The Palestine entity - 1960

From FRUS:

Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XVII, Near East, 1961–1962

34. Circular Telegram From the Department of State to Certain Near Eastern and North African Posts

Washington, April 15, 1961

...At Arab League meeting at Shtaura* last August, decision was made to establish Palestine “personality” or “entity” with implication of Algerian-type movement designed ultimately to eliminate Israel. While longer range plans include military organization and Palestine government, Arabs apparently plan take steps gradually. At last fall’s UNGA meeting, Arab UN delegates promoted concept of UN custodian for Arab properties left in Israel apparently as suitable first post-Shtaura gambit. They obviously encouraged by new composition of UN, believing that through mutual back-scratching tactics they can parlay Afro-Asian and Soviet bloc votes into series of votes progressively hostile to Israel. Upset by Nkrumah’s opening speech which urged Near East states to be “realistic” and implied Arabs should agree to Arab-Israel settlement, all Arab delegates engaged in lengthy harangues rehashing whole Palestine problem to “educate” new delegations.

* Chtaura, in Lebanon in last week of August when Arab foreign ministers conferred from 22 to 29 August.

_________________

UPDATE

From this article:

On January 19, 1960, King Hussein publicly expressed this urgency. In an interview with the Associated Press, he explained, “Since 1948, Arab leaders have approached the Palestine problem in an irresponsible manner. They have not looked into the future. They have no plan or approach. They have used the Palestinian people for selfish political purposes. This is ridiculous and, I could say, criminal.” Hussein suggested that the Arab League reactivate the Palestine Conciliation Commission and base negotiations with Israel upon U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194, which suggested that refugees “wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours” should be permitted to do so. The king charged Foreign Minister Nasser Musa with formulating a plan to present to a February 1960 Arab League session. King Hussein hoped that the Arab League would endorse principles of a settlement that could then serve as a basis for negotiations with Israel.

In a speech before parliament, Prime Minister Haza’ al-Majali[9] outlined general principles for a more productive Arab approach to the Palestinian problem. He called for an end to exploitation of the “emotions of the Arabs in general and the Palestinian refugees in particular"; a “realistic assessment of the situation and plans"; collective Arab responsibility; recognition of the existing legal status of Jordan; and the unity of the East and West Bank.

^

Kurdled Kerry (and Kerplunked)

Remember this?

Kerry pushes Israel to consider Arab League peace plan
July 17, 2013

After meeting with Arab League officials and Abbas in Amman, US Secretary of State urges Israel to "look hard" at Arab peace initiative; Israeli officials say plan is fine as basis of discussion, not a dictate.

Well, now we have this:

Arab League declares 'total rejection' of Jewish state recognition March 26, 2014

The Arab League announced on Wednesday its full backing of a Palestinian refusal to meet Israel's demand to be recognized as a Jewish state, a condition Jerusalem says it requires for peace.  "We express our total rejection of the call to consider Israel as a Jewish state," read a statement from the final day of the Arab summit in Kuwait.

And, in case you missed it:

Abbas defiant in speech of '3 noes' January 14, 2014

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas says the Palestinians will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state, will not agree to any deal that does not make east Jerusalem the future Palestinian capital and will not give up the right of return.

_______________

UPDATE

Just saw this:

Third-Party Conflict Management and the Willingness to Make Concessions

Abstract

Third-party conflict management, particularly legal dispute resolution (arbitration and adjudication) and mediation, can help improve the willingness of disputants to make asymmetric concessions by ameliorating commitment problems and providing political cover. In both regards, and especially pertaining to commitment problems, mediation has substantial limitations when compared to legal dispute resolution. We develop these arguments and test the observable implications on the Issue Correlates of War data. To get traction on the mechanisms at work, we distinguish between challenger concessions and defender concessions, positing that challenger concessions face the primary hurdle of political cover while defender concessions face the primary hurdle of commitment problems. We find that legal dispute resolution strongly increases the propensity for concessions by both challengers and targets, even major asymmetric concessions. Mediation, on the other hand, only helps increase minor challenger concessions. Also consistent with expectations, mediation best enables asymmetric challenger concessions in the highly salient cases that need the most political cover, and legal dispute resolution best enables asymmetric concessions when there has been a history of failed conflict management attempts that perpetuate mistrust.

^

Ask Yourself...and Others

The Arab League mission to Syria has been withdrawn.

In that connection, ask yourselves:

How many Muslim Aid Missions

have you seen

sent around the world

?

Nu, how many?

^

Behind the Headline

Whoops, there gopes another "peace proposal", the Arab League one.

New York Times reports:-

Arab leaders will threaten to rescind their offer of full relations with Israel in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from occupied lands unless Israel gives a positive response to their initiative, indicating the Arab states’ growing disillusionment with the prospects of a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

At an Arab League meeting next month in Syria, the leaders are planning to reiterate support for their initiative, first issued in 2002. The initiative promised Israel normalization with the league’s 22 members in return for the creation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as the capital, and a resolution of the issue of Palestinian refugees.

and the Chinese news service has it this way:-

Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa said here Thursday that all negotiations at the Annapolis conference to restart the Mideast peace process had failed to bear fruit. Moussa, who was attending a two-day meeting of foreign ministers of South American and Arab countries in the Argentine capital, warned that the Mideast peace deal brokered at the U.S.-sponsored Annapolis conference last year has not achieved any progress due to Israel's adherence to its original policies.

Israel refused to negotiate on the Jerusalem issue or acknowledge the Palestinians' right to establish a state, said Moussa, adding that the Israeli government had adopted wrong policies against the Palestinians and refused to correct them, creating a major obstacle to any peace initiatives.

The text (here) is really cute, in an Arab way.

First point is that it "Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well". In other words, non-peace is all our fault. We've never made peace overtures, not even in our declaration of statehood?

Here, May 14, 1948:-

We appeal - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.

We extend our hand to all neighbouring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighbourliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.

Can any Arab state, league, organization or terror group match that magnamity?


The Arab League's plan's main operative section reads:-

I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.

III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Those are unacceptable. They deny the history of the conflict, ignore Arab agression, rewards Arab terror, inadequately provides for Israel's future security and existence and Jewish character.

This is enough for me but for those wanting more, Mitch Bard does a nice summary of this "peace plan" and its faultiness.