Israel’s Dispossession: US Bid to Create a Palestinian State

President George W. Bush on Tuesday November 27, 2007 hosted the US sponsored Mid East Peace Summit also known as the Annapolis Conference, named after the conference venue in Annapolis Maryland. In a declaration presented by President Bush at the opening of the Conference both the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and President Mahmoud Abbas, the chairman of the PLO executive committee and president of the Palestinian Authority agreed to a number of measures which they anticipate will help achieve a peaceful settlement in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is expected that the rigorous diplomatic process launched during the Conference will culminate with a Palestinian state by December 2008. Highlights of the Declaration are as follows:

• a) We express our determination to bring an end to bloodshed, suffering and decades of conflict between our peoples; to usher in a new era of peace, based on freedom, security, justice, dignity, respect and mutual recognition; to propagate a culture of peace and nonviolence; to confront terrorism and incitement, whether committed by Palestinians or Israelis.
• b) In furtherance of the goal of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, we agree to immediately launch good-faith bilateral in order to conclude a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including all core issues without exception, as specified in previous agreements.
• c) We agree to engage in vigorous, ongoing and continuous negotiations and shall make every effort to conclude an agreement before the end of 2008.
• d) i) For this purpose, a steering committee led jointly by the head of the delegation of each party will meet continuously as agreed.
  ii) The steering committee will develop a joint work plan and establish and oversee the work of negotiations teams to address all issues, to be headed by one lead representative from each party.
  iii) The first session of the steering committee will be held on 12 December, 2007.
• e) The parties also commit to immediately implement their respective obligations under the performance-based road map to a permanent two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict issued by the quartet on 30 April, 2003" - this is called the road map - "and agree to form an American, Palestinian and Israeli mechanism led by the United States to follow up on the implementation of the road map.1 Haaretz.Com http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/928652.html, Tuesday November 27, 2007 Kislev 17, 5768

Furthermore, President Bush in his address to the Conference which comprised 44 countries and several heads of international organizations such as the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and Middle East Envoy Tony Blair, stated “We meet to lay the foundation for the establishment of a new nation, a democratic Palestinian state that will live side by side with Israel in peace and security.”2 (Haaretz.Com, Thursday November 29, 2007 Kislev 19, 5768, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/928652.html). Additionally, Bush emphasized that “This settlement will establish Palestine as the Palestinian homeland, just as Israel is the homeland for the Jewish people. Israel must demonstrate it's support for the creation of a prosperous and successful Palestinian state by removing unauthorized outposts, ending settlement expansion, and finding other ways for the Palestinian Authority to exercise it's responsibilities without compromising Israel's security.”3 (Ibid)

The legitimacy of Israel’s ownership of the land called Palestine has been a source of conflict and diplomatic maneuverings for decades. Multiple peace accords and initiatives have been drawn up over the decades and the parties continue to base future negotiations on aspects of these failed instruments. A former Israeli Prime Minister who was also a former UN Ambassador argued in his book the following:

“Today, after five major wars, Egypt and Jordan have signed peace treaties with Israel and some of the other Arab states are prepared to recognize Israel, but only in exchange for a Palestinian state bordering Tel Aviv that would obviously jeopardize Israel’s existence. This prerequisite, which is now demanded in nearly every corner of the Arab world, shows the distance that the Arabs must still travel in permanently reconciling themselves to the presence of a Jewish state in their midst.

This is not surprising if one considers the enormous anti-Israel propaganda that has been directed at the Arab and Moslem masses, in which 150 million people have been endlessly told that a tiny country in their midst has no place under the sun, that it must be “excised like a cancerous tumor” and “thrown into the dustbin of history,” as I heard my Iranian counterpart at the UN say in 1984. When this notion is repeated again and again, day in and day out, for half a century, there is no reason why the Arab masses should alter their hostility toward Israel”.4 (Benjamin Netanyahu, A Durable Peace, Israel and its Place Among Nations, Warner Books, A Time Warner Company, Copyright 2000, p.325)

The former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also opined “The Arabs often say that the wrong done to the Palestinians is so great that they cannot come to terms with Israel’s existence until it is set aright. But this argument, too, is intended only to confound the issue. The Palestinian Arabs were offered a state by the United Nations in 1947, and they rejected it. So did the Arab states, which did not only unanimously opposed Palestinian statehood but sent their armies into Palestine to grab whatever they could—for themselves. Further, when the West Bank and Gaza, which Jordan and Egypt captured in 1948, were in Arab hands, barely a whisper about Palestinian statehood was ever heard in either place. Thus, there is no shred of a historical connection linking the demand for Palestinian statehood to the Arab refusal to recognize Israel”. 5(Ibid, p. 324)

In assessing the new US proposal for Two Sovereign States, the Bush plan offers to the Arab Community a Palestinian State by the end of 2008 on land that is Biblically recognized as Israel’s. When Bush, Olmert and Abbas addressed the Delegates gathered they spoke of the fact that this was the right time, that there may not be another opportunity, the timing is now. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Olmert told Haaretz News on Wednesday November 28 (day two of the Conference) “If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights (also for the Palestinians in the territories), then, as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished."6(Haaretz.Com, by Aluf Benn, David Landau, Shmuel Rosner and Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondents and AP Tags: Ehud Olmert, Annapolis summit Thu., November 29, 2007 Kislev 19, 5768)

In a related move the United States appointed General James Jones a former NATO Supreme Allied Commander who was based in Europe until 2006, as the U.S.'s new security coordinator in the territories. Jones will determine whether Israel and the Palestinians have met their commitments in accordance with the "road map" plan, and will draw up security plans for transferring responsibility for additional Palestinian cities from the Israel Defense Forces to Abbas'.7(Ibid)

What’s at stake for the United States? The instability in the region continues to be a matter of grave concern for America and her Western Allies. Similarly, the war in Iraq has undergone a paradigm shift given the fact the US military has moved beyond fighting the Iraqi army to military engagements against insurgents and terrorists in that country. Additionally, claims that Iran posses a nuclear threat to US interests; and a growing tolerance for radical Islamists movements have all played a critical role in influencing the Bush Administration’s determination to create a Palestinian state. Other factors include:

• • Higher oil prices which continues to give Arab states more leverage;
• • An emerging Iranian hegemony which is likely to threaten the state of Israel;
• • Dwindling Arab support for the US; and
• • Fear of Middle East terror networks achieving political clout.

Cogently, the relevance of a promise made by the Lord God Almighty to Israel still applies despite current geopolitical realties. In Deuteronomy 1:21 Moses told the children of Israel “Look, the Lord your God has set the land before you; go up and possess it, as the Lord God of your fathers has spoken to you; do not fear or be discouraged.” (Prophecy Study Bible, John C. Hagee, General Editor, New King James Version, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville). But the Lord told Israel not … meddle with Essau… because I have given Mount Seir to Essau as a possession (Deut2:5); do not harass Moab… because I have given Mount Ar to the descendants of Lot as a possession (Deut2: 9); do not harass or meddle with the people of Ammon… because I have given Ammon as a possession to the descendants of Lot. Nevertheless, to Joshua the Lord instructs him saying, Moses My servant is dead. Now therefore, arise, go over this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving them---to the children of Israel (Joshua 1:2).

The Scriptures confirm that God did give land to the children of Israel. Land of their own… specifically located over the Jordan as far as the River Euphrates. Therefore, the peoples of this region have no right to lay claims to any portion of land belonging to the Israelis. Likewise, there is no account of Biblical instructions to given to any nation or government to participate in the “negotiated distribution or re-distribution” of land belonging to Israel, including Jerusalem. Consequently, the current US initiative can be described as one of “Dispossession” of the Israelis. Israel’s sole right to this specific Real Estate is well documented.

Cherub A. Nicholls
November 30, 2007