“Inflammatory and Unacceptable”: The E.U. Conclusions on Middle East Peace « News « Articles

Happy Chanukah! (image courtesy rotter.net)

NUMBER OF DAYS UNTIL THE ISRAELI ELECTION: 43

ISRAELSTREET ENDORSES NAFTALI BENNETT

NUMBER OF TERRORIST MISSILES AND MORTARS SHOT AT SOUTHERN ISRAEL SINCE THE CEASEFIRE AGREED TO BY BENJAMIN NETANYAHU ON NOVEMBER 21, 2012:

UPDATE 10 am Israel time Tuesday:

Signs like this one in the Simon Ha-Tzaddik (Simon the Righteous) neighborhood of Jerusalem--one of the oldest neighborhoods in the city--were plastered all over Jerusalem yesterday. Such is the result of Israeli policy based on political correctness.

After a series of videos were aired on Israeli TV last night which showed how IDF soldiers have been put at risk by the IDF General Staff’s refusal to issue clear orders of engagement in the wake of Palestinian terrorism following the recent U.N. vote, there have been calls throughout Israel this morning for the IDF General Staff to act to protect our soldiers.

TODAY’S BLOG:

On a day which saw the European Union absurdly being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, it was perhaps only fitting that it issued its most violent pronouncement ever against Israel.

In a Europe increasingly dominated by Muslims, antipathy towards Israel has been been steadily increasing, but yesterday’s outrageous E.U. declaration shows just how much the organization has become nothing more than an Arabic public relations agency and just why no one in Israel cares what the E.U. thinks anymore.

In a document entitled “Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process” by the “3209th FOREIGN AFFAIRS Council meeting” in “Brussels, 10 December 2012”, the E.U. adopted 10 conclusions–some of which are reprinted below.

(All emphasis is mine.)

Conclusion 1:

“In light of recent developments and taking into account previous Council Conclusions, the European Union firmly believes that now is the time to take bold and concrete steps towards peace. The parties must engage in direct and substantial negotiations without pre-conditions in order to achieve a lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, ending all claims.”

–Yet almost immediately thereafter, in Conclusion 3, the E.U. begins to set pre-conditions:

Conclusion 3:

“The European Union is deeply dismayed by and strongly opposes Israeli plans to expand settlements in the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem, and in particular plans to develop the E1 area. The E1 plan, if implemented, would seriously undermine the prospects of a negotiated resolution of the conflict by jeopardizing the possibility of a contiguous and viable Palestinian state and of Jerusalem as the future capital of two states. It could also entail forced transfer of civilian population . . .”

–So what is the first “pre-condition” to negotiations? Halting all Israeli construction of new homes, neighborhoods, schools, and medical facilities in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria. Forced transfer of civilian population? The E1 area mainly consists of a barren, rocky hillside.

–With Conclusion 4, however, the E.U. violently sets its basic “pre-condition” for negotiations:

Conclusion 4:

“Recalling its parameters for the resumption of negotiations between the parties, as set out in previous Council Conclusions, including in December 2009, December 2010 and May 2011, the European Union reiterates that it will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 borders, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties. The European Union expresses its commitment to ensure that – in line with international law – all agreements between the State of Israel and the European Union must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, namely the Golan Heights, the West Bank including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip . . .“

–” . . . will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 borders, including with regard to Jerusalem”? Stop and think about that for a moment. Between 1948 and 1967, the Jordanians and so-called “Palestinians” ethnically cleansed the Old City of Jerusalem and all the city’s eastern neighborhoods of every single Jew, stole or destroyed all Jewish homes, defaced or blew apart all Jewish holy places, and prohibited any Jew from even praying at the Kotel (Western Wall).

Returning to the pre-1967 borders in Jerusalem means returning to a barbaric environment of ethnic cleansing and denial of freedom to worship. For the E.U.–winners of this year’s Peace Prize– to openly advocate this violence against Jews is appalling.

As if this is not enough, we have the further pre-condition of returning the Golan Heights–and the Gaza Strip . . . but wait . . . Israel did return every millimeter of Gaza Strip seven years ago (somebody must have forgotten to tell the European Union).

What follows are conclusions about how Israel must pay the Palestinians tax monies owed (but not that the Palestinians have to pay their massive unpaid bills for electricity, etc), and a call for the Palestinians to constructively use their new non-member observer state status at the U.N. (the PLO has already announced that it will “constructively’ use this new status to take Israel to the International Criminal Court).

Next comes Conclusion 7–the longest conclusion in the entire document (too long to repeat here) and one entirely devoted to Gaza and the recent hostilities. Suffice it to say that the essence of the conclusion can be found in these sentences:

“This tragic escalation of hostilities underlined very clearly the unsustainable nature of the status quo with regard to the situation in the Gaza Strip. Fully recognising Israel’s legitimate security needs, the European Union reiterates its call for the immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid,
commercial goods and persons to and from the Gaza Strip, the situation of which is
unsustainable as long as it remains politically and economically separated from the West Bank . . .”

The suggestion that somehow Israel is responsible for the recent hostilities because it restricts the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza is preposterous–and again, nothing more than Hamas propaganda (see the updates to yesterday’s israelstreet blog). One more “funny” item: in the entire 225 word “Conclusion 7”, the words “Hamas” and “missiles” (or “rockets“) do not appear.

When “Hamas” finally does appear, down in Conclusion 9, it is in this short sentence: “The EU finds inflammatory statements made by Hamas leaders that deny Israel’s right to exist unacceptable.”

Inflammatory? Unacceptable? But not so inflammatory and unacceptable that the EU does not want to see the PLO/Fatah and Hamas reconcile. And not so inflammatory and unacceptable that the EU does not want to tie Israel’s hands in response to the Hamas threat.

Inflammatory? Unacceptable? What better words to describe the E.U.’s “Council conclusions on the Middle East Peace Process”?

*****************************************************

A daily feature of this blog is the recognition of those of you who support Israel by donating to this website. Each month, your humble servant places each name on this wall of support into the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Today we are highlighting Margalit of Geneva, Switzerland; Benny O. of Acapulco, Mexico; and Koila T. of Fiji:

Don’t be surprised if you came cialis overnight no prescription to know specific medicines also cause ED. In medical language, sexual dysfunction among women is triggered by end of production generico viagra on line https://pdxcommercial.com/author/dhuffman/page/3/ of hormones. Ed spent time focusing on the challenges that small businesses are up against in securing credit in this cheap cialis environment, challenges that many small businesses are all too familiar with. An online Des Moines newspaper gave more detail. pdxcommercial.com generic levitra