In some cultures, the expression: “red
herring” refers to the dishonest use of language. Thus, when someone is
negotiating something he doesn't want to resolve, he would continue to pretend
negotiating, but would digress from the original topic by throwing-in a
proverbial red herring.
That's what the Jews of Israel have been
doing for more than fifty years since the Security Council of the United
Nations passed Resolution 242 pertaining to the lands that Israel has occupied
illegally in the wake of the 1967 sneak attack it launched on its Arab
neighbors.
Because talk fills the air again about the
search for a solution to Israel's repeated misconduct in the region, the subject
matter that's covered by Resolution 242 came up again. And sure enough, with
the certainty that night follows day, the Jews of America joined their cohorts
in Israel, and started the process of pretending to negotiate a way to end the
occupation of Palestine. All they have been doing, however, is engage in the
business of transforming the talks into a red herring.
You can see how that works out in the
article which came under the title: “The true status of the territories,”
written by Shoshana Bryen, and published on June 17, 2019 in The Washington
Times. What sets this article apart from other articles treating the same
subject, is that Shoshana Bryen is discussing the subject not just from the
political angle, but from the legal angle as well.
Talking about the military occupation of
Palestine, this is how Bryen began her discussion: “Some hoary myths persist
year after year. One concerns the legal status of the territories.” She did not
come out and said what those myths are but chided the New York Times for
asserting that: “having Jews live beyond the 1949 Armistice line would be
illegal, and that annexation of the territory by Israel would be compounding
the crime”.
Well, despite Shoshana Bryen's misgivings,
this is the reality of the situation because the “home” that the United Nations
(UN) created for the Jews in Palestine, is the only patch of land that the UN
has allowed Israel to retain. And this means that until now, that patch is all
that the Jews are legally entitled to. Get it Shoshana: this is a legal fact,
not a hoary myth.
What is hoary is what the Jews of Israel,
working together with their cohorts in America, have been trying to establish
as law. But the fact remains that what these people are doing, has no more
legal force than the quack proclamation of an organized crime syndicate. In
fact, what Bryen is doing in the rest of her article, is repeat those hoary
pronouncements. Here are a few:
First: “The creation of secure boundaries
for Israel has been a hallmark of American diplomacy before Oslo, during the
Oslo period, and now beyond”.
What the people who came up with that idea
are missing, and what Shoshana Bryen fails to understand, is the fact that
American diplomacy does not make international law.
Second: “The Clinton Parameters had Israel
retaining the areas … It was presumed that Israel would annex that territory”.
What those deluded Jews cannot get into
their thick heads, is the fact that when Clinton was mediating, and when
proposals were made back and forth between the Palestinians and the Israelis;
none of the proposals became law. Had there been a final agreement, signed and
ratified by both parties, the proposals would have become a legally binding
contract, but not law. However, since the talks failed, none of what was
proposed became legally binding. And certainly not law.
Third: “President Bush said that the
borders and certain aspects of sovereignty 'will be provisional until resolved
as part of a final settlement,' … It can be presumed that Israel would annex
anything on its side of a final border”.
It is discouraging to see these people
incapable of understanding what they themselves write. Here you have Shoshana
Bryen reporting that nothing will be resolved till a final settlement is
reached and yet, she gives legal force to Israel's claims, knowing that there
is no final settlement. Not only that, she even gives Israel the right to go
ahead and annex the land without a law that backs it or a legally binding
contract that allows it.
Fourth: “President Obama explicitly called
for a 1:1 swap of territory. It can be presumed that Israel would annex that
territory”.
Again, because there has been no final
settlement, nothing can be presumed, let alone acted upon.
Fifth: “Even Palestinian Authority
President Mahmoud Abbas was reported to have a plan to trade [land against
land] with Israel. It can be presumed that Israel would annex that territory”.
Again, Shoshana Bryen and her Jewish
kinfolks can presume all they want, but until there is a final settlement,
nothing has legal force.
In fact, if these big-mouth Jews want to
do something constructive, they could suggest that Israel should remove the
settlers from the land it presumes will be swapped and offer it to Mahmoud
Abbas. The bet is that Abbas will instantly allow Israel to annex what is
presumed he will relinquish in return.
Let Israel do that, and it will have
started the confidence building measures that will lead to a final settlement
that both sides can live with.