Israel to Build in Jerusalem, Mulls More Steps Against UN
Source: Bloomberg
Israel is pushing ahead with building plans in areas the UN Security Council recently declared as occupied Palestinian territory and weighing new steps against UN agencies as the censure from the international body roils domestic politics.
The Jerusalem municipal planning committee on Wednesday is set to review requests to build hundreds of apartments in East Jerusalem. That would contradict the terms of Resolution 2334, which demands that Israel halt all building in areas it won in the 1967 Middle East war and brands construction there illegal.
The moves would expand on steps Israel has taken since the Security Council vote Dec. 23, when the U.S. broke with tradition and declined to veto a resolution Israel considers damaging. At a time when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been boasting of Israel’s improved international standing, the council’s decision threatens to further isolate his country over its half-century of control over Palestinians in the West Bank and east Jerusalem.
A senior Israeli official said the government is weighing fresh measures against UN agencies it considers particularly hostile, including the UN Relief and Works Agency, which serves Palestinian refugees; the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs; and the UN observer force on the Golan Heights. Israel could restrict new recruits to the agencies, delay visas for their officials and halt or delay visits of experts to those agencies, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the issue is sensitive.
Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-27/israel-to-build-in-jerusalem-mulls-more-steps-against-un-bodies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I guess we know. The Israeli PM is not interest in peace efforts.
Mosby
(16,256 posts)It's the capitol of Israel.
UNSCR 2334 basically says that the old city and the Western Wall is occupied Palestinian territory. It's fucking outrageous. Obama may very well have gotten back at netanyahu, but he has damaged the Democratic party in the process.
The Liberal Lion
(1,414 posts)it is to damage the Democratic party on the side of right, than to continue being the suckers of that which is wrong.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I guess it depends whether one holds true to their convictions, or simply desires power.
Mosby
(16,256 posts)that this resolution makes the two state solution less likely, not more.
1. This gives the Palestinians a reason to believe that eventually a solution will be imposed on Israel, so no need to compromise or negotiate.
2. This resolution will divide the Democratic party and affect the amount of involvement and money that liberal Jewish Americans provide.
3. This damages the Left in Israel by confirming all the accusations Bibi and Likud have leveled at the Obama admin. Namely that Obama is an Antisemite and wants to destroy Israel.
1) It is easier to make the case that actual buildings (facts on the ground) will make it harder to negotiate a two state solution. The US vetoing, what is essentially its own position on settlements, would give Israel reason to believe that they can control the US -- and its UN vote -- no matter who is President or what Israel does.
2) Most LIBERAL American Jews agree with is the J Street - 2 state position. Most Jewish American people I have known in any congregation (includes reform, conservative and reconstructionist) are at least as concerned with Tikun Olam - whether it is economic or social justice or environmental justice. These are all issues where they are allied with the Democrats.)
3) Obama is not an anti semite or wanting to destroy Israel. That is BiBi hysteria. Note that the US is the ONLY country that abstained rather than voted for the resolution. Note also that Obama and Kerry have warned Israel for years on settlements.
shira
(30,109 posts)Not to mention rejecting every 2 state offer ever made since even before the 1947 Partition Plan. This resolution also makes it illegal for Jews to be at the Kotel in Jerusalem.
Bibi froze settlements for 10 months back in 2009-10 while the Palestinians refused to talk. Don't you think it might make sense to pressure the Palestinians in some way, shape, or form?
As to most Jews, we don't believe Jerusalem is settlement territory or occupied land. Let's not pretend the fringe represents the mainstream. Also, most elected Democrats in the Congress & Senate oppose this UNSCR.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Israel are already riding the Trump train and are beyond any possible hope of redemption.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Emotional issue for both Israelis and Palestinians but the settlements are an impediment to peace.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)The resolution is a reaction to the Knesset approving increasingly more settlements and legalizing many that Israel itself had called illegal. Israel had built homes and its capital in WEST Jerusalem -- and East Jerusalem was until relatively recently, inhabited by mostly Palestinians. Jerusalem is also claimed as the capitol of Palestine. There is nothing wrong with the idea that both capitols could be adjoining border cities.
Obama did not "get back" at Netanyahu. Obama affirmed the position the US has had through several Presidents. You can simultaneously ignore the increase in settlements -- and the comments of Netanyahu's cabinet speaking of annexing areas of the West Bank and be honestly for negotiating a two state solution.
Netanyahu and his representatives say that a resolution saying "no settlements or expansions beyond the 1967 border" is destroying future negotiations. Yet, it is easier to make the case that actually filling the land with Jewish settlements is far more likely to destroy future negotiations. In fact, what Netanyahu and others have done is to create "facts on the ground". You could say that "possession is nine tenths of the law -- and they want to be seen possessing it!
Obama was faced with a resolution, that was very close to US policy. At the same time, Netanyahu - possibly to satisfy his right wing - had pushed the legalization of settlements they had called illegal and approved new settlements.
What NETANYAHU may have done is to have split the US Jewish population. I KNOW that in many synagogues, Israel programming is really really hard to do -- as in many congregations it has to avoid anything political. Not to mention, I have heard for at least 16 years that the Jewish vote was going to leave the Democrats for the Republicans. It has NEVER happened to any real degree.
There will be a shift long term - not because American Jews will suddenly be one issue voters (Israel) - but because the Jewish population will gradually have a higher percent Orthodox - given their higher birth rate and lower rate of assimilation. This year, my synagogue actually brought in bagels and invited anyone who needed to talk the day after the election - something that never happened before.
shira
(30,109 posts)....is to exchange land for peace & that's being taken away, especially by calling the Kotel area a settlement. As if Jews have absolutely no right whatsoever to any land beyond the 1949 Armistice lines. Forget disputed territory, it's solely Palestinian. We Jews are thieves & 3500 years of history there are flushed down the shitter.
This resolution will only make the PA more defiant. There's a reason Hamas & Islamic Jihad celebrated this resolution & it's not because they want to make peace and have 2 states side-by-side. The PA now has nothing to negotiate for, believing that the International Community will give them what they want for no peace whatsoever.
Sure, the settlements are definitely an obstacle to peace, but think hard on what this resolution means to the PA, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc.... and then ask yourself again why it's such a good idea. Does this resolution call for the Palestinians to recognize the Jewish state or the formula 2 states for 2 people? No, what it does is work within Arafat's 'phased plan'. That's not a formula for peace. There wasn't peace back in 1937, 1947, 1967, or now. Ask yourself what the Palestinians are doing for peace. Then look again at this resolution and honestly explain how peace is any closer due to UNSCR 2334.
Oh, lastly. Do you believe Jews building homes in their ancestral homeland is just as bad or worse than Palestinian incitement to terror & the rewarding of it with your American tax dollars?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)The one-state solution is the reality, whilst the two-state solution is "what might have been."
Expect at least another century of violence, oppression, and chaos emanating from that corner of the world.
