The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Palestine: Bandar candour can help end Arab-Jewish conflict > Comments

Palestine: Bandar candour can help end Arab-Jewish conflict : Comments

By David Singer, published 30/10/2013

There are three possible one-state solutions that would ensure a Jewish and democratic state - which involve merging the West Bank and Gaza.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Aren't Israel, Jordan, Syria and Iraq all constructs post the British, French and Turkish Empires when you get right down to it? Saudi Arabia and Lebanon, too?
Which isn't to deny the history there. Of course there is history there, lots of. But the lines on today's map are from British and French cartographers' dreams, and none of them seem to be holding against the tides of contemporary desires.
The only rightfully solid one, Iran, seems to be in everyone's sight.
Populations growing. Oil and guns. Not enough water. No one is happy.
Bit of a mess, really.
And now Prince Bandar bin Sultan (AKA Bandar Bush) is making busy all over the area. Could that be because he knows that the House of Saud is on a slippery slope.
I do wonder where China will put its money.
Posted by halduell, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 9:46:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Treaty of Sevres was irrelevant. It was signed by Turkey, Italy, France and Great Britain. The people who lived in the area covered by the treaty were not consulted. The people living in the area were also not consulted when the Balfour Declaration was issued. The colonial powers divided up the world as they saw fit at the close of WW1.

Governments that are not made with the just consent of the governed simply have no legitimacy if one has regard for democracy.

As far as a Jewish and democratic state goes that is an oxymoron.

Governments that discriminate among their citizenry on the basis of ethnicity or religion also have no legitimacy if one has regard for democracy.
Posted by david f, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 10:05:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The PLO has undeniably botched its chances," opines the Singer loftily.

But the current PLO, which is a nest of vipers and scorpions and collaborators, is a corrupt creation of the U.S. and Israel, Singer.

You can't seem to grasp this fact just as you don't grasp the fact that occupying a people and stealing their land and building settlements upon it is a war-crime!

The truth of the matter is that it is Israel that has botched its chances of establishing a homeland in the Middle East. Its constant violence and brutality and genocide has rendered it persona non gratia for a 1,000 years plus.

When will YOU get it, Singer?
Posted by David G, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 3:37:01 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
#halduell

All the countries you mention - Israel, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon - are on today's map because of the decisions taken by the Principal Allied Powers after World War 1 at the San Remo Conference as ratified by the Treaty of Sevres in 1920 and unanimously endorsed by the League of Nations in 1922.

Yet Israel is the only one whose legitimacy and existence is still being challenged in 2013.

Jew-hatred would have nothing to do with those taking this position would it?

#davidf

The Treaty of Sevres is not irrelevant.

I repeat what I posted to #halduell - It is the legal source for creating the states of Jordan,Iraq, Lebanon,Syria,Saudi Arabia and Israel.

These areas had been part of the Ottoman Empire for 400 years until their loss by Turkey in World War 1.

These conquered areas were allocated as to 99.99% for the Arabs for self determination and 0.01% to the Jews for self determination.

Even that arrangement was changed in 1922 when 78% of the 0.01% promised for the Jewish National Home was denied to the Jewish people.

The civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish communities living in Palestine were to be protected under the Mandate for Palestine. No political rights were to be created in their favour. Jews were to be encouraged to return to their ancient and biblical homeland to settle on State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

Whilst you might find these arrangements unpalatable or undemocratic - they were accepted by the unanimous vote of every member state of the League of Nations.

This body of established international law cannot be subject to the whims of those dissatisfied with it - like the PLO and Hamas.

Replacing international law with the law of the jungle is a recipe for world disorder.

The law is not always right or just in many peoples' eyes but it is the best system we have for trying to regulate human conduct.

Ignore it at your peril.

The Palestinian Arabs have for the last 90 years - with disastrous results.
Posted by david singer, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 3:44:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sniff. Sob. Minutes of Handwringing, tear-wiping, etc.

Singer didn't reply to me. Oh, I am undone, thricely, cruelly.

In Singer's reply to others he said : "The law is not always right or just in many peoples' eyes but it is the best system we have for trying to regulate human conduct. Ignore it at your peril."

But the Israelis are the recognized 'world champions' at ignoring International Laws, U.N. Resolutions, etc, (the U.S. comes a close second).

How come Singer is advocating two entirely contradictory viewpoints, one for Jews and one for the rest of us?

He appears to be rather confused!
Posted by David G, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 4:11:27 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David Singer wrote:

"The Treaty of Sevres is not irrelevant.

I repeat what I posted to #halduell - It is the legal source for creating the states of Jordan,Iraq, Lebanon,Syria,Saudi Arabia and Israel.

These areas had been part of the Ottoman Empire for 400 years until their loss by Turkey in World War 1.

These conquered areas were allocated as to 99.99% for the Arabs for self determination and 0.01% to the Jews for self determination."

You can repeat what you said ad nauseam and accuse those who challenge what you say as Jew haters ad nauseam. You do precisely that. Democracy and self determination remain incompatible. A democratic state does not discriminate among its citizens on the basis of religion or ethnicity. Self determination is the formation of a country on a basis of religion or ethnicity. All states formed on the basis of self determination are not democratic.
Posted by david f, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 4:28:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@David Singer
#1 "Yet Israel is the only one whose legitimacy and existence is still being challenged in 2013."
#2 "Jew-hatred would have nothing to do with those taking this position would it?"
Concerning #1, and you would have to be having a laugh. Iraq is buggered. Syria ditto. Lebanon is periodically taken to pieces, and Saudi Arabia is running scared.
Concerning #2, and, no, speaking for myself Jew-hatred is something I am gratefully without, although I do have my reservations about Zionism. You would be doing yourself and what you write no end of good if you would stop conflating the two.
Posted by halduell, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 4:38:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You know. I am beginning to think that the only "country" in the middle east that is illegitimate is israel.

They refuse to set their borders.
They have no constitution.
They are a religious theocracy.
They possess weapons of mass destruction.
They refuse to sign up to any disarmament or weapon control treaties.
They would not exist without the support of the septics.
They stole the land to make their country.
They continue to steal land to expand their country.
They include many people like singer who want to steal all the land right up to the Jordan river.
They kill thousands of people including many innocent civilians in retaliation for a few firecrackers that rarely hurt anyone.
Their intelligence services kidnap, murder and use stolen passports.

I could go on but im feeling a bit sick.
Sick of israeli propaganda and lies. Sick of the demonisation, oppression and destruction of the Palestinians. Sick of apologists like singer coming here and spouting the same old rubbish over and over again.
Posted by mikk, Wednesday, 30 October 2013 5:53:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So, what we have here is a case of Saudi conspiracy to topple the good king of Jordan - may God bless him and his country with long life and prosperity.

Nobody needs or wants the headache of having the radical and hostile Palestinians as their citizens. King Hussein was wise to renounce them and their cursed territory - and King Abdullah is intelligent enough to follow in his father's footsteps, rather than listen to this adversarial Saudi advice.

No Arab-Jewish conflict would be resolved by throwing the occupied territories on Jordan (or Egypt): all that would happen is that within a few months the Palestinians would riot, overthrow the king, bring Jordan into chaotic civil-war, enforce Shariah law, then end up with the same conflict with Israel, forcing Israel to re-occupy that land and perhaps the whole of Jordan... I suspect that's what Singer is hoping for.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 31 October 2013 12:58:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu, trying to guess what Singer is hoping for could be the topic of an OLO article.

In his small Machiavellian mind lurk many evil plans and among them is the fanatical desire to drive everyone on OLO crazy.

What I want to know is what has Australia ever done that is bad enough to have Singer constantly bleating on our doorstep about the purity and self-righteousness of God's Children in the Holy Land, holy to lots of religious devotees it seems?

Crazy Benny should offer our Singer a post, take him off our hands, give us some desperately needed relief!

Perhaps Singer could run a prison hell where the Palestinians dwell! Perhaps he could read thousands of his OLO articles to them each day as punishment.

No, I withdraw that idea. We have already suffered enough and the Palestinians much more so!
Posted by David G, Thursday, 31 October 2013 11:49:59 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good to be informed there is no common ground in negotiations. No progress possible as usual. Nothing to see here.

Variables are required in the Middle East - for example US threats are causing Syria to divest itself of chemical weapons.

In the case of the Israel-Palestine+Hezbollah question about the only thing that will give talks a nudge is Iran acquiring the Bomb.
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 31 October 2013 12:56:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
#David G

You wrongly state:

"But the current PLO, which is a nest of vipers and scorpions and collaborators, is a corrupt creation of the U.S. and Israel, Singer"

The PLO was created in 1964 by Russia and Egypt.

The PLO had three years to create their own State in the West Bank and Gaza when not one Jew lived there - but did not do so.

That missed golden opportunity and the rejection of two further offers made in 2000/2001 and 2008 makes any successful conclusion to the current negotiations seem pretty hopeless.

You further state:

"But the Israelis are the recognized 'world champions' at ignoring International Laws, U.N. Resolutions, etc, (the U.S. comes a close second)."

Care to provide any specific examples?

#david f

You are entitled to your opinion - but the majority opinion appears to recognise Israel as the only democracy in the Middle East,

#mikk

Sorry to hear you feel sick.

You obviously need a dose of some good news from the illegitimate Jewish State:

1. Israel Corporation subsidiary IC Green Energy has inaugurated a facility in New Jersey to produce gasoline from natural gas. The plant can produce up to 100,000 gallons (440,000 liters) of gasoline a year. Cars will be able to use the lower cost, less emissions fuel without any modifications

2. 19-year-old Israeli, Shahar Shenhar, has become 2013 world champion at Magic:

3. Israel’s Elfi Tech monitors your pulse rate, respiratory rate, blood pressure, blood flow and much more, non-invasively at any time with the help of a sensor smaller than two dollars.

Knowing Elfi Tech is there should hopefully assist you overcoming your severe depression.

#Yuyutsu

Gosh - if your predictions for creating a bi-national exclusive Arabs only State in the West Bank and Jordan are anywhere near correct - can you imagine what would happen if there was a bi-national Jewish/Arab state created in the West Bank and Israel?

#plantagenet

Iran's acquisition of the bomb will threaten the US, Europe and every Arab State - not only Israel.
Posted by david singer, Saturday, 2 November 2013 9:12:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. In David Singer's case he proposes the same ludicrous "option" week after week in the hope it will gain acceptance.

His option is ludicrous because it cannot work. It cannot work because the Palestinians and the international community will never agree to it. They will never agree to it because it is immoral. It is immoral because you cannot force the Palestinians to abandon their right to self determination in their own state in the land of their birth.

Singer of course doesn't understand this because apparently he regards Jews as superior to Palestinians and therefore with superior rights to the land. He tries to justify this on spurious legal grounds (which have no acceptance by any government on earth other than right wing politicians in Israel) but the real basis for his position is unadulterated racism and bigotry. His right wing extremist views do not in my view represent the jewish community in this country or Israel. They represent the views of someone completely out of touch with reality; someone who can write as much nonsense as he likes from the comfort of Sydney; someone who does not live in Israel and will never need to live with the consequences of the intifada and isolation that will follow if his "option" was implemented
Posted by Ben DR, Sunday, 3 November 2013 11:36:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
#Ben DR

Attack me as much as you like - but the basis for reuniting the West Bank with Gaza has its precedent - the 17 years that it actually happened between 1950-1967 when not one Jew lived in either the West Bank and Jordan.

This happened with Arab League approval.

It happened with PLO approval for three years between 1964-1967 from the time the PLO was formed.

Indeed Article 24 of the original PLO Covenant provided:
"This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on the Gaza Strip or in the Himmah Area."

In my opinion had Jordan not lost the West Bank and Egypt lost Gaza to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War - this would have still been the position today.

Diplomacy is the art of the possible.

20 years of trying to establish a Palestinian Arab State between Jordan and Israel for the first time ever in recorded history under the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap has proved an abject failure.

Everyone is agreed the current status quo in Gaza and the West Bank cannot continue and that the allocation of sovereignty in those areas needs to be determined.

Seeking to unify the West Bank with Israel into one State is in my opinion an option that cannot possibly eventuate.

Seeking to unify part of the West Bank with Israel and part of the West Bank and Gaza with Jordan and possibly Egypt is far more likely to succeed.

Concentrate on the above facts - not me personally - and perhaps your eyes might be opened to encouraging diplomacy that can deliver results to help end the Arab- Jewish conflict.
Posted by david singer, Monday, 4 November 2013 7:57:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<In my opinion had Jordan not lost the West Bank and Egypt lost Gaza to Israel in the 1967 Six Day War - this would have still been the position today.>>

Quite so, but things have changed since.
Today's Gazan population in particular is an explosive barrel that would blow up any country they are in.

We can only mourn the past: had only the Israelis foresaw these developments in advance and withdrew early after that cursed war - but at the time only one Israeli (Yeshayahu Leibowitz) saw what's coming.

<<Seeking to unify part of the West Bank with Israel and part of the West Bank and Gaza with Jordan and possibly Egypt is far more likely to succeed.>>

The West-Bank on its own may succeed, but nothing will succeed while Israel is united with even one square-centimetre of the West Bank; and in particular with the 'holy-sites' therein; so long as the Messianic component of Zionism is not completely broken, which sanctifies the secular state of Israel and perceives the 6-day military victory in 1967 as the 'hand of God', thus sanctifying militarism itself. For any chance of peace, that must go!
(not withstanding Arab and Iranian belligerence, as a separate issue that should also be dealt with before peace can be achieved)
Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 4 November 2013 10:50:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,

Congratulations, you're not annexationist. You merely want the Palestinians permanently deprived of a state by reclassifying them as Egyptians or Jordanians. Do you want to do this without their consent (as the South Africa Nationalist party did with its indigenous population from 1948) or would you like them to just agree voluntarily to their own national suicide ?

I am assuming you mean "Politics is the art of the possible" (Bismark I think) ? If so, it seems to me that the 2 methods by which you seek to achieve your solutions fall significantly foul of that quote.

Incidentally, if you are ideologically opposed to any form of viable Palestinian state in the WB (which you appear to be) are you not just a hypocrite to bemoan the fact that no agreement has been reached on one for 20 years ? What, for example, have you done in 20 years to advocate for such an agreement ?

Perhaps it will help us understand you better if you could tell us whether you would support Livni if she reached a complete peace agreement, bridging the gaps between the parties that existed at, say, Taba or Annapolis (the closest the parties have ever been), and if not, why not ?
Posted by Ben DR, Monday, 4 November 2013 12:49:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
#Ben DR

The Palestinian Arabs have had chance after chance to have their own state - but have always knocked it back.

A State could have been theirs in 1937, 1947, between 1948-1967, in 2000/2001 and 2008 - but they failed to grasp any of those opportunities.

They will assuredly miss the boat again within the remaining six months of the time set for the current negotiations - and for the same reason that led to their rejection of such a State when offered to them on the previously stated occasions - they have only wanted a Jew-free Palestine - and will settle for nothing less.

For them Palestine is exclusive Arab territory and the Jews are persona non grata - as clear a racist and apartheid policy as anyone could ever hope to see espoused anywhere in the world.

Until the Arabs agree to accept the idea of a Jewish Nation State located within the ancient biblical, historical and internationally recognised and legally sanctioned area of the Jewish National Home - nothing will change with the Arab League, PLO, Hamas and the myriad band of terrorist groups operating under a bewildering assortment of esoteric names.

That is their prerogative - and yours if you like to support it.

It is however a certain prescription for continuing conflict - as the events of the last 90 years have clearly proved.

The reality is that with the imminent demise of the present "two-state" solution proposed by the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap - reunification of the West Bank with Jordan still remains the only realistic solution.

In my opinion nothing else has any realistic chance of success.

You disagree as is your entitlement - but offer no other realistic solution.

You need to do so and then we can discuss your proposal.
Posted by david singer, Monday, 4 November 2013 4:05:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,

I'm assuming that when you say that "they" want a "Jew-free Palestine", you are referring to the area east of the so called green line ? The PA (and at least those negotiating now) obviously don’t think that way in relation to the area west of the line and you are spreading lies to suggest otherwise.

As for the land to the east, its an exaggeration to say that all those areas will be "Judenrein". The PA will probably (and bitterly) accept that many of the current illegal enclaves (around 4-6%) will form part of Israel and, for those who decide to move, there must be compensation.

Although it may be scant comfort, I have personally heard the PLO foreign minister state last year to an Israeli organisation that Jews remaining in a Palestinian state would have their rights protected. Israel's trump card in this is that the PA would be signing deportation orders for every Arab in Israel were it to do otherwise (as a signatory to the ICC it would also find itself in the ICC quicker than you can say Geoffrey Robertson QC).

While most people would sympathise with settlers who feel compelled to move, this would be balanced against the historical hardship incurred by 700,000 Arab refugees from 1948, for which Israel showed no sympathy (Benny Morris and others excepted).

Obviously the Palestinians don’t accept the idea of a Jewish Nation State located within ALL the ancient biblical, historical Palestine. For heaven's sake, nor does the entire international community, and they never will. If you are not prepared to even compromise on that then you are no better than maximalists like Hamas.

You would also be a gross hypocrite btw to complain about the failure of the Palestinians to grasp anything in 1947, in 2000/2001 and 2008 because none of those offers involved ALL the land. Put another way, you would have offered them nothing and they would have been right to reject that.
Posted by Ben DR, Monday, 4 November 2013 6:28:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To #Ben DR

You appear to believe that the "two-state" solution is still possible as you offer no other alternative.

You are certainly more upbeat than UN Special Rapporteur Professor Richard Falk who has made the following comments on Z net on 4 November:

"There is a sharp disconnect between the public profession of support for the resumed peace negotiations as a positive development with a privately acknowledged skepticism as to what to expect. In this regard, there is a widespread realization that conditions are not ripe for productive diplomacy for the following reasons: the apparent refusal of Israel’s political leadership to endorse a political outcome that is capable of satisfying even minimal Palestinian aspirations; the settlement phenomenon as dooming any viable form of a ‘two-state’ solution; the lack of Palestinian unity as between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas undermining its representational and legitimacy status."

I respect your viewpoint but I too believe the two-state solution will not happen for three more additional reasons:

1. Israel's insistence that its right to exist as a Jewish State be recognized

2. Israel's insistence that any Palestinian Arab State be demilitarized.

3. The PLO refusal to abandon the claimed right of return.

How anyone can believe the two state solution can be achieved in the face of all these obstacles is beyond my comprehension.

Both parties will be eager to blame the other for what I believe will be the inevitable breakdown of the negotiations.

Like America assigning the blame for the sarin gas attack in Syria on Assad whilst Russia blamed the rebels - that will prove to be a pointless exercise.

The focus needs to be concentrated on resolving the allocation of sovereignty of the West Bank between Jews and Arabs.

If the PLO and Israel fail to do that - then in my opinion Jordan and Israel and possibly Egypt should have a try.

We will just have to await for the conclusion of the current negotiations to see whether your view or my view and that of Professor Falk prevails.
Posted by david singer, Tuesday, 5 November 2013 4:59:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Israel's insistence that its right to exist as a Jewish State be recognized."

Dear David Singer,

I don't think any state is recognised as a Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or Hindu state. As far as I know a state is recognised by other states and its internal composition is an internal matter. Israel in demanding to be recognised as a Jewish state is departing from international norms.
Posted by david f, Tuesday, 5 November 2013 6:02:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
#david f

Your statement - "Israel in demanding to be recognised as a Jewish state is departing from international norms" - is I hope just another kneejerk response once again made by you without reference to any facts to suppport your generalized and unsubstantiated sweeping comments.

There are 56 states that are members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference.

The criterion for membership under article 3.2 of the Constitution states:

"Any State, member of the United Nations, having Muslim majority and abiding by the Charter, which submits an application for membership may join the Organisation if approved by consensus only by the Council of Foreign Ministers on the basis of the agreed criteria adopted by the Council of Foreign Ministers."

Get it ? - "Muslim majority" - otherwise they cannot join.

Why is it that difficult for these 56 Muslim majority states to recognize one state with a Jewish majority - Israel - as being a Jewish state?

The objectives of this organisation include:

"To disseminate, promote and preserve the Islamic teachings and values based on moderation and tolerance, promote Islamic culture and safeguard Islamic heritage;"

"To protect and defend the true image of Islam, to combat defamation of Islam and encourage dialogue among civilisations and religions;"

How can they continue to deny the entitlement of the Jewish people to have one state where they are the majority population promoting and preserving Jewish teachings and values and combating defamation of Judaism?

I guess I can excuse you for having expressed the view you did - as you obviously were not aware of the OIC and its membership criteria.

Just be sure that in the future you can back up your statements with facts before you start shooting from the hip.
Posted by david singer, Tuesday, 5 November 2013 7:04:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear David Singer,

My statement still stands. I wrote, "I don't think any state is recognised as a Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or Hindu state."

When a member of the OIC is recognised by another state it is not recognised as a Muslim state even though it belongs to the OIC. Australia and the United States recognise the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia not the Muslim Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Australia recgnises the Vatican (Stato della Citta del Vaticano) not the Catholic Vatican City. In like manner Israel can be recognised as Medinat Yisrael not the Jewish state of Israel. The religious nature of Saudi Arabia and the Vatican are an internal matter for those countries even though they may join in an organisation with other nations on the basis of their mutual faiths.

The United States and France are both democracies. However, that is an internal matter. Those countries do not demand to be recognised as democracies.

Israel's demand for its Jewish nature to be recognised internationally remains a departure from international norms. Australia recognises and has diplomatic relations with the State of Israel. I doubt that you can cite any official document in which Australia recognises Israel as a Jewish state.
Posted by david f, Tuesday, 5 November 2013 7:43:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy