An act of petulance … I mean from William Hague

FOLLOWING THE SUCESSFUL upgrading of their status at the UN, the Palestinians must have known that there would be a price to pay. Both America and Europe pleaded with them to hold fast before acting rashly; for this would only provoke Israel into doing the same: and this indeed is what has happened. The Israeli’s have reversed an earlier decision not to build settlements on a particularly sensitive part of the West Bank known as E1. On top of which Netanyahu promises further settlements in East Jerusalem.

            Of course Israel is acting illegally with her actions, but by acting unilaterally as they did in going to the UN, the West Bank Palestinians under Abbas, have effectively abandoned a two state solution in Israeli eyes. By seeking anything that gives the Palestinians any kind of international sanctioning of their own state, (if only a limited one) without first consulting the other ‘partner’ who seeks to hang on to its own legitimately created state, legitimised by the UN, is an affront to Israel, and the UN should have accepted this before allowing the vote in the first place.

            A two state solution requires the participation of the Israelis and Palestinians: no other body has any legitimacy in independently negotiating a Palestinian homeland. The UN’s decision provoked Israel into acting as she did. The UN is weighted heavily in favour of the Palestinians, and from an Israeli perspective it has little to lose by acting against such an institution. Israel has not, since 1948, been very popular with the UN (outside, of course, America).

            The UN, as an institution, has become less and less regarded since its foundation on 24^th October 1945. Given its partisan approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict, why should Israel take its motions, edicts, formulas and demands seriously?

            Israel may be acting illegally because of what they see as a Palestinian provocation; but as a partisan of the Palestinian, the UN is in no position to tell Israel how to behave…and neither has the British Foreign Office.

THE BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE comprises high ranking civil servants who are E. T. Lawrence Devotees (ETLD). They are also fond of the oil producing kingdoms of the Middle East. When they retire they will seek, no doubt, an opportunity to sell Arab princes their diplomatic pearls of wisdom for a price which far exceeds anything they can attain on retirement from within the British civil service’s pension scheme.

            Our Foreign Office civil servants have been Arabist for many years (and some would say anti-Semitic for the same period) following our colonial introduction to this region: and the discovery of oil in Saudi Arabia, which kept our diplomats keen to appease the Arab world at every opportunity. After all it was British companies such a BP that brought the oil from the dessert to each and every street in the UK as well as other parts of the globe.

            Which brings us to the shenanigans of our present Foreign Secretary, William Hague, who is, this very afternoon deciding whether to withdraw our ambassador to Israel. Such a decision  would no doubt cause eruptions of joy among his civil servants, as well as the Left generally, who have a myopic view of Middle East history and Israel’s part in it,

            The ETLD’s within the Foreign Office will consider our ambassador’s removal from Israel as a stocking filler at this Yule Tide season. The ETLD’s within the Foreign Office have for decades kept the re-printing of The Seven Pillars of Wisdom alive and profitable. While the ordinary wet dream among men comprises of a beautiful naked women; the high ranks of the civil service within the Foreign Office, see themselves as Lawrence clones ( if yet un-buggered by a Turk).

           

            William Hague should not listen to such people when he decides whether or not to withdraw our ambassador from Israel. He should consider the consequences of a Middle East without a Jewish state. His civil service advisers seem to have managed to bring him under their control, as all civil servants, in all the great departments of state seek to do to their political masters. But I would never have believed that William Hague would have fallen fowl of such pro- Arabic advice, as he seems to have done.

ISRAEL SHOULD BE regarded by the UK and Europe as America observe it. Israel is a Jewish homeland that acts as a magnet for those Jews who still suffer from anti-Semitism in all parts of the world. The Jewish state of Israel has historical legitimacy going back over 4000 years.

The Jews, and the Christians, have proclaimed Jerusalem as their home. The Jews have had a presence in what is now Israel for thousands of years. According to Jonathan Millar (a liberal writer no less): “Over the past few centuries, archaeologists have made a series of extraordinary discoveries that establish that a distinctive Jewish religion and culture was developed around 4,000 years ago in Israel and that Biblical figures such as David, Solomon and Jesus were the focus of considerable attention by the Jews of antiquity within Jerusalem and throughout the holy land. Further, Martin Gilbert, a widely-respected historian, has demonstrated, through a dispassionate examination of the historical record, that for more than 1600 years, Jews formed the “main settled population ” of what now is considered the modern state of Israel.

The Jewish people’s right to a homeland within the current boundaries of the Middle East is historically just. The Jews must remain in the Middle East as they have done so historically for over 4,000 years. The Jewish tenancy in the Middle East has as much legitimacy as any Arab, including the Palestinians.

If the Jews were ever driven once more into the Diaspora; it would mean the end of the West along with the Jewish state. The prestige of such a victory within the Muslim world would rally millions of Muslims against the West; including the millions of those the West has given citizenship to.

The West has to stand full square behind Israel, even after Benjamin Netanyahu’s intemperate riposte to the Palestinians visit to the UN. As I began this peace by suggesting that Abbas had full cognisance of what he could expect from Israel in retaliation; I have ended it by warning of the dangers for the West in isolating Israel, either diplomatically or economically, if the West insists on such strategy.