The blood of Israelis and Palestinians will be on the hands of our politicians.

Cross-posted at CiFWatch.

With the British Parliament due to take up six hours of precious debating time on Monday over whether to recognise a “state of Palestine” Vincent Fean’s article in The Guardian sums of the ignorance of those who will vote for such recognition.

Fean uses Sweden, which recently recognised “Palestine”, as a precedent for Monday’s vote. But as Amotz Asa-El points out in the Jerusalem Post this move says more about Sweden than anything else. Asa-El writes of the Swedish government’s social and economic failures:

“Unable to affect the domestic scene, Prime Minister Stefan Lofven fled to a foreign affair where talk is cheap and responsibility is everyone else’s except his.”

And so with British politicians. With May’s general election starting to loom large on the horizon and UKIP continuing to take votes off all the main parties (they have just won their first ever Member of Parliament) many of our Parliamentarians would rather flee to a foreign issue which is certain to win them votes due to the vehemence of many voters where Israel is concerned.

Fean thinks the debate, and subsequent vote, is important because we, Britain, have a “bigger share of responsibility than all the 135 (countries that already recognise “Palestine”) put together.” But do we really?

Britain operated the Mandate which ended in a 1947 UN vote to partition the land, a vote which was rejected by all Arab leaders. Britain’s responsibility ended then.

Fean also obliges the Israel-haters with the usual “The illegality of settlements, the separation barrier, and the demolition of Palestinian homes in Jerusalem and the West Bank is incontestable.” Really? Incontestable? Who said? A court? An international court, maybe? Of course not! There has never been such a decision.

The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on such “illegality” is just that, an Advisory Opinion. It wasn’t a proper court case.

In fact the only case I know that relates directly to the issue of “illegality” is the recent British Supreme Court case Richardson and another v DPP in which, because it could not be proved that Israeli-owned Ahava’s London shop was selling illegal products, those who occupied the shop forcing it to close down for some three hours were found guilty of aggravated trespass. Therefore, Ahava’s factory on the West Bank is, in fact, legal.

As for home demolitions once again they turn on the legalities of each individual case. Illegal Jewish homes are also demolished.

Perhaps the most risible part of Fean’s article is this:

“The United States should guarantee the safety of both peoples with US or Nato troops during the full, phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from Palestine, endorsed in a unanimous security council resolution.”

Really? Fean must have not been near a radio or television for the last three years and so not seen what Assad and Islamic State have been doing to their own people while the US, UN and NATO all watched on. Never again? Don’t believe it.

If Monday’s debate ends with a vote in favour of recognising the “state of Palestine” there will be no change on the ground. Israel won’t suddenly give up its security requirements because of our Parliament. That would be suicide.

The recognition will only ratchet up the expectation of the Palestinians and lead to more bloodshed and violence on both sides. This blood will be on the hands of the likes of Fean and our politicians who vote in favour on Monday.

Our politicians should get back to representing their own constituents instead of desperately trying to buy votes by fleeing to foreign fields.

12 responses to “The blood of Israelis and Palestinians will be on the hands of our politicians.

  1. The UK has a special legal and moral responsibility to prevent a final Jewish holocaust against the Palestinian people. Britain must recognize a Palestinian state before it is too late as Israel is decapitating whatever remaining prospectives for the establishment of a viable Palestinian state.

    Khaled Amayreh Occupied Palestine

    • The antisemitic Amayreh continues comparisng ludicrously the ‘Palestinian’ mostly self-inflicted problems with the Holocaust, That is considered antisemitic in both US and EU.
      Recognising a ficticious ‘Palestinian’ state will only trigger the annexation of main settlements and start an economic destruction of the PA-administered territories in the same way Hamas did to Gaza.
      In some way, that would be an excellent move by UK. That would probably end the ‘Palestinian’ fantasy for good. But unfortunately, some Israelis would also die because of then ensuing fights.

    • Brian Goldfarb

      Khaled Amaryreh plainly has a loose grip on reality as well as the notion of what facts are. How do we know this? He says that “The UK has a special legal and moral responsibility to prevent a final Jewish holocaust against the Palestinian people.” This suggests that he believes that the Israelis have already carried at least one earlier “genocide” against the Palestinians (else how could they carry out a “final” one?), without producing any evidence for this claim. Where are the mass graves on the West Bank? Where are the mass graves in Gaza? Where are the concentration camps in either place? And before he tries to cite the refugee camps, let him remember that these were established by the Lebanese, Egyptian and Jordanian Governments on their soil, not on Israeli soil. And in stark contrast to the solution to the problem of European displaced people (who were all resettled within 5 years or so), the number of “Palestinian” refugees has only grown, by a factor of at least 7.

      Strange that, the only refugee problem in the whole world that has grown over time. Wonder why?

      This is followed by another sentence, which similarly shows a loose grip on reality: “Britain must recognize a Palestinian state before it is too late as Israel is decapitating whatever remaining prospectives for the establishment of a viable Palestinian state.”

      If Khaled Amayreh expects to be taken seriously, he must do more than mouth pointless platitudes. For a start, why must Britain recognise a Palestinian state? What has it to do with the UK? The UK gave up all rights to the area when it indicated to the UN in 1947 that it wanted out of the Mandate it had held since shortly after World War I. Britain has no more responsibility in this regard than the USA or any other western democracy. Indeed, no longer being a Great Power, it arguably has less responsibility. If Khaled Amayreh disagrees, he should enlighten us as to how he disagrees.

      I would also like, pre-emptively, to forestall any attempt by Khaled Amayreh to adduce the imbalance in casualties in the recent fighting between Hamas and Israel as evidence for any Israeli attempt at “genocide” on the Palestinians. The imbalance is due to Israel spending money on “safe rooms” in new build apartment blocks and houses; it is due to Israel investing in defence material such as Iron Dome, which is capable of shooting down many (if not most) incoming rockets that might just hit inhabited areas, while Hamas uses the building materials that come through the crossings between Israel and Gaza to build attack tunnels designed to unleash Hamas terrorists on innocent civilians, and also uses human shields to “protect” its rocket firing sites, resulting in a civilian/combatant ratio of 1:1. BTW, according to ex-military men such as Lt. Col Richard Kemp, the “normal” civilian/combatant ratio in these situations is closer to 1:3 – that is, 1 combatant to 3 civilians. What was that about “genocide” and the disproportional Israeli response to Hamas aggression?

      Go and learn the international law on this topic, KA, then come back and lecture us on “genocide”.

      In all this, I am reminded of the wise words of Israel’s then Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, in 1968 or so: “I think that this is the first war in history that on the morrow the victors sued for peace and the vanquished called for unconditional surrender.”

      They are still doing so, and Khaled Amayreh is a prime example of this.

    • Amayreh is the typical example of the Palestinian Authority Arab: lives off the charity of the West and Israel, blames Israel for killing terrorists and defending herself. On a pro-Israel blog. Vain and stupid.

  2. On BBC tonight, after the excellent film on Israel security, the Palestinian representative talked about them being ‘kicked out of our land’ post 1948. He didn’t say why, pre 1967, there wasn’t an intifada to kick out Jordanian occupation in the West Bank, and Egypt in Gaza. Only when Israeli forces (Jews) were in those areas did statehood demands occur. Hypocrisy?

  3. That is exactly what I focused on, Toothlight and of course none of the other people present (such as Miri Eisen) got the chance to refute this complete rewrite of history. Also, referring to the Jews on the West Bank as “colonizers” is utterly laughable, first of all the West Bank (unlike Gaza) are the traditional lands of the Bible, Judea and Samaria. Secondly, whatever the settlers have done is the reverse of colonization or even occupation. They do not steal local resources and use them in the mother country, they do not use local labour at very low wages or as slaves, plenty of West Bank inhabitants work happily in Israeli factories (such as Sodastream) at equal wages with Israelis. One thing that Miri Eisen might have said is “if the Palestinians were driven from their land, how come so many of them still live in Israel?” I thought it was amusing that Arieh Shavit of Haaretz was wheeled in because it was assumed he would be another traitor to Israel like Avi Shlaim but what he had to say was very reasonable. If Avi Shlaim had come from any other country and talked about his homeland in those terms he would have been assassinated by now, together with the rest of the gang – Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappé, etc. – it shows that Israel’s values are higher than those of any other democracy that these people are left alone to spew out their hatred. One thing that was never brought up by the retired Shabak people or by the discussion: the creation of UNWRA and the status of the Palestinians outside Israel, the West Bank and Gaza as refugees in perpetuity, the vast sums of money lavished on them and the appalling way the Palestinian “refugees” (or rather their descendants) are treated in the other Arab countries, just so they can be kept like a running sore with which to harrass the Israelis.

  4. There are 30 MPs in Labour Friends of Israel. If they vote to recognise a “state of Palestine” tomorrow, bearing in mind that the Palestinian leadership does not recognise any part of the State of Israel as being irrevocably Jewish, I don’t see how LFI can continue. It would be nice if the Israeli Government made that clear to them.

  5. Excellently put. Yet another instance of the unbelievable appeasement of Islamofascists by white, middle-class, so-called liberals.

  6. I am “arcaneone”, ex-US, and now a resident of Israel .I write mostly on
    the Yahoo comment threads.

    I feel I have learned a lot, and maybe taught a fair amount as well, not only
    in terms of individual issues, but in general debate tactics. Aside from reasonably good historical annd writing knowledge, what success in that milieu seems to demand is enough individuals to prevent an overwhelming flood that will wash out our otherwise successful remarks.
    Have been doing this for 50 years, and I have no doubt Israel can win.

  7. Look at the furor over Lancet–They actually printed an article by David Duke–not a doctor or medical researche

    r, but former head of the Ku Klux Klan and notorious racist–to denounce Israel , a subject that has nothing to do with Lancet’s purpose. Many such events have come up, and our
    general response should be the same–either find a way to co-opt it, or
    bury it in ink so the perpetrator is delegitimized forever. It works.