SETTLEMENT FREEZE

King Abdullah II of Jordan on American TV the "Daily Show" said, that if the settlement freeze does not continue, there will be war by the end of the year. Is this a threat or a warning? Why is the issue of settlements now an issue, when prior to 1967 it wasn't? Why is Israel considered an occupier and Syria is not when she was occupying Lebanon for over twenty years? The same goes for Egypt when it occupied the Gaza strip. What does this tell  us of the double standard of the international and Islamic community? The Prime Minister of Israel showed courage when he kept his promise and lifted the freeze. Jews all over Israel should be able to build where they want to. The international community has no right to dictate to a sovereign nation where to build and where no to build.

Israel must continue building as her population grows this is part of natural growth and in building a community. Further more, President Obama knows quite well the promise that Netanyauh made to his citizens that the end of settlements will occur at the end of September. Shouldn't the president of the United States honor the promise that a head of state made to his fellow citizens and not pressure the Prime Minister of Israel to renege on his promise? If President of the United States does not honor those who made promises and agreements what does it tell us of his character?

AN INDEPENDENT JUDEAN STATE

We continually hear about two states living side by side and President Obama's rush to make it happen between Israel and the Palestinians. Are there alternatives, to a two state solution? There is and the media, US and the international community refuses to acknowledge it. The hope for peace would be for Judea to secede from Israel and form an independent state. It would not be a part of the State of Israel and thus not an occupying force.Those Jews who seek to leave Israel and join the newly established state are welcomed to do so. If Prime Minister Netanyauh continues the settlement freeze or slows it down for another time period, it would be considered a betrayal of his promise to the citizens of Israel. If the Prime Minister can not keep his promise what good is his word? The Palestinians want concessions, they want to chip away little by little at the very fabric of Israel's existence. We all know the enormous pressure that is being put on Netanyauh by Barack Obama the most anti-Israel president of the United States. President Obama shameful treatment of Prime Minister Netanyauh still lingers in the minds of Jews all over the world. An independent state of Judea is the best solution to the on going conflict between Palestinians and Israelis.

Since the start of the freeze, what has it brought in the past nine months? Israel experienced more terror and deaths since the temporary freeze on settlements. This is the tactic of the Palestinians, to chip away and force Israel to renege on the promises made, to surrender more land, halt the building of settlements, and give up Jerusalem. In other words, to remove Israel from the Middle East. Prime Minister Netanyauh must keep his promise because the whole world is watching. If this doesn't happen then a call to secede from Israel is the best soluition. He must show courage and not cave into the demands of a US administration that is no longer a friend of Israel, but rather a regime that continues to make overtures to Hamas and Israel's enemies. Now is the time for Netanyauh to heed the words of Moses, "Be strong and courageous".

JERUSALEM

The major players in the on going peace initiative between the leadership of Israel and the Palestinians will not move ahead unless the issue of Jerusalem is resolved. What is needed, is the recognition by the international community that Jerusalem is the historical and undivided capitol of Israel. If this is done, it can advance the peace process in the region. If the international community were to move its embassies to Jerusalem this could be a major breakthrough for peace. The Palestinians want all of Jerusalem as their capitol not just East Jerusalem. If the international community were to relocate their embassies to Jerusalem, and recognize Jerusalem as the historical capitol of Israel, this could very well defuse some of the hostilities between these two groups. This move would force the Palestinians to move away from claiming Jerusalem as their future capitol, and lead to an end of hostilities. Historically, Jerusalem was never a capitol of any nation only Israel. It is also important to understand, that Jerusalem was never an imperial Islamic capitol like: Istanbul, Medina, Damascus, Baghdad or Cairo. The notion that Palestinians are demanding Jerusalem as their capitol, which historically, they cannot claim as their own, proves the point that they want to delegitimize Israel’s historical connection to the Holy City.

One entity that can play a pivotal roll is Rome. Eastern Jerusalem is divided into four historical sections. These neighborhoods are: Armenian, Christian, Arab and Jewish neighborhoods. The PLO does not speak for Armenian, Christian and the Jewish community and not for all of the Arab quarter. To suggest that the Palestinians want Eastern Jerusalem as a future capitol and divide the city with out consulting the other religious and people groups carries no weight. This is something that is not heard in the media. Who speaks for the three quarters of the population in Eastern Jerusalem who are not Muslims? The Vatican with its influence can at least speak for the Armenian and Christian quarter in a general sense, if these two groups approve of it. The Jewish quarter can speak for itself and so can the Muslim quarter. Another point, that is circling around is the concept of sharing the same capitol. One capitol shared by both nations. Why should Israel share its capitol with another nation that seeks to destroy her? Why should Israel share her capitol at all? Would a man share his wife with another man?

The ancient Hebrew prophet Nehemiah said this to Israel’s enemies, “I answered them by saying, The God of heaven will give us success. We his servants will start rebuilding, but as for you, you have no share in Jerusalem or any claim or historic right to it." 1 Given the sensitive nature on both sides of the spectrum, we need to look only at history to see that Israel not the Palestinians have a legitimate legal claim to the Holy City. The United States can facilitate this process by enacting the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 and move its embassy to Jerusalem. If the president of the United States would move ahead on this, it would create an enormous amount of creditability to his leadership and his standing at home and in the world. Jerusalem is the key to peace in the region. Palestinians must abandon Jerusalem as their potential capitol and live with the fact that the historical ties to the city favors Israel not Palestinians or any other nation or religious group.

---

1 Nehemiah 2:20 (NIV)

MIDDLE EAST ACTORS

The diplomatic activity going on in the Middle East is pure theatre and disturbing. Both parties Israel and the Palestinians are seeking a way to get the peace process moving. The looming shadow is being ignored, the threat of Iran to Israel and the whole region. The Obama administration is deliberately avoiding this issue, because an armed nuclear Iran is not as dangerous as a people group who seeks to be an independent nation. The objective of these meetings is clear to all who read in between the lines. The chief goal is to weaken Israel and to make her less defensible. The Prime Minister of Israel knows this. Netanyahu in his book "A Place Among the Nations" clearly stated that in order for Israel to survive it must have "strategic depth".

The American Chief of Staff in 1967  submitted a position paper outlining the minimal territory Israel would need to defend herself against her enemies. Their conclusion was clear, Israel must maintain all of Judea, Samaria,and the Golan Heights. If Israel was to relinquish Judea and Samaria it would have no warning of attack and could end Israel's existence. So why a meeting  with President Abbas whose term expired in January of 2009? 

President Obama is in need of a boost to his fail domestic and foreign policy.  Obama must have a transfusion to keep his appalling creditability up before the American public and the international community. The American public has seen what his administration is doing to Americans. His  foreign and domestic policies have been divisive. Case in point, the suing of the State of Arizona by the US government; the labeling of those who disagree with his policies as "radical elements" by Homeland Security and the list goes on.

Netanyahu must stand up to a hostile American president who seeks to undermine the safety and security of the State of Israel and to upset the whole balance of the Middle East. Netanyahu's preference as it appears right now, is to give in to the demands of Obama and Abbas. Appeasement only empowers the enemies of Israel and makes Israel more vulnerable, and in the end, will not bring peace.                              

TWO STATES OR ONE?

The present talks that are taking place in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinian leadership will not produce the desired peace. Time after time the Palestinians and the Muslim world demand that Israel make concessions to the detriment of Israel's security. Gaza was one example that has led to untold insecurity and death to Israel. The on going talks is nothing more but theatre to prop up the president of the United States in the Middle East and in the European community. President Obama has failed domestically and his foreign policy is a threat to our national security. The Palestinians have made it clear that they will not recognize the state of Israel nor will they give up their idea of claiming Jerusalem as their capitol.

This issue of settlements is another issue and why should that be an issue when prior to 1967 it was not an issue, neither was Gaza or building in Jerusalem? It has become an issue because the Palestinians want all of Israel from the Jordan River to the sea. A Palestinian state that is disconnected with the rest of the disputed land is no state. What will happen as a result of these talks? If president Abbas does not get his way, there will be an increase in violence like before in previous talks. Perhaps the best thing that Netanyahu can offer is potential economic prosperity. No two states living side by side, but rather a chance for Palestinians to experience the same prosperity that Israel has. If this is presented there could very well be a breakthrough for peace.