The converse also applies.

Is there any indication that Netanyahu looks like tiring of “telling world leaders that the 100 years old Jewish-Arab conflict will not be resolved until the Arabs recognise the right of the Jewish people to their own independent State.”?

Of course there is not. The Eurabian, anti-Jewish, anti-American cabal is simply not accepting the declaration.

Hi Ateday,

The 'converse' ?

Do you mean Israeli recognition of Palestine ? That has been offered many times, on the reciprocal proviso.

Or do you mean that the conflict WILL be resolved immediately when Arab countries, or maybe even just Palestine, recognizes the right of Israel to exist, and thereby giving an assurance that Israelis will not be pushed into the sea and/or exterminated ?

Of course, the sticking point is that, according to the Koran, once territory has become Muslim, by whatever means, it can never again revert to its former rulers or owners or occupiers: it must remain forever Muslim, the property of Allah.

Have you built that into your calculations ?

Cheers,

Joe

The Muslims will NEVER recognise Israel's right to exist. Surely the calls for Israel to be wiped of the face of the earth are enough of a hint for you?

Proof that religion is dangerous and harmful. Forever fighting and killing. Forever hating and vilifying. Forever WRONG!

It's not religion, mikk, it's Islam, which is a dictatorial, fascist organisation posing as a religion when it suits.

The difficulty with these Israeli propaganda pieces is choosing one of numerous options to shred it to pieces. I thank Singer though for giving us the perfect lead in to demonstrate the absolute hypocrisy of Islamaphobes waving the Israeli flag.

I doubt the irony of Netanyahu going to Russia to talk about the so called 100 year Jewish-Arab conflict is lost on him. Conveniently he forgot to mention the overlap with the 1,2,3 hundred years or more Jewish-Europe conflict. For brevity's sake I'll keep it to the last 100 years of the Jewish-Europe conflict.

Long before the Nazis the Jews had a hard time of it in Europe, especially in Russia. The term antisemitic originated in Europe. Like the Nazis many 19th century politicians traded successfully on their antisemitism.

Jews were often stateless, unable to become citizens of their own country. Restrictions were placed on their movements in various countries. So it was not surprising that Zionism became more and more popular in the latter part of the 19th century. The Jews wanted their own homeland and they wanted it in their ancient ancestral homeland, far away from Europe.

At that time the Ottoman Empire was the imperial controller of that land. The Turks were only too willing to accept Jewish bribes for land. More often than not they kept the money and the land. With the Ottomans defeated in World War 1, the British became the new imperial controller. Now the bribes flowed their way.

So let's start wrapping this part up with what the Brits found in Palestine in 1920. Jews comprised about 11% of the population. Most of them were immigrants that had arrived in the previous 40 years. Prior to that the Jews comprised less than 5%.

So we are not talking here about a Jewish state for the local Jewish population. We are talking about a Jewish state for European Jewish refugees wanting to escape rampant antisemitism.

'Proof that religion is dangerous and harmful. Forever fighting and killing'

yeah petty bad Mikk until you compare it with irreligious people. They butcher the unborn at incredible rates.

I don't normally weigh into these Israel issues, but really, this essay is as sanctimonious as it is ridiculous.

Israel is a typical colonial power, doing all the things that colonial powers do - encroaching, encroaching, encroaching - until the situation morphs into a sanctimonious defence of their right to exist on the fruits of their encroachment.

International opinion is reaching the point of enough is enough. Nitpick all you like about historical facts on the ground. Israel only exists on the back of a dispossessed people that is being ground down by Israel's increasingly desperate maneuvering to keep them in their vanquished place.

Why does the Jewish people's own independent state have to be in the Middle East? Seems to me this is what's causing all the trouble. Why there in particular? Seems there are lots of places a lot more accommodating to settle.

Dear Loudmouth,

Being deliberately slippery with history is becoming your forte now it seems.

In 1993 the PLO as the representative body the Palestinian people recognised the State of Israel's right to exist.

In fact in a letter from Yasser Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin this was stated categorically;

“The signing of the Declaration of Principles marks a new era...I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments: The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.”

Israel has never recognised the right of the Palestinian people to their own state. Why not?

And who was the biggest stumbling block to peace progressing? The current Israeli prime minister.

"They asked me before the election if I'd honor [the Oslo accords]... I said I would, but [that] I'm going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the '67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I'm concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue."

"It's not religion, mikk, it's Islam, which is a dictatorial, fascist organisation posing as a religion when it suits."

Sounds just like a description of all the other religions to me.

"yeah petty bad Mikk until you compare it with irreligious people. They butcher the unborn at incredible rates."

LOL runner. Yeah mate as if no godbotherer ever had an abortion.
Get your hand off it.

For once I agree: The settlements are not the problem. Why should Jews be prevented from living in what they believe to be their ancient land?

The issue with the settlements is not the fault of the Jewish settlers - it's the fault of the Israeli government which still retains control of the territories that it took in 1967, partially in order to protect those settlers (with the blood of young Israelis) and partially for other ambitions. It was not settler-like Jews who took over and occupied these territories in 1967, but rather a corrupt, secular, socialist (Labor) Israeli government. I agree that for Israel's security it was necessary at the time to enter and clear up those territories from enemy combatants and their weapons, but it was not necessary to remain there.

While the Jewish settlers may do what they like (and face the consequences like we all do), they have no right to expect the citizens of Israel to protect them. If they want to have a state, then let them have a state, outside Israel. Muslims already have dozens of states, so why can't Jews have two?

As SteeleRedux just mentioned, following the Oslo accords the so-called "Palestinians" already recognised the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security. What they "failed" to "recognise" is the hypothesis of Jewish ownership of Israel: Netanyahu's demand that Arabs recognise the right of the Jewish people to their own independent state implies a great insult to the people of Israel. Their own prime-minister is traitorously suggesting that rather than being democratic, their state is (or should be) run by foreigners, who do not pay taxes in Israel, who do not spill their blood for it, who are not under any risk of rockets, bombs and attack-tunnels, who only want to give instructions from the sidelines to suit their own interests, believing that they have that right only because they happened to be born with Jewish blood. The author appear to be one of them.

Part two.

1920, a year after the World War 1 Paris peace talks where the Arabs had been seeking self-determination. There was little Arab self-determination, only Eastern European nations qualified for the lot! What the Arabs got was French and British Mandates drawing arbitrary lines to form boundaries of new nations that would be controlled by their new French and British imperial overlords. To rub salt into their wounds, they were being told a new independent state for Jews would be established in their midst.

This is what makes the simplistic dichotomy of Arab and Jew so utterly ridiculous. I would have thought the Abrahamic religions would have been a dead give away about the shared ethnicity of Arab and Jew. DNA shows clearly that the people of the fertile crescent have a common ancestry. (Sorry to put the mockers on the chosen ones.) Why only a Jewish state? Why not a Christian state as there are probably far more Christian Arabs than Jewish Arabs? Isn't Judea the birthplace of Christianity? Why not a Druze state or any one of a plethora of Middle Eastern religions? To isolate Jewishness out of all the Arabian diversity and make it a special case is an insult to all the other Arabs and their cultures.

As modern democracies are putting distant between religions and the workings of government, Netanyahu wants it front and centre. It's not hard to figure out why and you only have to look across its northern border to know it's a disaster in the making. Palestinians have agreed to accept Israel. Their rejection of it as a Jewish state is not only understandable, it is to be commended. It wasn't just Iran that Israel developed nuclear weapons with, they did the same with apartheid South Africa. Credible reports continue to be written about the apartheid style practices the Israelis are engaged in currently. Creating a constitutional Jewish state leaves the way open for non-Jewish citizens to be further marginalised. It's yet another Netanyahu roadblock in his never ending attempts to stall the peace process.

Hi Steele,

As usual, I agree with you bout religious-based states: I'm very uneasy about Islamic states, Christian states (if there are still any), India as a Hindu state, others as Buddhist states, and a Jewish state. But since there are plenty of others, then why get stuck into a Jewish state ? If all citizens in such a state have equal access to rights and opportunities and obligations (as in Israel), then - in a world of other religiously-based states - it's not the main game.

After all, are there churches and mosques in Israel ? Yes, of course. Are there synagogues in all Muslim states ? Perhaps not I do believe that one of the most significant mosques in Islam, the al-Aqsa Mosque, sits on top of the Temple Mount, the ancient Temple of Solomon, and that Jews are not allowed to visit it without permission. And why is it there ? Because both Jews and Muslims believe that it is the site of Jacob's Ladder, the only way to get into Paradise - which is why Muhammad flew there on a winged horse on the night of his death, rendering Jerusalem such a sacred place for Muslims. Therefore forever, they assume.

As for your kind remark, "Being deliberately slippery with history is becoming your forte now it seems..... ", I'm not sure what you mean. Are you referring to my misgivings about religious and faith-based beliefs, and a preference for evidence, for the scientific method over passion, and for the defence of the constantly-evolving principles of the Enlightenment ?

Cheers,

Joe