Two links on the right that are worth looking at are:
2nd thoughts– a website from Maurice Ostroff – that provides excellent background material on the Arab-Israeli conflict
and CoHaV – Coalition of Hasbara Volunteers – timely points regarding current events. Incidently, I enjoy seeing the word “Hasbara” bandied around, primarily because it is a Hebrew word from the language of the Jewish people in the land of Israel. It’s a reminder that the Jewish nation has its own language – from thousands of years ago to its modern transformation particularly through the efforts of Eliezer ben Yehuda.
Explanation and Interpretation are its principal meanings – recognising that it is used for advocacy and is used by the “anti” people in a derogatory way. A couple of discussions of the word Hasbara are here (I am pleased that they reference the brilliant Shmuel Katz book “Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine” and here
Below is CoHaV’s comment regarding the Palestine UN move.
Palestinian Bid for Statehood in the UN
Agreements should be respected.
They certainly should be respected in the United Nations.
In September the Palestinian Authority (PA) is expected to violate its agreements with Israel and all the international frameworks for Mideast peace by seeking premature recognition of a Palestinian state in the UN.
Israel remains dedicated to direct negotiations as the only method of resolving the conflict.
Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority has long abandoned peace negotiations.
Instead, the Palestinian leadership has embarked on the path of unilateral action, preferring to attempt to force their will on Israel through international pressure.
It has long been the dream of the Palestinians to bypass a negotiated settlement, bypass the need for necessary compromises through the application of international coercion on Israel.
A unilateral declaration
a) harms true peace, challenging the most basic principles of Mideast peacemaking.
b) undermines all internationally accepted frameworks for peace, including UN Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, 1850 and the Roadmap for peace. All call for a mutually-negotiated and agreed resolution of the conflict. All reject unilateral actions.
c) violates existing bilateral Palestinian-Israeli peace agreements.
d) will do nothing to solve the conflict.
e) will intensify rather than end the conflict.
f) will eliminate incentives for the Palestinians to negotiate and compromise.
g) will not settle any of the key permanent status issues, such as borders, Jerusalem and refugees.
h) will ignore Israel’s legitimate concerns, especially regarding security issues.
i) will allow the Palestinians to continue to avoid taking the important step of mutual recognition, which includes Israel’s right to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
Recognition of Palestinian statehood at this time is an untenable move because
a) the Palestinian Authority currently fails to meet the established legal tests for statehood.
b) the PA does not pass the test of effective government.
c) the PA does not rule the territory in question. According to existing agreements, the PA exercises varying degrees of control only over relatively small areas of the West Bank.
d) the PA does not have effective control over the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, despite the recent attempts at reconciliation among Palestinian factions.
Recognition at this time would constitute recognition of a terrorist entity.
Premature recognition of a Palestinian state would render the negotiating process and the ideals of compromise and dialogue meaningless.
All who desire true peace in this region should reject Palestinian efforts to act unilaterally and forsake the negotiating process.
Only through direct negotiations can a lasting peace agreement be reached.