It seems that a very powerful and highly contagious virus is sweeping across the Western world. This malady affects particularly members of the European Union, whose current leaders are highly susceptible to infection of this “pro-Palestinian state syndrome.”
The masks they are wearing are to conceal the real reason for their unrealistic policies. So let’s examine what lies beneath the mask and the origin of that virus.
Initially, the Syria civil war since 2011, the Iraq war since 2003, the war in Afghanistan during the first two decades of this century, and the conflicts in Sudan and in the 49% Muslim state of Eritrea among others caused mass migration to Europe. Primarily driven by the conflict and associated persecutions and economic hardship, combined with the perception that Europe offers better economic opportunities and a higher standard of living, this illegal migration increased exponentially.
Encouraged by the ease of entry and the assistance afforded to illegal immigrants, many South American young men also undertook the arduous journey to Europe to reach the United Kingdom, regarded as the best option because of its reputation for the generous help given to such arrivals.
Europe receives several overloaded boats, dinghies, and other such unsafe vessels daily, amounting to thousands of illegal immigrants.
The indigenous population initially welcomed them, with the expectation of their becoming an assimilated workforce in due course.
Sweden, which has an exceptionally pronounced humanitarian policy, looked to the example of the Jewish refugees they took in from Europe in 1945, who became an economic asset to the country. However, like the Europeans, the Swedes discovered that the new wave of so-called “asylum seekers” they so generously accepted had no intention to adopt the norms and behavior expected by their host countries.
For the Muslim immigrants, the fact that their religious practices are respected everywhere did not satisfy their aspiration. They worked hard to impose Muslim culture and laws into the fabric of their host society.
In the UK, for instance, many municipalities in the Midlands are headed by a Muslim immigrant mayor, and Sharia law is practiced by the Muslim community. Sharia councils exist to offer advice and recommendations on Islamic law but cannot overrule UK law. Their rulings and decisions on marriage, divorce, inheritance, and controversial equality laws are generally considered as binding and "voluntarily” observed. In some respects, they clash with UK law, and serious problems can arise, such as honor-based violence against women.
The various European countries now have a large constituency of Muslim voters, and therein lies the problem.
However much the political leaders talk about democracy and transparent government, votes are their raison d’etre, their reason to be in politics. That is why they wear the mask and publicly pronounce the unrealistically warped adherence to a Palestinian state, allowing the tail to wag the dog.
In the UK, there are already loud and influential voices expressing the possible illegality of their prime minister’s intention to declare the UK’s recognition of a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly that opens on September 9.
They refer to The Montevideo Convention of December 1933 on the rights and duties of states as a key international treaty that principally lists the four necessary qualifications to become a recognized state: a permanent population; defined territory; a government; and the capacity to enter relations with other states.
Let’s look at this a little closer.
Why Palestine does not meet the requierments of statehood
“A permanent population” refers to a group of individuals who reside within a defined territory on a permanent basis; but the population must form a cohesive community within the state’s borders.
“Defined territory” refers to an area of land under the jurisdiction of a ruler or state.
“A government” refers to a system of governance that effectively and ethically manages public affairs, ensuring the well-being of its citizens and upholding the rule of law. This includes promoting participation, transparency, and accountability, meaning that those in power are answerable for their actions and that information about government activities is accessible to the public.
“The capacity to enter relations with other states” refers to an entity’s ability to independently engage in international, legal, and political interactions, which is a key criterion for statehood under international law.
None of the above conditions fulfill the aspirations for statehood by the so-called Palestinians.
That makes a mockery of some European states’ intention to recognize a Palestinian state, rendering as absurd their reasoning and unmasks their real political ambitions.
Shame on you, President Macron of France, Prime Minister Starmer of the UK, and all the others who follow suit, for abandoning your duty to work for and maintain the moral and ethical values of your countries and of Western civilization.
As for events in Gaza, the only viable option at this stage is to give Hamas the opportunity to deliver all the hostages, alive and dead, then surrender and stay alive, or suffer a concerted attack, regardless of their casualties. It will be prudent to warn the captors to release the hostages without further harm, or we will not take prisoners. Events have shown that this scenario is the only way to end the war in Gaza.
Last word: To even consider the establishment of any sovereign state in the biblical heartland of Israel is a delusional fantasy that will never ever come to pass.
Am Yisrael chai.■