To paraphrase the famous line from The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly – When you have to talk, talk; don’t shoot your mouth off. That’s what came to mind after a recent proclamation by British Foreign Minister David Lammy.
Lammy last month posted a short but not sweet statement on X/Twitter condemning Israeli moves to further construction plans for the area between Jerusalem and the nearby city of Ma’aleh Adumim, known as E1.
“The UK condemns the decision by Israel’s Higher Planning Committee today to approve the E1 settlement plan. If implemented, it would divide a Palestinian state in two, mark a flagrant breach of international law, and critically undermine the two-state solution. The Israeli government must reverse this decision.”
The chutzpah and flawed logic are astonishing. This is not so much about dividing a future Palestinian state in two as it is about double standards regarding the one existing Jewish state.
Lammy, of course, is not alone. His message echoed that of politicians and others around the global village, calling for the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state and a return to the tired “two-state solution” mantra. In a time that calls for thinking out of the box, there’s a paucity of original thinkers – particularly those who understand the situation on the ground.
Although foreign governments aren’t meant to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries, it’s not a rare occurrence. But only when it comes to Israel do foreign politicians and bodies routinely decide what can be built where.
For that matter, Israel alone is not allowed to determine its own capital city. Imagine declaring that London or Paris were not the capitals of Britain and France despite what the British and French might think. Then tell them exactly where they may and may not develop those cities. Or let’s go the whole way and tell them to grant independence to certain neighborhoods where there’s a large Muslim population – home rule for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, for example.
Lammy’s words of warning – “If implemented, it would divide a Palestinian state in two” – reflect double-think at its most twisted. It takes a peculiar logic to complain about cutting a so-far non-existent Palestinian state in two, while ignoring that if not implemented, there’s a threat that Jerusalem – the Israeli capital – will be isolated from its satellite towns. The only reason to object to Israelis living there is if you want to build Palestinian communities there instead.
Ironically, those countries and organizations like the EU and UN complaining that the E1 construction would cut a possible Palestinian state in half nonetheless favor doing something far more drastic: creating a Palestinian state in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and Gaza. This would divide the future Palestinian state with Israel in the middle, between the devil and the deep blue Mediterranean Sea.
Why is territorial contiguity not an issue when it involves creating a Palestinian state on two Israeli borders, thus doubly endangering Israel’s security? Connecting the two Palestinian regions would cut Israel in half; keeping them separate is not a two-state solution but a three-state complication. (Make that four states if you count Jordan, which has a Palestinian majority).
United Nations General Assembly
There is A flurry of diplomatic activity leading up to this month’s United Nations General Assembly in New York. The obsessive focus on this part of the Middle East gives the impression that if only the Israel-Palestinian problem could be solved, there would be world peace.
Forget the famines in Sudan and Yemen; the Islamist-jihadist wars on Christians in Africa; China’s threat to democratic Taiwan; and Russia’s invasion and continued attacks on Ukraine, to list but a few conflicts and disasters. Ignore the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran is still intent on getting nuclear weapons despite the setback it suffered after Israel’s successful 12-day war and has not undergone a change of heart and ideology.
There was some good news out of the UN this week, however. The decision not to renew the mandate of UNIFIL after December 2026 is a welcome one. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, established in 1978, has clearly failed at keeping peace along the border with Israel. On the contrary: The Hezbollah terrorist organization was able to amass rockets and weapons, dig terror tunnels, and carry out occasional attacks and kidnappings, literally under the noses and feet of the UN forces.
After Israel knocked out Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and most of Hezbollah’s leading cadre last year, the terrorist organization has been weakened to a point that the Lebanese government – the official regime – has been able to begin disarming the terrorists. More than Israel, this benefits the Lebanese people who might finally manage to rein in the foreign-sponsored terrorist body that has destroyed their country.
But don’t expect anyone to thank Israel. UN hypocrisy is working overtime. In February, following the abduction of eight UN workers in Yemen and the death of a UN employee in a Houthi prison, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres declared the suspension of aid to the area until the workers were released. That’s the same Guterres who insists that Israel permit almost unlimited aid to Gaza, even though the Hamas regime is still holding Israelis (and other foreign nationals) hostage.
Last week, Guterres was at it again. He declared: “It is vital to reach immediately a ceasefire in Gaza and the unconditional release of all hostages, and to avoid the massive death and destruction that a military operation against Gaza would inevitably cause.” But he couldn’t help adding a dose of distorted moral equivalence: “Simultaneously, the decision by the Israeli authorities to expand illegal settlement construction, which would divide the West Bank, must be reversed. All settlement construction is a violation of international law.”
Actually, while “settlement construction” might be a matter of dispute, it is not automatically “a violation of international law” – unless, of course, it’s by Israel.
This week, when 11 staff members were kidnapped by Houthis who took over the premises of the World Food Programme and UN property in Yemen’s capital, Guterres issued an official statement saying: “The Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah, have been battling Yemeni Government forces, backed by a Saudi-led coalition, for control of the country for over a decade.”
Then he added: “Since October 2023, they also have been targeting Israel as well as commercial ships in the Red Sea, in solidarity with the Palestinian cause in Gaza.”
So now you have the official UN reason for the indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli civilians and piracy of international shipping – “solidarity with the Palestinian cause in Gaza.” Except, that – as Guterres himself notes – the Houthi terrorist assault on the Yemenite regime predates October 2023 by at least 10 years. As the Saudi-led coalition obviously realizes, the Houthis are part of the Iranian-sponsored global jihad, just like Hezbollah and Hamas.
And what, pray tell, happened in October 2023? October 7 happened. The Iranian-backed, Hamas-led invasion of southern Israel where 1,200 were slaughtered and 250 abducted (of whom 48 remain in terrorists’ hands, 20 of them presumed to be alive.)
The UN Special Envoy for Yemen, Hans Grundberg, said on Sunday that he was “following with great concern” recent developments in the country, and “reiterated that Yemen cannot afford to become a battleground for a broader geopolitical conflict...”
As a Jerusalem Post editorial cynically put it: “It would be amiss to ask Mr. Grundberg where he may have been these past few years, if not in Yemen, as he clearly seems to be under the impression that Yemen is not part of the geopolitical battleground of the Middle East.”
When Israel hit the Iran-backed Houthi leadership in Yemen last week, killing the “prime minister” and other senior ministers and officials of the terrorist organization, the IDF once again risked its pilots to eliminate an international threat. It seems that the world is happy to let Israel do its dirty work – and then reward the Palestinians for attacking the Jewish state.
A long list of countries have announced they will use the UN General Assembly to declare a Palestinian state. And who is going to ensure that it will not be ruled by a terrorist regime? The UN? What a bad joke.
It is easy for politicians like Lammy to shoot off a statement – when his country is not in the direct line of fire.