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.

"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.

#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.

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.