs your mentaliy so much......

Cheers, BB, WA.

This reads like a propaganda piece to an ignorant public...trouble is we are not that naive...or ignorant of history for that matter.
Israel is digging itself into perpetual war, for which it seems to be blaming everyone but itself.
Arrogance is ugly in a person, but even uglier in a nation.

The United Nations is a shambles of null interface with reality. Until it becomes a Democratic Institution with no vetoes, it will remain a shambles.
As for Law, international or American, it too is a shambles of over-use and over-complexity.
Are there no moral laws to guide us any more? Israel's behaviour is immoral as was Hitler’s. Must the world at large pay forever for Hitler's immorality while Israel's Immorality is becoming hard to distinguish from Hitler's?
The myths and fantasies of Israel's past are as flimsy as all Religions. The Palestinian people are real; they were not party to the Second World War, why should they withstand the worst of Israeli revenge? Why not Europe? Is that why Europe is saying nothing while they have a "whipping boy" in the Palestinians?

Perhaps it's a bit late to bring back the British Mandate.

Many people in Israel want all of the territory of Israel/Palestine.

Many Palestinians want all of the territory of Israel/Palestine.

What would Solomon advise ? Cut the territory in two.

That didn't work the first time around.

Both sides agree that the entity of Israel/Palestine should remain as one. Let's assume that they are both right.

Simple solution: Israel/Palestine as one secular, democratic and demilitarised state, under the supervision of the UN for the next, say, one hundred years. Expel the religious zealots on both sides and learn to get on with each other.

Otherwise, don't waste our time, there are much bigger issues in the world.

David Singer,

Watch this clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE

Take note of John Cleese's words. Substitute the word "horse" for "parrot".

The horse you are beating has demised.

It is deceased.

It has passed on.

It has expired and gone to meet its maker.

It is an ex-horse.

No amount of beating will bring it back to life.

Even among the diminishing number of countries that do not wish for Israel's demise none would support Israel's claim to any territory beyond the 1967 borders. No amount of sophisticated argumentation about so-called "international law" will change that fact.

So get real Mr. Singer

The talking and blaming and hand wringing is nothing more than cover for Israel's determination to exterminate the Palestinian race. The talking and blaming will continue until Israel has achieved its terrible ends.

This is exactly the kind of one-eyed partisan nonsense that stands in the way of any solution to this endless dispute.

Singer starts by quoting the Secretary-General's call for an independant Palestinian state standing along Israel, and then concludes by asserting (with no evidence offered) that the SG is somehow wafted by a wave of hate that seeks the elimination of Israel. Ban Ki-Moon may not be the greatest SG ever, but he is most definitely not animated by or compliant with any desire to eliminate Israel. It is virtually defamatory to suggest this.

There are waves of hate from minorities on both sides. THIS IS THE PROBLEM. The solution is to by-pass these extremists and work on a solution that will be accepted by the reasonable majorities of the two peoples. Achieving this looks a long way off. This doesn't justify advocating a solution that is even more impossible to achieve.

Neither the Palestinians nor the Jordanians favour incorporating the West Bank into Jordan. The idea doesn't have a lot going for it if it is opposed by all of the major players and all of the peoples concerned!

#mac, #bushbred, #ozandy

Seems I have struck a raw nerve. It must gall you that the Jews have the right in international law to build in the West Bank and East Jerusalem under the terms of the Mandate and article 80 of the UN Charter.

Argue against my conclusions if you dare but don't waste your time in senseless attacks on the messenger bearing such unwelcome tidings.

#Jeremy

Britain was the Mandatory Authority and terminated its role in May 1948. The UN was left holding the bunny and could possibly still seek to determine the allocation of sovereignty in the West Bank,Gaza and East Jerusalem in accordance with article 80 of its own Charter. So far it has shown no intention of doing so.

Read and digest article 6 of the Mandate and Article 80 of the UN Charter and you will understand why my claim is not far fetched.

# rexw

You overlook that "apartheid, road blocks, the withholding of supplies and medical services" would not be happening in 2010 had the Arabs really wanted to see a two state solution and create a new Arab state alongside Israel between 1948-1967 in the West Bank,Gaza and East Jerusalem - 19 long years - when not one single Jew lived there after having been driven out of their homes by the invading Arab armies in 1948.

The Arabs have never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

The golden opportunity offered between 1948-1967 to create a new Arab state in 100% of the West Bank,Gaza and East Jerusalem will not return.

# Sherkhan

If the Palestinian people are real why did they not accept the 1947 UN Resolution to create their own state alongside a Jewish State and continued to reject such a proposal between 1948-1967 ?

Wallowing in self pity after the horse has bolted is a bit rich

Whilst you wax on about immorality what are your thoughts about the morality of 21 Arab states allowing 4 generations of Arabs to be kept in refugee camps rather than being resettled and integrated into those 21 states?

#Loudmouth

Your one state solution will not be accepted by Israel. The provision of a Jewish National Home has been indelibly imprinted on international law and cannot be reversed.

Solomon's idea to cut Palestine into two in fact happened and succeeded - with Jordan getting 77% of Palestine in 1946 and Israel 17% of Palestine in 1948.

What happens with the remaining 6% - the West Bank and Gaza - is the current problem. Dividing it between Jordan and Israel is the only feasible solution.

There are certainly more pressing world issues that need resolving. Pandering to continuing Arab intransigence is a complete waste of time and the diplomatic time and effort could be better directed to Iran,North Korea Sudan,Afghanistan,Iraq, Thailand and Kyrgyztan.

#stevenlmeyer

Sorry but the Mandate is alive and healthy by virtue of article 80 of the UN Charter.

There are those like you who seek to bury it but in the land famous for the resurrection this tactic will not work.

If you are arguing for the abandonment of international law then you are encouraging anarchy in international relations. This is happening before our very eyes in relation to the ignoring of the international law regarding Palestine and the sacred trust created by the League of Nations and the United Nations to legally endorse the right of the Jewish people to reconstitute their national home in Palestine.

Study the mandate and article 80 and perhaps you might conclude that you need to get real and stop being hoodwinked by Arab propaganda that seeks to bury the Mandate and the provisions of the UN Charter.

#ocm

Pointless blather. The "Palestinian race" is growing at the rate of knots.

# Michael T

Funny that you should characterize my statement of international law as "one eyed partisan nonsense".

Challenge my legal conclusions with something a little more compelling than that argument.

The Secretary General is not doing his job if he seeks to negate the very Charter which it is his responsibility to uphold.

He has become a captive of those who appointed him. A pity when you consider what might be achieved if he stopped parroting the tired old shibboleths of the member states and told them what the Charter required them to uphold.

Israel is constantly being pressured to do things it does not want to do. So why should Jordan not be similarly pressured? If it were the political situation in the West Bank and East Jerusalem could change overnight and a settlement could be achieved based on the history,geography demography and applicable international law.

It has taken 17 years so far to bring about the creation of a new Arab state between Israel and Jordan. It has been and continues to be a solution that remains unfulfilled in even the slightest of detail and has proved incapable of achieving despite the most intensive diplomatic efforts to bring to fruition.

I estimate the boundaries between Israel and Jordan could be redrawn in six weeks of negotiations and within the framework of their existing peace treaty.

This is the only way of freeing Arabs in the West Bank from Israeli control to Arab control without ongoing conflict or any one having to leave their existing homes.

If you can come up with a better or fairer alternative then let us in on the secret

David Singer wrote:

"If you are arguing for the abandonment of international law then you are encouraging anarchy in international relations."

I am not arguing for the "abandonment of international law." I think international law would be a great idea.

My argument is simply that international law does not exist. It is a fiction.

If there were truly such a thing as "international law" Indonesia would be sanctioned for the occupation of West Papua, a land grab that makes anything alleged in Israel-Palestine look like a domestic dispute over the placement of a fence.

If there were truly such a thing as international law Kim Jong Il would be among the most wanted for starving hundreds of thousands of North Koreans to death.

See:

http://www.atimes.com/koreas/CE23Dg02.html

If there were truly such a thing as international law would former South African President Thabo Mbeki still be a free man. His refusal to allow the distribution of anti-retroviral drugs to HIV sufferers in South Africa took 15 – 20 years off life expectancy in South Africa.

If there truly were such a thing as international law wouldn't we be much more concerned about serial killer Omar al-Bashir, Sudan's current president, than about Nethanyahu. In some years the Al-Bashir regime has been responsible for more deaths than have died on BOTH SIDES in all the Arab-Israeli conflicts combined. I know that theoretically the ICC is seeking to arrest him. However he still seems welcome in most world capitals.

If there really were such a thing as international law wouldn't the world had been calling for the toppling of Afghanistan's Taleban regime for crimes against women long before 9 / 11?

Get real Singer. International law does not exist. It is something that is invoked when somebody finds it convenient to do so.

#stevenlmeyer

You state:

"Get real Singer. International law does not exist. It is something that is invoked when somebody finds it convenient to do so."

You contradict yourself.

International law does in fact exist but in many cases it is ignored or not enforced. This only emphasizes the bias and double standards for which the United Nations is famous when it comes to Israel.

More seriously however the claims made by people such as Ban-Ki Moon and President Obama as to the legality of Jewish settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are total nonsense since the law relied on by them (The Geneva Convention) fails to take into consideration the provisions of the Mandate and article 80 of the United Nations Charter which predate the Geneva Convention and which remain alive and kicking in 2010.

Any legal opinion that fails to consider these two crucial pieces of international law is simply not worth the paper it is written on.

How people of such influence as the Secretary General of the UN and President Obama can rely on a half baked opinion of the international law applicable to the West Bank and East Jerusalem is a scandal of massive proportions.

Whoever is giving them such advice needs to be also exposed and publicly ridiculed as legally incompetent.

Let these so called "experts" consider the Mandate and Article 80 and whatever other law they consider applicable and then issue their legal opinion after doing so.

To my knowledge no one who has considered the Mandate and Article 80 has concluded that the settlements are illegal - quite the contrary.

That is my challenge to those who assert Jewish settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is illegal - Obama and Ban Ki Moon included.

David Singer, only hope Obama keeps a wary eye on Israel's real intentions in the Middle East.

What with Israel being given a free passage by America to have become the only militarily atomic power in the Middle East brings fears that Israel will eventually attack Iran, former Persia, the only true historical nation with established power left in the Middle East.

Most of the rest are economic makeshifts like Saudi Arabia, which with both economic and Western military aid does tell the real story about Middle East Western colonialism.

Though one has not a great deal of time for Iran, one does believe as a middle road historian that letting Israel handle too much war-talk with Iran will get Western democracy nowhere