The Gingrich Who Stole Palestine

VN:F [1.9.12_1141]
Please rate this article (No need to sign up)
Rating: 7.0/7 (3 votes cast)

Gingrich Stole
“We have invented the Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs…..” Newt Gingrich on The Jewish Channel (Cable TV), December 12, 2011

“The Palestinian people does not exist,…only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of the Palestinian people.” Zahir Muhsein, Member of the PLO Executive Committee, 1977

The former House Speaker apparently agrees with Mr. Muhsein that Arabs living in the former Palestine Mandate territory do not constitute a separate people, but are merely a segment of the Arab people in one geographical area. He also agrees that the term “Palestinians” was invented to create an Arab state in place of the Jewish State of Israel.

The basic historical facts are not in dispute. The first time “Palestini” occurs in world literature is in the work of the Greek historian Herodotus, who wrote in the 5th century BCE. The land which is now Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan and Gaza was named “Syria Palestina” by Roman Emperor Hadrian about 165 CE after he crushed the Bar Kochba Revolt in Judaea. The Arab newspaper Filasteen referred to its readers as “Palestinians” around 1911, and the first Syrian-Palestinian Congress met in 1921. Residents of the Palestine Mandate (both Jewish and Arab) were referred to as Palestinians in Article 7 of the League of Nations Mandate. (Wikipedia)

The British severed the eastern part of Palestine in 1922 to form the Kingdom of Transjordan, now Jordan. In November 1947, the UN voted to partition western Palestine into a Jewish state (Israel) and an Arab state. During the ensuing war the West Bank of the Jordan River was seized by Jordan, and Gaza by Egypt, so Palestine disappeared from the maps of the world altogether. But Arabs continued to refer to all the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean as Palestine, and several terrorist organizations were formed to “liberate Palestine” from the Zionists (Jews). In the course of the 1967 Six Day War Israel conquered both Gaza and the West Bank, bringing nearly 4 million Arabs under Israeli rule. Israel offered to withdraw from these territories in exchange for peace and recognition, but until 1977 no Arab nation agreed. The peace treaty with Egypt made that year left the Palestine question open to subsequent negotiation.

The Arab League had 19 years (1948 to 1967) to establish a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank, but did not do so. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), formed by Yassir Arafat in 1964, explicitly denied any designs on the lands held by Egypt and Jordan; the goal was to replace Israel with an Arab state. In 1993 Arafat and PLO agreed to recognize Israel and accept Gaza and the West Bank as the “new Palestine,” but he made it clear to his fellow Arab leaders (but not to Israel or the US) that this was merely a first step toward the ultimate goal of one Arab state in the entire land. Israel assisted in setting up the Palestine Authority (PA) in Gaza and the West Bank, and offered in 2000 to establish a State of Palestine there. Arafat rejected this offer, and his successor Mahmoud Abbas rejected a similar offer in 2008. Meanwhile Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza, which was quickly taken over by the fanatical Islamist Hamas regime, which rejects any peace with Israel.

By building a fence around Gaza and the West Bank, Israel has essentially severed both lands from “Israel proper,” even though several hundred thousand Jews live in the West Bank among over two million Arabs, who call themselves “Palestinians” (even if Gingrich won’t). The US Government, under both Presidents George W Bush and Barack Obama, have sought to establish an Arab state in the two territories, much as the UN proposed back in 1947. Israel also supports the concept, but with several security caveats. Yet Israel and the PA are very far apart on issues such the future of Jerusalem, the West Bank settlements and possible rights of Palestinian Arabs to settle in Israel.

I contend that the PA dares not accept any deal to which Israel could possibly agree, so no State of Palestine will be established in the foreseeable future. Obama foolishly promised the Palestinians a state of their own in 2009, and now he cannot deliver one. Meanwhile, his carping crticism of Israel over expanding the settlements has alienated Jewish voters, who supported him overwhelmingly in 2008.

Although Newt Gingrich has repudiated the position of Republican President George W Bush, his rejection of Palestinian nationhood is politcally smart. This stance will appeal to both Jews and evangelical Christians, and the latter are important in Republican primaries and caucuses, especially in the early states of Iowa and South Carolina. If Gingrich is nominated, he will pull crucial Jewish votes away from Obama in New York and Florida.

In the unlikely event that Newt Gingrich becomes President,. at some point he will have to explain to the Palestinians and their allies in the Arab world why he does not believe they exist.

Gerald S Glazer
_____________________________________________________
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this guest post do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Publictrough.com, its staff, its advertisers, and/or its partners, agents/assigns. Any guest post content appearing on Publictrough.com has not been checked for factual accuracy, and any photos/videos uploaded have not been verified to be copyright-free. It is the user’s/guest poster’s responsibility to post text and/or photos that belong to that user/guest poster and do not violate any copyright or intellectual property laws.

VN:F [1.9.12_1141]
Please rate this article (No need to sign up)
Rating: 7.0/7 (3 votes cast)

Syria: The New Libya?

VN:F [1.9.12_1141]
Please rate this article (No need to sign up)
Rating: 0.0/7 (0 votes cast)

syriamarching
Reports of Syrian soldiers defecting to the armed resistance to the regime of President Bashar Al-Assad indicate that Syria may be following the path of Libya.

The parallels between the two Arab nations are striking. Col. Muamar Gadhafi (aka Khadafy aka Qaddafi) ) seized control of Libya in a military coup d’etat in 1969. The next year Gen. Hafez Al-Assad overthrew President Nureddin Al-Atassi in Syria. Gadhafi intervened in nearby Chad, Assad intervened in Lebanon. Both killed their own people to keep power. At the time of the Libyan Revolution, Gadhafi was grooming his sons to succeed him as dictator. Hafez Al-Assad originally groomed his older son Basil to succeed him, but the young man was killed in an auto accident in 1998. (1) He then prepared his younger son Bashar for his job by giving him increasing responsbilities in the government. Bashar become president when Hafez died in 2000. The same year he married a British woman of Syrian birth.

Bashar Al-Assad has an unusual background for an Arab dictator. Instead of a career in the military or diplomatic service, he chose to become a doctor, graduating Damascus University Medical School in 1988. He then studied ophtalmalogy at the Westerm Eye Hospital in London. Bashar returned to Syria in 1994 and entered the military academy. With his father’s blessing, Bashar ascended the ranks quickly, and in 1998 was placed in charge of Syria’s activities in Lebanon.

As president, Bashar has made only minor reforms in his father’s policies of authoritarian rule at home and hostility toward Israel and the United States. He has maintained an alliance with Iran, and supplies arms to Hezbollah, which probably killed the Prime Minister of Lebanon in 2005. On the other hand, Bashar is strongly suspicious of the Muslim Brotherhood, which Hafez Al-Assad crushed in Syria. In 2008 he authorized indirect talks with Israel (through Turkey), which came to nothing.

Bashar’s armed forces have have killed over 3,500 people trying to stop protests against his regime, yet the demonstrations continue. The King of Jordan, the Prime Minister of Turkey and the Arab League have all turned against him. (2) Texas Gov. Rick Perry has called for a “no-fly zone” over Syria. But the real threat is that his military is starting to crack. The Assad family and all important military and security officials belong to the minority Alawite sect, while most of the soldiers are Sunni Muslim. In the Middle East religious differences are crucial, so a major split in the Syrian Army (like the one in Libya) is a real possibility. If that happens, foreign help for the rebels could turn the tide against Bashar Al-Assad and his Alawite Baath regime.

But Bashar is no Muamar. Gadhafi, who was probably mentally ill, resolved to fight for power to the death, and that is what he got. But I do not believe that Bashar Al-Assad will gamble his life for his job. The fact that he chose a career in medicine and lived in England for several years tells me that this man has a far more pragmatic and cosmopolitan view of life than Gadhafi ever had. The Assads are not crazy, they are calculating. If Bashar Al-Assad ever concludes that his cause is lost, he will pack his bags and move back to London, where he could perhaps re-instate his medical license. (A possible International Criminal Court indictment for human rights violations might be an obstacle, however.)

Of course we cannot tell what kind of regime might follow the Assads, but I am willing to bet that it will be better, rather than even worse.

Gerald S Glazer

————————————————————————————-

(1) Wikipedia

(2) “Syria threatened with sanctions” by Nada Bakri, NY Times, Nov. 25, 2011.

————————————————————————————-
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this guest post do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Publictrough.com, its staff, its advertisers, and/or its partners, agents/assigns. Any guest post content appearing on Publictrough.com has not been checked for factual accuracy, and any photos/videos uploaded have not been verified to be copyright-free. It is the user’s/guest poster’s responsibility to post text and/or photos that belong to that user/guest poster and do not violate any copyright or intellectual property laws.

VN:F [1.9.12_1141]
Please rate this article (No need to sign up)
Rating: 0.0/7 (0 votes cast)