Tag Archive for: Judea and Samaria

House Committee Will Now Make Place Names ‘Judea and Samaria’ Mandatory

/in , , , , , , , , /by

In 1950, the government of Jordan renamed the territory on the Western side of the Jordan River, that it had managed to hold onto in the 1948 war with Israel, as “the West Bank.” This was done in order to replace the toponyms “Judea and Samaria” that had been in continuous use in the Western world for 3500 years, in an attempt to efface the Jewish connection to the land that “Judea and Samaria” made obvious. This was similar to what the Romans had done in 135 A.D., following the suppression of the Bar Kochba revolt. As a way both to punish the Jews, and to efface the Jewish connection to what had then been called “Judaea,” the Romans renamed the whole area as “Syria Palestina,” or “Palestine.” And the place name “Palestine” stuck. In fact, it stuck so well the entire Western world started to call the area “Palestine.” In the same way, and for the same reasons, Jordan’s renaming of “Judea and Samaria” as “the West Bank” also stuck. It stuck so well, in fact, that most people believe that “the West Bank” was always the name of the territory indicated, and those who use “Judea and Samaria” must be wild-eyed Israeli “settlers” who, of course, are beyond the pale.

Now there is a growing support in this country to bring back into general circulation the venerable place names “Judea and Samaria.” The chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Brian Mast, has now directed that in all of its proceedings, hearings, and official documents, the committee members should use the terms “Judea and Samaria” instead of “West Bank.” More on this welcome development can be found here “Mast directs Foreign Affairs Committee to refer to West Bank as Judea and Samaria,” by Marc Rod, Jewish Insider, February 27, 2025:

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast (R-FL) instructed committee staff to refer to the West Bank as Judea and Samaria in all official documents and communications going forward, stating that Congress should “recognize Israel’s rightful claim to the cradle of Jewish civilization.”

The directive echoes legislation recently reintroduced in both chambers of Congress and the establishment of a new Friends of Judea and Samara caucus on the Hill, reflecting growing interest among some conservative lawmakers in recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the territory. A group of Republican lawmakers also explicitly called for U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty in the West Bank in a letter earlier this week.

Judea and Samaria is the biblical name of the territory, used by the Israeli government and preferred by some who favor Israeli annexation of the area and believe Israel has a historical and biblical right to control it….

Judea and Samaria are not just the “biblical” names of that territory; these place names have been in continuous use for 3500 years, not just by Jews, but by everyone in the Western world, right up until 1950, when the neologism “West Bank” was invented by Jordan.

Use of the place names “Judea and Samaria” reminds the world of, and reinforces the Jewish claim to, the land that the Jordanians renamed as the “West Bank” (a strange term, for the word “bank” normally applies to a riparian strip of land of equal width along a waterway, whereas the “West Bank” is applied to an ear-shaped territory), that the Arab and Muslim peoples successfully persuaded the world to accept. Now that acceptance is being challenged, beginning with those in Congress who support Israel’s claim, which is based both on 3500 years of Jewish history, and more recently, on the League of Nations’ Mandate for Palestine, which included all of the land “from the river to the sea” in what was planned to become the Jewish state.

Ambassador to Israel-designate Mike Huckabee has said that he believes the West Bank is rightfully and legally part of Israel and is not occupied, saying also, “There is no such thing as a West Bank. It’s Judea and Samaria.”…

As a matter of history, Mike Huckabee is right.

President Donald Trump said during a visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this month that he would declare a U.S. position on West Bank annexation in the next four weeks.

Let’s hope Trump does not disappoint the many people in his own government, including a growing number of Republicans in Congress, including Senator Tom Cotton and Representative Brian Mast, his Ambassador to the U.N. Elise Stefanik and his Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, who support Israel’s right to annex “Judea and Samaria,” for it was there, and not in Tel Aviv and Haifa, that Jewish history was made, beginning 3500 years ago, and which in modern times was included by the League of Nations in the Mandate for Palestine.

Those who are determined to rectify a historic wrong, by bringing back “Judea and Samaria” into common usage, should do much more than adopting those terms for use in this or that Congressional committee. The Republicans now have a majority in both the House and the Senate. They should pass a law making mandatory the use of “Judea and Samaria” instead of the “West Bank” in all government documents. The enemies of Israel will scream to high heaven, but so what? Articulate defenders of this change should conduct a media blitz, appearing on every conceivable news program, where they can recount the millennia-long history of the terms “Judea and Samaria,” and explain how in 1950, for propaganda reasons, “the West Bank” was concocted by Jordan to replace them. At the very least, such an effort will force the issue into the public arena, giving those who want “Judea and Samaria” to be brought back into common usage the chance to make their overwhelming case.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Blinken tried to impose sanctions on elite IDF unit, was persuaded not to at the last minute

Hamas Official Tells One Truth About His Organization, But Conceals Another

USAID sent over $2,000,000,000 to Hamas AFTER October 7 jihad massacre

Columbia University: Pro-Hamas students violently take over building, scream for ‘intifada revolution’

Germany: Muslim migrant has sexual relationship with 11-year-old girl, says ‘There are no good people in Germany’

USAID Paid Time Magazine $4 Million Dollars to Name Zelensky “Person of the Year”

RELATED VIDEO: Condemning Hamas by the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations speech

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

A U.S. Senate Bill to Bring Back ‘Judea and Samaria’ to Replace ‘West Bank’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

In 135 A.D., following the suppression of the revolt by the Maccabees, the Roman overlords of what was then called Judaea decided to change its name to “Syria Palaestina” — “Syria of the Philistines” — which was then shortened to “Palestine.” The Romans wanted to efface, through a change of toponym, the connection of the Jews to the land that was made obvious in the place name “Judaea.” They also attempted to change the name “Jerusalem” to “Aelia Capitolina” but, unlike “Palestine,” that place name never caught on.

During the Arab-Israeli war of 1948, the Arab Legion of Jordan — led by British officers under John Bagot Glubb (“Glubb Pasha”) — managed to seize and hold onto the territory that had been known, for more than 3,000 years, not just to the Jewish people but to everyone in the Western world, as “Judea and Samaria.” It would never do, the Jordanian Arabs believed, to continue to use the toponyms “Judea and Samaria,” which would remind people of who had inhabited that territory for millennia. So, like the Romans with their toponymic change — “Judaea” becoming “Palestine” — nearly 1800 years before, the Jordanians, after a year of reflection (the war officially ended in 1949), in 1950 decided to replace “Judea and Samaria” with the place name “West Bank.” It is a most peculiar appellation. After all, the riparian zone along a river is usually envisioned as of a uniform width, but the Jordanians’ “West Bank” is shaped like an ear. The Jordanians, and their fellow Arabs, by dint of repetition, made sure that “West Bank” was used so often, came more trippingly off the tongue than “Judea and Samaria” (it helped that people were uncertain whether “Judea and Samaria” were two distinct places, inked by a conjunction, or constituted one territory) and stuck so well in the popular mind, that it pushed “Judea and Samaria” out of common usage, save by the Israelis themselves. Even non-Israeli Jews now use the term “West Bank.”

People outside of Israel, including orthodox Jews and evangelical Christians, who persisted in using “Judea and Samaria,” found that “West Bank” had become so widely adopted that it was they who experienced a certain self-consciousness about using “Judea and Samaria.” “West Bank” is now used everywhere; it is up to us to undo that offense to history. When the Western media reports on Israelis, especially on those much-maligned “settlers,” they are often described as “using the Biblical terms Judea and Samaria,” as if that made such usage illegitimate. In other words, the fact that these place names had been used for three millennia by Jews and the rest of the Western world was not a point in their favor, but rather, was held against them. Amusing, isn’t it, that those people who would dismiss the use of “Judea and Samaria” because they are Biblical names have no objection to using the toponym “Gaza,” which is also a place name found in the Bible.

Now Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Congresswoman Claudia Tenney of New York have introduced a bill requiring the U.S. government to drop that preposterous “West Bank,” and to use the venerable, correct, imbued with history, place names “Judea and Samaria.” It’s an important bill; if it passes, it will put back into general circulation, by government fiat, “Judea and Samaria.” If every time a government official, from Trump and Rubio on down, gives a press conference, or holds a Congressional hearing, uses the terms “Judea and Samaria,” it will be an important victory, with the world being reminded that this territory has for more than three millennia been linked to the Jewish people; it was in Judea and Samaria, not in Haifa and Tel Aviv, where their history was made.

More about the legislation introduced Tom Cotton when he announced his resolution can be found here.

Senator Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) today introduced the Retiring the Egregious Confusion Over the Genuine Name of Israel’s Zone of Influence by Necessitating Government-use of Judea and Samaria (RECOGNIZING Judea and Samaria) Act, legislation to require all official U.S. documents and materials to use the historically accurate term “Judea and Samaria” instead of the “West Bank”. This bill would require the use of historically accurate terminology and align U.S. policy language with the geographical and cultural significance of the region. This legislation was introduced in the House by Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (R-New York).

“The Jewish people’s legal and historic rights to Judea and Samaria goes back thousands of years. The U.S. should stop using the politically charged term West Bank to refer to the biblical heartland of Israel,” said Senator Cotton.

“The Israeli people have an undeniable and indisputable historical and legal claim over Judea and Samaria, and at this critical moment in history, the United States must reaffirm this,” said Congresswoman Tenney. “This bill reaffirms Israel’s rightful claim to its territory. I remain committed to defending the integrity of the Jewish state and fully supporting Israel’s sovereignty over Judea and Samaria.”

To some this will seem a minor matter. “Words, words, words,” as Hamlet said to Polonius. It is not. It is important to escort back into common usage the words, including place names, that the Arabs have managed to push aside and replaced with others that diminish or efface altogether, the Jewish link to the land. Senator Cotton and Congresswoman Tenney deserve the gratitude of all those who care about history and the truth.

Striking “West Bank’” And Inserting “Judea and Samaria”

The bill making this change of place-name mandatory throughout the American government has now been introduced by Senator Tom Cotton (D.-Ark) and Representative Claudia Tenney (D.-NY). It can be found here.

A BILL

To prohibit the use of materials that use the term ‘‘West Bank’’, and for other purposes.

1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Retiring the Egregious   Confusion Over the Genuine Name of Israel’s Zone of Influence by Necessitating Government-use of Judea and Samaria Act’’ or the ‘‘RECOGNIZING Judea and Samaria Act’’.

118TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION

Striking “West Bank’” And Inserting “Judea and Samaria”

The bill introduced by Senator Tom Cotton (D.-Ark) and Representative Claudia Tenney (D.-NY) can be found here. https://www.cotton.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/west_bank.pdf

A BILL

To prohibit the use of materials that use the term ‘‘West Bank’’, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SEC.1 SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Retiring the Egregious   Confusion Over the Genuine Name of Israel’s Zone of Influence by Necessitating Government-use of Judea and Samaria Act’’ or the ‘‘RECOGNIZING Judea and Samaria Act’’.

118TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION

SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

2  It is the sense of Congress that the United States Government—

(1) should refer to the land annexed by Israel from Jordan during the 1967 Six-Day War by its historical names of ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’, with the land south of Jerusalem being considered ‘‘Judea’’

and the land north of Jerusalem being considered ‘Samaria’’; and

(2) should no longer use the term ‘‘West Bank”  in official government materials.

2. SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON USE OF MATERIALS THAT USE THE TERM ‘‘WEST BANK’’.

3. (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available after the date of the enactment of this Act may be obligated or expended to prepare or promulgate any policy, guidance, regulation, in this section if the Secretary—determines that is in the interests of the United States to do so; and

(2) submits to Congress an explanation for the waiver not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary makes the determination.

  1.   SEC. 4. CONFORMING CHANGES TO UNITED STATES LAW. FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961.—The For- Assistance Act of 1961 is amended as follows:

(1) In section 620K(f)(3) (22 U.S.C. 2378b(f)(3)), by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(2) In section 620L (22 U.S.C. 2378c)—

(A) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘THE WEST BANK’’ and inserting ‘‘JUDEA AND SAMARIA’’; and

(B) by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(b) TAYLOR FORCE ACT.—Section 1004 of the Tay- lor Force Act (22 U.S.C. 2378c–1) is amended—

(1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘THE WEST BANK’’ and inserting ‘‘JUDEA AND SAMARIA’’; and

(2) by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(c) MULTINATIONAL FORCE AND OBSERVERS PAR- TICIPATION RESOLUTION.—Section 2 of the Multinational Force and Observers Participation Resolution (22 U.S.C. 3421) is amended by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(d) OMNIBUS DIPLOMATIC SECURITY AND ANTITERRORISM ACT OF 1986.—Section 414 of the Om- nibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (22 U.S.C. 4862) is amended—

(1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘WEST BANK’’ and inserting ‘‘JUDEA AND SAMARIA’’; and

(2) by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(e) UNITED STATES-ISRAEL FREE TRADE AREA IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF 1985.—Section  9 of the United States-Israel Free Trade Area Implementation Act of 1985 (Public Law      99–47; 19 U.S.C. 2112 note) is amend-ed by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(f) IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 9/11 COMMISSION ACT OF 2007.—Section 2021(i) of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (22 U.S.C. 2151 note) is amended by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(g) FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FIS-CAL YEAR 2003.—Section 699 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107– 228; 22 U.S.C. 2301 note) is amended—

(1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘WEST BANK’’ and inserting ‘‘JUDEA AND SAMARIA’’; and

(2) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

(h) NITA M. LOWEY MIDDLE EAST PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE ACT.—Section 8005 of the Nita M. Lowey Middle East Partnership for Peace Act (division K of Public Law 116–260) is amended by striking ‘‘the West Bank’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘Judea and Samaria’’.

Got it?  STRIKE “West Bank” and INSERT “Judea and Samaria.”

O where? Here, there, and everywhere.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

FACT CHECK: Senator Claims $50,000,000 in Condoms Needed to ‘Keep Malnourished Babies Alive in Gaza’

Witkoff Now Talking About 10-15 Year Rebuilding of Gaza

Who are the Terrorists Whom Israel is Freeing?

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden regime plans to label goods made by Jews in Judea and Samaria so they can be boycotted

/in , , , , , , /by

Government-led boycotts of Jewish businesses. Hmmm. Where have we heard of such a thing before?

U.S. plans to label goods from Jewish settlements in occupied West Bank

by Felicia Schwartz, Financial Times, April 5, 2024:

The Biden administration is drawing up plans to require goods produced in Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank to be clearly labelled as coming from there, according to US officials, another sign of White House unhappiness with the government of Benjamin Netanyahu.

The final go-ahead for the move, and its timing, have not been decided but it is intended to increase pressure on Israel over rising settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, and comes amid US frustration with the Jewish state’s conduct of the war in Gaza.

The move would reverse a policy introduced by the Donald Trump administration in 2020 that required goods produced in the West Bank to be labelled as “Made in Israel”….

Read more.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SPENCER

RELATED ARTICLES:

Seattle Teacher: “Rape [of Jews] is Justified”

Oct. 7: Hamas ‘cut off organs and took them to Gaza in order to trade with them in future hostage negotiations’

Congressman Ritchie Torres, a ‘Progressive’ whom the Squad Would Like to Throttle

Germany: Muslim migrant stabs random four-year-old girl in supermarket, ‘motive unclear’

Israel Prepares For Iranian Retaliation

Israel Takes Out Iranian Mastermind of Oct 7

Colorado: Rohingya Muslim migrant arrested for sexual assault of children, may be targeting Burmese

Israel and That Iranian ‘Consulate’ in Damascus

Syria: Islamic State jihadis screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ attack civilians who refuse to pay zakat to them

POST ON X:

EDITOR NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ®All rights reserved.

WATCH: Spokesperson for Israel’s Prime Minister Speaks on Judea and Samaria

/in , , , , , , , /by

Joshua Waller from The Israel Guys sits down in Nashville, Tennessee with the spokesperson for Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office and talks about the current situation in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria. Tal Heinrich makes some incredible statements about what is happening in Judea and Samaria.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Son of Hamas: How the UN sabotaged the Oslo Peace Process

Hamas said to no longer be demanding complete IDF withdrawal from Gaza, permanent ceasefire in truce talks

RELATED VIDEO: How this murderous terrorist describes with glee October the 7th

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Newsrael News Desk with video by The Israel Guys is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

ZOA Accuses Biden’s Handlers of Planning to Train, Equip and Deploy Palestinian Terrorists in Judea and Samaria

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The Biden administration is either dangerously naïve or worse. It is presenting this plan under the pretext of helping to curb terrorism in Judea and Samaria, yet ZOA says this “unconscionable and illegal plan” would aid Palestinian jihadists. Meanwhile, another report has exposed the U.S. State Department’s funding of an anti-Netanyahu Leftist group that is behind the chaotic protests in Israel. What exactly is the motivation of the Biden administration?

A news article by Tablet Magazine stated of America’s most recent plan:

Incredibly, the U.S. is now proposing to take advantage of its ally’s political weakness by standing up a potential 5,000-man Palestinian terror army that would ostensibly fight terrorism in the West Bank in place of the IDF.

Washington, D.C.’s latest bout of Mideast pyromania began with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Ramallah at the end of January, right after a Palestinian terrorist shot dead seven Israelis outside a synagogue in Neve Yaakov.

The key words are “ostensibly fight terrorism in the West Bank in place of the IDF,” which puts a different spin on America’s possible intent from that of the ZOA below. But what would make the Biden administration actually think its plan could possibly work to bring Palestinians to “fight terrorism”? Given the administration’s consistent anti-Israel stance, does it really believe that arming, training and deploying Palestinians could be a trusted strategy to “fight terrorism,” rather than help perpetuate it?

In reality, such a plan would greatly empower the Palestinian “resistance.” History bears out the fact that the Palestinians do now want and never wanted peace. They aim to obliterate Israel from the River to the Sea, as is stated in the founding Charters of all the major Palestinian organizations, and they’re watching closely as America further positions itself as their ally rather than the ally of Israel.

Surely America should know that Israel cannot allow such a plan. The IDF, in fact, beefed up troops in Samaria last month in response to the escalating violence.

ZOA: Stop Biden/Blinken/Amr Unconscionable Plan to Establish Army of 5,000 Palestinian-Arab Terrorists plus U.S./Foreign Forces

Zionist Organization of America, March 17, 2023:

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) denounces, in the strongest possible terms, the Biden Administration’s unconscionable, illegal plan to provide commando training in Jordan to 5,000 Palestinian-Arab army of terrorists or future terrorists; and to then equip and deploy this Palestinian-Arab commando army in Judea/Samaria, along with foreign and U.S. forces.

The administration’s horrific, frightening, dangerous plan also requires Israel “to sharply curtail IDF counterterror operations.” U.S. security coordinator Lieutenant General (LTG) Michael Fenzel, who is currently responsible for training Palestinian Authority (PA) police in Judea and Samaria, proposed training the new 5,000-strong commando army, and deploying foreign forces, including U.S. military forces, on the ground.

Thus, under the Biden administration’s plan, Israel would be restricted from defending innocent Israelis from terrorists; and much of Judea/Samaria would become a “safe haven” for terrorists to retreat to and be celebrated after perpetrating murderous terror attacks in Israel, with no consequences.

Moreover, American and other foreign forces on the ground would become sitting ducks, subject to Palestinian-Arab terror attacks. American and foreign soldiers would also become human shields, who block Israel from going after the terrorists, lest foreign forces be caught in the crossfire. Further, the PA will want foreign forces to include Iranians, thereby introducing even more terror into the region…..

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED VIDEO: Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff Video: Islam’s Assault on Human Rights.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DC News Now tells you ‘everything you need to know’ about Ramadan, except what you need to know

Israeli Finance Minister says ‘There is no such thing as a Palestinian people,’ U.S. says ‘we utterly object’

German Tourists Get a Taste of Palestinian Hospitality

Palestinian Islamic Jihad meets with Hizballah head to ‘strengthen the rebellion against the Zionist enemy’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

INTO THE FRAY: The imperative for incentivized Arab migration & the emerging inevitability of the Humanitarian Paradigm

/in , , , , /by

Once inconceivable, the dismantling of UNRWA; the naturalization of stateless Palestinian residents in Arab countries; and the emigration of Palestinians from Judea-Samaria & Gaza are slowly emerging as realistic outcomes

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth – Sherlock Holmes, in “The Sign of the Four”.

Over a quarter-century ago (in 1992) , I warned of the consequences—for both Jew and Arab—if Israel were to evacuate Gaza.

I cautioned: “…the inevitable implications of Israeli withdrawal can be ignored only at great peril to Israelis and Arabs alike”, observing:“…no measure whether the total [Israeli] annexation or total [Israeli] withdrawal can be reconciled with either Israel’s security needs or the welfare of the Arab population there.” Accordingly, I concluded that the only viable and durable policy was the resettlement and rehabilitation of the non-belligerent Gazans elsewhere—and I underscored: “this was not a call for a forcibly imposed racist “transfer” by Israel, but rather…a humane and historically imperative enterprise”.

Confusing economic enhancement with “ethnic cleansing”

Today, after a more than a decade-and-a-half of bloody confrontations, including three large scale military engagements—imposed on Israel to protect its civilian population from predicted assaults—and a fourth appearing increasingly inevitable; with the Gazans awash in untreated sewage, with their sources of drinking water polluted, and with perennial power outages, my predictions appear to have turned out to be lamentably precise.

Perversely, earlier this month I was excoriated for…being proven right—and my fact-based professional assessment as a political scientist that, because of the overtly unremitting enmity of the Gazans towards the Jewish state: “Eventually there will either be Arabs in Gaza or Jews in the Negev. In the long run, there will not be both”, was denounced as a call for ethnic cleansing.

Of course, my detractors conveniently ignore that, time and time again, I have called for providing generous relocation grants to help the hapless non-belligerent Gazans find more prosperous and secure lives for themselves elsewhere, in third party countries, outside the “circle of violence”; and to extricate themselves from the stranglehold of the cruel, corrupt cliques who have led them astray from debacle to disaster for decades.

Confusing an unequivocal call for economic enhancement with one for “ethnic cleansing”, they apparently believe—in their “infinite benevolence and wisdom”—that compelling the Gazans to languish in their current conditions is somehow more humane.

But, more on these wildly unfounded recriminations against me perhaps in a future column.

A tripartite plan

Several years after my 1992 article, I extended the idea of incentivized emigration to the Arab population in Judea-Samaria (a.k.a. the “West Bank”) and in 2004 I formulated a tripartite plan (The Humanitarian Paradigm) for the comprehensive resolution—or rather the dissolution of the “Palestinian problem”, which include the following components:

The first was the dismantling of UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency), an anomalous UN entity, charged with dealing exclusively with the Palestinian-Arab diaspora (a.k.a. Palestinian “refugees”), displaced by the 1948 and 1967 wars with Israel. As I pointed out back then, because of its anomalous definition of who is considered a “refugee” (which extends to the descendants of those originally displaced), and its anomalous mandate (which precludes resettling them anywhere but in the country from which they were displaced), UNRWA is an organization which (a) perpetuates (rather than resolves) the predicament of the stateless Palestinian “refugees”; (b) perpetuates (rather than dissipates) the Palestinian-Arab narrative of “return” to pre-1948 Israel. Accordingly, the continued existence of UNRWA is an insurmountable obstacle to any resolution of the “Palestinian problem”—and hence its dismantling—or at least, radical restructuring—is an imperative precondition for progress toward any such resolution.

The second component was the launch of an international campaign to induce the Arab countries to desist from what is essentially a policy of ethnic discrimination against the Palestinian diaspora, resident in them for decades, and to grant its members citizenship—rather than keeping them in a perpetual state of stateless “refugees”, as a political weapon with which to bludgeon Israel. To date, any such move is prohibited by the mandate of the Arab League.

A tripartite plan (cont.)

The reasoning behind this prohibition was made clear in a 2004 LA Times interview with Hisham Youssef, then-spokesman for the 22-nation Arab League, who admitted that Palestinians live “in very bad conditions,” but maintained that the official policy on denying Palestinians citizenship in the counties of decades-long residence is meant “to preserve their Palestinian identity.” According to Youssef: “If every Palestinian who sought refuge in a certain country was integrated and accommodated into that country, there won’t be any reason for them to return to Palestine.”

The significance of this is clear.

The nations comprising the Arab League are prepared to subordinate the improvement of the dire humanitarian conditions of the Palestinians, resident throughout the Arab world, to the political goal of preserving the “Right of Return” — i.e. using them as a pawn to effect the elimination of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews.

It is to the annulment of this pernicious policy that international pressure must be directed.

The third—and arguably the most controversial—element was to offer the non-belligerent Arab residents in Judea-Samaria generous relocation grants to provide them and their families an opportunity to seek a better and safer future in third-party host-nations, than that which almost inevitably awaits them—if they stay where they are.

Atomization & de-politicization

To overcome potential resistance to accepting the relocation/rehabilitation grants, I stipulated two elements regarding the manner in which the funding activity is to be carried out: (a) the atomization of implementation of the grant payments; (b) the de-politicization of the context in which they are made.

(a) Atomization: This implies that the envisaged compensation will be offered directly to individual family heads/breadwinners—not through any Arab collective (whether state or sub-state organization), who may have a vested interest in impeding its payment. Accordingly, no agreement with any Arab collective is required for the implementation of payment to the recipients—merely the accumulated consent of fate-stricken individuals, striving to improve their lot.

(b) De-politicization: The incentivized emigration initiative is not cast as a political endeavor but rather a humanitarian one. This reflects a sober recognition that, after decades of effort, involving the expenditure of huge political capital and economic resources, there is no political formula for the resolution of the conflict. Accordingly, efforts should be channeled into dissipating the humanitarian predicament of the Palestinian-Arabs, which the insoluble political impasse has precipitated.

These two elements–direct payments to individuals and the downplaying of the political nature of the relocation/rehabilitation grants and the emphasis on the humanitarian component are designed to circumvent—or at least attenuate—any claims that acceptance of the funds would in some way entail an affront to—real or imagined—national sentiments.

Once inconceivable, now slowly materializing

For many years, advocating these three elements—the dismantling (or at least the radical restructuring) of UNRWA; the naturalization of the Palestinian diaspora resident in Arab countries as citizens; and the emigration of Palestinian-Arabs from Judea-Samaria and Gaza—seemed hopelessly unrealistic.

However today, all three are slowly but inexorably materializing before our eyes in a manner that would have appeared inconceivable only a few years ago.

Of course, a major catalyst for this nascent metamorphosis has been the Trump administration.

The US administration has—despite hitherto unexplained and inexplicable Israeli reluctance—exposed the fraudulent fiasco of UNRWA. As its erstwhile biggest benefactor, the US has retracted all funding from the organization. But more importantly, it has focused a glaring spotlight on the myth of the “Palestinian refugees” and the spectacularly inflated number of such alleged “refugees”—which even include those who have long acquired citizenship of some other country!

This salutary US initiative has the potential to rescind the recognition of the bulk of the Palestinian diaspora as “refugees”. Thus, even if they continue to receive international aid to help ameliorate their humanitarian situation, this will not be as potential returnees to their alleged homeland in Israel.

Once the Palestinian diaspora is stripped of its fraudulent refugee status, the door is then open to settling them in third party countries other than their claimed homeland,  and to their naturalization as citizens of these counties.

Naturalization of Palestinian diaspora in countries of residence

In this regard, the Trump administration has reportedly undertaken an important initiative–see here; here; and here. According to these reports, President Trump has informed several Arab countries that, at the start of 2019, he will disclose a citizenship plan for Palestinian refugees living in those countries. 

Significantly, Palestinian sources told the news outlet: “Trump informed several Arab countries that the plan will include Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.” According to these sources: “the big surprise will be that these countries have already agreed to naturalize Palestinian refugees.” Moreover, it was reported that senior US officials are expected to seriously raise an American initiative with several Arab countries—including stipulation of the tools to implement it, the number of refugees, the required expenses, and the logistics demanded from hosting countries for supervising the process of “naturalization of refugees”.

It is difficult to overstate the significance of such an initiative, which coincides precisely with the second element in the foregoing tripartite plan. For, it has the potential to remove the ominous overhang of a five million strong (and counting) Palestinian diaspora that threatens to inundate the Jewish state and nullify its ability to function as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

As such, the Israeli government and all pro-Zionist entities should strive to ensure its implementation.

Emigration: The preferred option of the Palestinians?

As for the third element of the tripartite plan, emigration of the Palestinian population to third-party countries, there is rapidly accumulating evidence that emigration is emerging as an increasingly sought-after option. Indeed, earlier this month, Israeli mainstream media highlighted the desire to leave Gaza in order to seek a better life elsewhere. For example, the popular website, YNetnews, ran a piece entitled, Gaza suffers from brain drain as young professionals look for better life, with the Hebrew version appearing a few days previously, headlined The flight from Gaza: What Hamas is trying to conceal from the media. Likewise, the KAN Channel ran a program reporting very similar realities (January 13).

These items come on the heels of a spate of previous articles that describe the widespread clamor among Gazans to find alternative places of abode—see for example For Young Palestinians, There’s Only One Way Out of Gaza (Haaretz) ; Thousands Abandon Blockaded Strip as Egypt Opens Crossing  (Alaraby); As Egypt Opens Gaza Border, A Harsh Reality is Laid Bare (Haaretz); and How Turkey Has Become the Palestinian Promised Land (Haaretz).

The Ynetnews piece describes the fervor to leave: “Leaving Gaza is expensive, particularly for the residents of the impoverished coastal enclave…The demand is high, and the waiting list to leave is long…Those wishing to cut short their wait must pay for a place on a special list, which is run by a private firm in Gaza…The price for a place on this special list is $1,500—a fortune for the average resident of Gaza…”

It would appear then, that the only thing preventing a mass exodus from Gaza is…money. Which is precisely what the tripartite plan proposes providing.

Let their people go: A slogan for April’s elections?

There is, of course, little reason to believe that, if Israel were to leave Judea-Samaria, what happened in Gaza would not happen there. After all, the preponderance of professional opinion appears to hold that, if the IDF were to evacuate Judea-Samaria, it would likely fall to elements very similar to those that seized power in Gaza—and the area would quickly be transformed into a mega-Gaza-like entity, on the fringes of Greater Tel Aviv—with all the attendant perils that would entail.

Sadly however, despite its clear strategic and ethical advantages over other policy proposals, few in the Israeli political system have dared to adopt incentivized emigration as part of their platform. The notable exception is Moshe Feiglin and his Zehut party –and, to certain extent, Bezalel Smotrich, the newly elected head of the National Union faction in the Jewish Home Party, previously headed by Education Minister Naftali Bennett.

It is, however, time for the idea of incentivized emigration to be embraced by the mainstream parties as the only viable policy paradigm that can ensure the continued survival of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. It is time for the mainstream to adopt an election slogan that sounds a clarion call to “Let their people go”.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Cole Keister on Unsplash.

The Two-State Solution is Dead. Long live what?

/in , , /by

Ted Belman, editor and publisher of the blog Israpundit writes: The Two-State Solution is dead.  All that remains is for the US to declare it so. Palestinians leaders and Israeli leaders have made it clear.

In a speech on Jan 10/14, Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud  Abbas made it crystal clear that he would never abandon the “right of return”, would never recognize Israel as a Jewish state and would never make a deal unless East Jerusalem was given to the Palestinians as their capital, all of which cross Israel’s red lines.

When the latest “peace process was getting started, Israeli leaders kept referring to Abbas as a moderate, contrary to the truth, and even referred to him as a partner in peace, also not the truth. No more.

Upon Israel’s release of the third batch of murderers in December and in response to the leaders of the PA celebrating them as heroes, PM Netanyahu said:

“Murderers are not heroes. [..] This is no way to educate toward peace. This is no way to make peace. Peace can be achieved only when the education toward incitement and toward the destruction of Israel is stopped. There will be peace only if our security and settlement interests are ensured. Peace will be established only if we could defend ourselves, by ourselves, against any threat.”

In the past week, Netanyahu, Yaalon and Bennett all criticized Abbas.

Netanyahu told VP Biden that recent comments by Abbas were proof that he does not want peace.

Min of Defense Boogie Yaalon said, Mahmoud Abbas “lives on our sword,” “Once we leave Judea and Samaria, he is finished. In fact, throughout the recent months, there is no negotiation between us and the Palestinians – but rather, between us and the Americans. The only thing that can ‘save’ us is that John Kerry will get a Nobel peace prize and leave us alone.” and “I live and breathe the conflict with the Palestinians, I know what they think, what they want and what they really mean,” he went on. “The American security plan that was presented to us is not worth the paper it was written on.”

Economy Minister Naftali Bennett denounced Abbas as “no different than Yasser Arafat,”

The fact that Yaalon was forced to apologize does not invalidate the truth of his remarks.

No doubt that Kerry is now looking for an exit strategy from his doomed efforts to force Israel to make concessions.

If not the Two-State Solution, then what?

Wm Galston writing in The New Republic on June 2011, said: “Benjamin Netanyahu offers no viable alternative to the status quo, and the opposition offers no viable alternative to Netanyahu. [..] The majority of Israelis actually seem comfortable to the point of complacency with today’s de facto truce and limited Palestinian autonomy.”

He was right. Netanyahu, Yaalon and many Israelis, though they prefer the Two State Solution on their terms, in its absence, are quite comfortable with maintaining the status quo.

But not everyone embraces the status quo. They fear Israel’s further isolation and deligitimation. They are clamouring to be pro-active rather than passive or defensive.

They all want to annex Judea and Samaria (West Bank) but differ on what to do with the Arabs that live there.

Deputy Minister of Transportation, MK Tzipi Hotovely recently said:

“The goal is for Judea and Samaria to be under Israeli sovereignty. It is ours and it was acquired legally in a bloody, defensive war. We must now implement the vision of the Greater Land of Israel and begin to apply sovereignty in all of the territory. This is the vision reflecting belief in the holy precept that the Land of Israel is ours and we have no right to revoke this precept. It is fidelity to the ideology of the Right and the religious public, which believes that this is our land.”

“We must begin a gradual process of 25 years under the heading of ‘annexation-naturalization’.”

‎” We must bear in mind that this is a hostile entity and it is impossible to ‎turn them into citizens overnight.”

Caroline Glick recently published her latest book, ‘The Israeli solution: A One State Plan for Peace in the Middle East’ arguing that whereas in Israel, the conversation has begun about alternatives to the ‘Two-State’ model, no such conversation is taking place in America. Instead American policy beginning with Nixon was and is to appease the PLO, now PA, at Israel’s expense.

“The only thing that should interest us is that Judea and Samaria is Israel,” she says and notes that even though providing the Palestinians with permanent residency and the right to apply for citizenship is not a perfect solution and will damage Israel on certain levels, “it is absolutely clear that it is better than establishing a Palestinian state. Such a state would be the ruin of Israel.”

Prof Martin Sherman, while totally supporting the annexation of Judea and Samaria, warns Glick and Hotovely, to “look before you leap” for reasons he makes clear.  He is adamantly against offering citizenship.

“Topping the list of bad ideas is the notion that, given the proven infeasibility of the two-state paradigm, Israel should extend its sovereignty over the entire area of Judea-Samaria and offer “immediate permanent residency to all its [Arab] Palestinian residents, as well as the right to apply for citizenship.” This is an approach so fraught with manifest disaster that it pains me that someone of the caliber of Caroline B. Glick, for whom I have the utmost regard and with whom I am seldom in disagreement, has chosen to advocate it.

“An almost childlike naiveté is required to entertain the belief that Israel could sustain itself as a Jewish nation-state with a massive Muslim minority of almost 40% – as the societal havoc that far smaller proportions have wrought in Europe indicate.”

Instead, he argues for a  “humanitarian solution” which envisages voluntary Arab emigration induced by generous compensation.

Glick rejects this and the Jordan Option as “irrelevant ideas that no one will accept, especially the Palestinians themselves.”

But were Sherman’s idea be adopted by the US and the EU, the conflict would be fully and finally solved in a decade.

Kerry for his part has resorted to threatening Israel with dire consequences should she not capitulate. In a November interview in Israel he said: “If we do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis, if we do not find a way to find peace, there will be an increasing isolation of Israel, there will be an increasing campaign of delegitimization of Israel that’s been taking place on an international basis,” In fact Governmental sources report that US Secretary of State John Kerry is behind the European boycott threats on Israeli products and companies operating in Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.

At the Saban Conference in November, he said “Force cannot defeat or defuse the demographic time bomb.”

What Demographic Bomb

While the left, the EU and the USA continue to threaten Israel with claims that Israel is losing the demographic war, the opposite is the truth.  Amb (ret) Yoram Ettinger has been studying the demographics in Israel for a decade and has often written that the demographic trend supports Israel now in the foreseeable future. According to him, Jews outnumber Arabs from the river to the sea, excluding Gaza, by a 2:1 majority and the numbers will only get better.

But the Two-State Solution carries with it a real demographic bomb. If a  Palestinian state was created, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan would demand that the descendants of the original refugees now living in their countries, numbering now over 4 million, be returned to Palestine. If the PA gives up the “right of return”, and most of these “refugees” were to return to Palestine, both Palestine and Israel would be greatly destabilized. So much so, as to require no return to Palestine either.

Glick advises:

“I brief the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate several times every year. Each time I present this plan on Capitol Hill, the response borders on euphoria. In the United States, just as in Israel, there are millions of people who understand that the ‘Two-State’ solution is a disaster. They are just waiting for someone to tell them that they can abandon it. My book gives them, and the Israeli public as well, the alternative that they are waiting for.”

Let’s hope they adopt it.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.