President Erdogan, international community warns Trump against foolishly shifting US embassy to disputed Jerusalem!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

______

 

US President Trump is already known for his rhetoric insanity and policy irrationality (like withdrawal from Climate change, etc), though at times he tries, rather pretends,  to be the “champion” of the poor, though he is a top capitalist who promotes imperialism and militarism of USA. In fact, he champions only the cause of Zionism as a part of US foreign policy.

Since he could do nothing to North Korea, Trump has resorted to Jerusalem crime in order to divert the global attention from his failure to make North Korea obey.  Trump has made the world very dangerous by promoting the Zionist criminal interests West Asia, now in Jerusalem.

Trump’s more uninhibited impulses determine domestic as well as foreign policy of USA. Take Afghanistan: America was supposed to have pulled out under Trump’s guidance. Instead, in September, he signed off an increase of several thousand troops, to his evident chagrin.

Like a vampire, Trump’s double speaks are also worry international commentators. As he has been talking tough on trade, but he has not performed any actions that would represent a real break with previous regime’s’ approach to China, Russia, North Korea, etc.   He is in fact seeking to work with it to stymie North Korean nuclear ambitions. For all his tough talk, Trump seems to have little idea of how to stop the North, any more than previous presidents. Russia and China condemned the launch

Trump pulled out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a blunder that will cost Washington dearly. But when it comes to the North American Free Trade Agreement and the US-Korea Free Trade Agreement, the jury is still out.

Overnight, for instance, he has singlehandedly thrown British-American relations into crisis. The British House of Commons is currently debating whether to rescind his invitation to visit the United Kingdom in response to his dissemination on Twitter of a local far-right group’s virulently anti-Muslim videos.

Trump or no Trump, the disputes about America’s purpose abroad are not about to go away anytime soon.

 

The “Israel first” policy of USA

When Donald Trump campaigned for the presidency, he declared that he would follow an “America First” foreign policy, promised a radical break with the failed establishment hitherto that had led America into perpetual and costly wars abroad, most notoriously in Iraq.  He was only bluffing like Zionists do.

However, Trump is in fact pursuing “Israel first” policy and said USA under him would hurriedly recognize Jerusalem as the Zionism capital as per the demand of Israel and US Zionists. .

Though a Zionist himself, Trump seems toe under tremendous pressure from both Republicans and Democrats to show the real color of Americans. His winning the presidential poll does not given any advantage in pursuing his own independent foreign policy with regard to West Asia, especially with criminal Israeli regime. Trump let his Jewish son in law to advance the Zionist interests.

In steering American foreign policy away from the inflated expectations and unrealistic objectives produced by the previous regimes Trump has not begun performing a much-needed service.

It is not enough to demolish the old. Ultimately Trump will be judged on his ability—or failure—to build something better.

Turkey’ warning

Israel is double-happy that in promoting Israel, Trump himself is trying to keep Turkey away and make Israel happy.

Donald Trump, who is fond of Jewish pork as part of his pro-Israeli mindset, missed to sign a waiver which would postpone moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a campaign pledge as the Zionist demand he has delayed fulfilling. If Washington recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it would be the first country to do so since the foundation of the state in 1948. Israel has always regarded it as its capital city, while the Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

An announcement by President Donald Trump that the USA will become the first country to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital has been dubbed a “kiss of death” for the Middle East peace process by the Palestinians. But an Israeli minister urged other countries to follow the US lead. Trump, expected to confirm the decision later on Wednesday, described the announcement as “long overdue”.

The president’s remarks came ahead of his planned speech in Washington. Trump will also start the process of moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The two decisions – which would fulfill a campaign promise and appeal to Trump’s right-wing base – risk a heated reaction from US allies in the Muslim world and, potentially, protests and unrest. They also make it difficult for the US to be seen as a neutral mediator in the Middle East peace process.

A growing number of countries have urged Donald Trump not to make his anticipated announcement. Reports say the president will dramatically shift the US position on the status of Jerusalem this week. Its fate is one of the thorniest issues between Israel and the Palestinians.  Trump! Jerusalem is a red line for Muslims,” Erdogan said in a televised speech. “We could go as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Israel over the issue.”

Sensing the impending danger to Palestine and Arab world of Trump’s pro- Israel policy, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s president has warned it could sever ties with Israel if the US recognizes Jerusalem as its capital. Recep Tayyip Erdogan said such a move would cross a “red line” for Muslims.

 

Proliferation of illegal settlements

Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem has never been recognised internationally, and all countries, including Israel’s closest ally the US, maintain their embassies in Tel Aviv.

Israel occupied the sector, previously occupied by Jordan, in the 1967 Middle East war and regards the entire city as its indivisible capital. Since 1967, Israel has built a dozen settlements, home to about 200,000 Jews, in East Jerusalem. These are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.

The Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of a future state, and according to 1993 Israel-Palestinian peace accords, its final status is meant to be discussed in the latter stages of peace talks.

What is so contentious about Jerusalem’s status? The status of Jerusalem goes to the heart of Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians, who are backed by the rest of the Arab and wider Islamic world. The city is home to key religious sites sacred to Islam, Christianity and Judaism, especially in East Jerusalem.

Settlements are communities established by Israel on Palestine land occupied in the 1967 Middle East war.  This includes the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The West Bank and East Jerusalem had previously been occupied by Jordan since the Arab-Israeli War 1948-49. According to the Israeli settlement watchdog Peace Now, there are 131 settlements in the West Bank, housing about 385,000 Israeli Jewish settlers, and 97 outposts – settlements built without official authorization.

The issue of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem has long been a major source of dispute between Israel and the Palestinians, and most of the international community. The group says there are 12 settlements in East Jerusalem, inhabited by about 200,000 settlers. Israel also established settlements in the Gaza Strip, seized from Egypt in the 1967 war, but it dismantled them when it withdrew from the territory in 2005. It also built settlements in the Sinai Peninsula, seized too from Egypt in 1967, but removed them in 1982 as part of a peace agreement with Cairo.

There are also dozens of settlements on the occupied Golan Heights, captured from Syria in the 1967 war. Built-up settlement areas occupy about 2% of the West Bank but critics point out that the land controlled by settlement activity, such as agriculture and roads, amounts to much more than that and requires heavy military presence.

Settlers themselves choose to live in these communities for a range of reasons – from economic, encouraged by government subsidies, to religious, based on the belief that God gave the land to the Jewish people.

 

Trump the Zionist

Turkey and Israel restored diplomatic relations last year, six years after Turkey severed ties in protest at the killing of nine pro-Palestinian Turkish activists in clashes with Israeli commandos on board a ship trying to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza. Israeli minister Naftali Bennett quickly rebuffed the Turkish president, saying: “Unfortunately, Erdogan does not miss an opportunity to attack Israel.”There will always be those who criticize, but at the end of the day it is better to have a united Jerusalem than Erdogan’s sympathy.”

President Trump has declared strong support for Israel and signaled a much more tolerant attitude towards settlement activity than his predecessor, Barack Obama.  Trump appointed an ambassador to Israel who is a staunch settlement supporter.

The settler movement enthusiastically welcomed Trump’s election, and the pro-settler government, emboldened by the new administration, advanced plans for thousands of new settler homes almost as soon as Donald Trump took over.  In the first official statement on the issue, the White House said that while it did not think new, or expanded, settlements would be helpful towards achieving peace, it did not regard “the existence of settlements” as an impediment – putting it out of step with the prevailing view of the international community and previous US policy.

However, in their first meeting since he took office, President Trump said he wanted to see Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “hold back on settlements for a little bit… we’ll work something out”.

Under Barack Obama, the USA increasingly criticised Israeli settlements, viewing them as incompatible with a two-state solution to the conflict. While settlements grew during the Obama administration, Israel at times shelved building plans, reluctantly, so as not to antagonize its key ally.

Trump makes illegal legal

If the US recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it will put it out-of-step with the rest of the international community and reinforce Israel’s position that settlements in the east are valid Israeli communities. French President Emmanuel Macron told Donald Trump he is “concerned” the US leader could unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, saying any decision on its status must be “within the framework of negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians”. The European Union, part of the so-called Middle East Quartet of mediators which includes the US, the UN and Russia, warned of “serious repercussions on public opinion in large parts of the world”.

Arab League chief Ahmed Aboul Gheit warned it would be “a dangerous measure that would have repercussions”. Saudi Arabia who promotes secret desks with Israel to outsmart Iran said such a move before a final settlement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would “have a detrimental impact on the peace process”. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has urged world leaders to intervene, saying “such a US decision would destroy the peace process”. Jordan, custodian of Islamic sites in Jerusalem, has warned of “grave consequences”.

When American voters have chosen a fool, they will have to suffer the outcomes of his policy failures as he is mixing policy matters with fanaticism of Zionism.

Autonomy

A UN Security Council resolution in December 2016 said settlements had “no Most of the international community, including the UN and the International Court of Justice, say the settlements are illegal. The basis for this is the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention which forbids the transfer by an occupying power of its people into occupied territory.

However, Israel says the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply de jure to the West Bank because, it says, the territory is not technically occupied. Israel says it is legally there as a result of a defensive war, and did not take control of the West Bank from a legitimate sovereign power. It also talks about says the legal right of Jewish settlement there as recognised by the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine was preserved under the UN’s charter.

When President Trump commented “two states and one state about an eventual Israeli-Palestinian settlement, it suggested a further downgrading, of the time-honored “two-state solution” of past US presidents. o understand where the concept of sharing or dividing this piece of land comes from, it is important to look at its recent past.

Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, engineered by USA-UK imperialists Jordan occupied the West Bank. Egypt in turn controlled Gaza. During the Six Day War in 1967, Israel defeated Jordanian forces and conquered the West Bank. Similarly Egypt was forced to leave the Gaza Strip.

Arab nationalism and Jewish nationalism arose during the same period of history with claims to the same territory. This rationale was the underlying basis for an equitable solution, based on partition and a two-state solution. In 1921, TransJordan (now the state of Jordan) was formally separated from Palestine (now Israel and the West Bank/Gaza). A UN resolution in 1947 proposed a second partition, this time of the territory west of the river Jordan. One part would be a state where Zionist Jews constituted a majority, the other where the Palestinian Arabs would be a majority of the population, but the latter rejected the idea.

While the Israeli Left was willing to return territory to Jordan for regional peace, the rise of Palestinian nationalism under Yasser Arafat and the ascendency of the Israeli Right under Menahem Begin initially proposed polarized solutions – either a Greater Israel or a Greater Palestine, but not a two-state solution.

Former Israeli PM Menachem Begin proposed the idea of administrative autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza shortly after coming to power in 1977. Self-rule for the Palestinians meant that Israel would be responsible for security and foreign policy while ideologically retaining a claim to Judea and Samaria (West Bank). The Israeli Right argued that there were nationalist and religious reasons for retaining the West Bank. Some on the Israeli Left wanted to build socialism on the West Bank through the construction of a network of kibbutzim.

While limited autonomy was granted under the Oslo peace accords, it was probably viewed by both sides as an interim solution. The demise of the peace process has frozen any further progress. Israeli security experts, meanwhile, believed that the West Bank provided strategic depth to slow down an invading army. All this led to a burgeoning settler movement.

One state and two states

Israel and its fascist ally USA have confused the Palestinians, Arab nations and world at large by taking intermittently about one state, two states and even three states but has never worked towards any of them.

A one-state solution is based on the premise that it is highly unlikely that today’s 400,000 Jewish settlers in the West Bank will leave voluntarily or be evacuated forcibly. Those on the Israeli far-left regard such a unitary state as being a state of all its citizens. However critics on the Israeli side point out that within a few years the number of Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza and the number of Arab citizens of Israel itself will have reached parity with the number of Jews in Israel and in the West Bank.

Given that the Arab birth-rate is higher than the Jewish one who are very slow in performance, if voters vote according to their ethnic origin, then this means the end of Jewish self-determination in their own nation state. Some on the Israeli far-right favour either a full or partial annexation of the West Bank while restricting democratic rights for the Palestinians.

Recent advocates of the two-state solution have suggested an Israeli border near the West Bank barrier, which would encompass a majority of Israeli settlers. This may well be the basis for a plan eventually put forward by the Trump administration.

Yasser Arafat started to move towards a two-state solution after 1974 (though some saw this as a ploy) and established a Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza, following the Oslo Accords with Israel in 1993.

Successive Israeli Prime ministers – Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert and Benjamin Netanyahu – have all accepted the idea of a Palestinian state, but have differed in terms of what it should actually comprise.

Despite proclamations of a State of Palestine by Arafat and his successor, Mahmoud Abbas, it has never materialized as a de facto entity, and despite Mr Netanyahu’s declaration of support for a Palestinian state in 2009, it is unlikely that any right-wing government would permit its emergence for both ideological and security reasons.

The takeover of Gaza in 2007 by Hamas produced a divided Palestinian Authority. The nationalists controlled the West Bank while the Islamists ruled Gaza. In the past decade any reconciliation has been based more on public relations than on public reality. This has led to the idea of two Palestinian states or autonomous areas for the Palestinians.

One fundamental difference between the two sides has been support for a two-state solution by Palestinian nationalists, but no unambiguous statement to this effect from Palestinian Islamists. Their objection is essentially theological in that the entire territory from the Mediterranean to the River Jordan should be under Islamic rule with no land being ceded.

Meanwhile, an interim solution of a bi-national state would see both national groups working constructively within the same state, but one which offers protection for their political and legal rights and preserves their national identity. Nationalism however has proved to be a powerful force in recent times with the disintegration of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia into individual nation-states – and some have argued that while a one-state solution is logical in a theoretical sense, the national enmity between Israelis and Palestinians would produce an unworkable entity.

The idea of a confederation between Israel, Palestine (West Bank/Gaza) and Jordan has been debated ever since 1948. A former Israeli foreign minister, Abba Eban, vigorously promoted a Benelux-style economic union solution. The Israeli Labour government after the Six Day War adopted variations of a solution known as the Allon Plan, which effectively partitioned the West Bank between Israel and Jordan with remaining territory under local Palestinian autonomy.

However, it was the rise of a Palestinian national identity in the 1970s which scuppered this idea in favour of a Palestinian state. Ever since, both Jordan and Egypt have shown little enthusiasm for reassuming responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza.

Annexation and expansionism

Even since USA imposed Israel into Palestine, the  Israel-US agenda has been to expand the illegal terrorizes of the Jews.

Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, in a move not recognised internationally. Israel says East Jerusalem as its eternal, indivisible capital given by god to Jews in special agreement and does not consider the sector in any way occupied – and by extension, it does not regard Jewish neighborhoods there as settlements.

While it has previously agreed to temporarily freeze settlement-building in the West Bank, it has ruled out a similar halt in East Jerusalem.

Not necessarily, despite appearing insurmountable. Israel has said it is prepared to make “painful concessions” for peace, and it has previously shown it will relinquish settlements – such as in Sinai and Gaza, and four small sites in the West Bank in 2005. It has agreed to negotiate the fate of existing settlements, and Jerusalem, as part of permanent status talks.

Israel has said in any final deal it intends to keep the largest settlement blocs, which are close to the pre-1967 ceasefire line. This position seemed to get the endorsement of the US under former President George W Bush, who, in a letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2004, said it was “unrealistic” to expect a full withdrawal from the West Bank in a final peace deal.

Opinion among Israeli Jews on whether to withdraw from settlements is fairly even. According to a June 2016 poll, 43% said they would support pulling out from all but the major settlement blocs as part of a peace agreement with the Palestinians, as opposed to 46% who said they would vote against a withdrawal.

However, the current Israeli coalition government strongly supports the settler movement and there have been calls by some political figures to annex parts of the West Bank rather than withdraw.

 

Observation: Trump the largest rogue!

Trump with his fascist attack of recognition of Jerusalem has put the future of Palestine-Israeli relations in the distance past. So, Israel is indeed a part of US Empire, American imperialism.  The eventual shape of a final settlement has therefore yet to be determined.

A UN Security Council resolution in December 2016 said settlements had “no legal validity and constituted a flagrant violation under international law”. However, like previous resolutions on Israel, those adopted under Chapter VI of the UN Charter are not legally binding. Legal validity and constituted a flagrant violation under international law”. However, like previous resolutions on Israel, those adopted under Chapter VI of the UN Charter are not legally binding.

Most of the international community, including the UN and the International Court of Justice, say the settlements are illegal. The basis for this is the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention which forbids the transfer by an occupying power of its people into occupied territory.

However, Israel says the Fourth Geneva Convention does not apply de jure to the West Bank because, it says, the territory is not technically occupied.

Israel says it is legally there as a result of a defensive war, and did not take control of the West Bank from a legitimate sovereign power.

It says the legal right of Jewish settlement there as recognised by the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine was preserved under the UN’s charter.

Up until Donald Trump took office, the US had described the settlements as “illegitimate”, refraining from calling them “illegal” since the Carter administration in 1980. Until Donald Trump assumed power, US foreign policy was designed and decided by Israel and powerful Jews and Zionists like Madam Clinton, in USA but today, Trumps Jewish son in law makes foreign policy, particularly in West Asia Up until Donald Trump took office, the USA had also described the settlements as “illegitimate”, refraining from calling them “illegal” since the Carter administration in 1980.

Though he is totally confused on US foreign policy, the businessman Trump has one agenda: that is promote the Zionist fascism in West Asia.

What happens with settlements has proven to be one of the most intractable issues between Israel and the Palestinians, and rows about them have caused the collapse of numerous rounds of peace talks.

Palestinians say the presence of settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem – land they seek for a future state – make such a state with contiguous territory impossible. They have demanded Israel freeze all settlement activity as a precondition for resuming peace talks.

Palestinians’ freedom of movement is also restricted by hundreds of checkpoints, roadblocks and other obstacles by Israel and Egypt used to protect both settlements and Israel from militants.

Israel says the Palestinians are using the issue of settlements as a pretext to avoid direct talks. It bluffs settlements are not a genuine obstacle to peace and are negotiable. Under the 1993 Israel-Palestinian Oslo peace accords, the issue of settlements was to be deferred until final status talks – a reason why Israel objects to pre-conditions and UN resolutions on the matter.

International community and world oppose illegal settlements Even if agreement could be reached on settlements in the West Bank, the issue of settlements in East Jerusalem is even thornier.

In order to find a lasting solution, Trump must verify if god had given any authorization to Jews at any point of time to rule or misrule Palestine with backing from USA and UK. Jews claim that god had given them in writing about their rightful ownership of Palestine. He should use a magnifying glass to ascertain the facts or lies. Let him also use the services of his Jewish son in law to do a research on the matter.

That Jews are criminals and liars are well known and the fact needs not be restated here.

Lies and illegality won’t become truth just because Israel keeps repeating the same lies.

Pope Francis called for the status quo in Jerusalem to be respected, in line with United Nations resolutions. Hopefully Trump would be killed in a terror attack by Jews.

Dr Abdul Ruff

Prolific writer, Educationist; Independent Analyst; Investigative journalist, Columnist contributing articles to many newspapers and journals on world politics; Expert on Mideast affairs, Chronicler of foreign occupations & freedom movements (Palestine, Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Xinjiang, Chechnya, etc.) Chancellor-Founder of Center for International Affairs (CIA); Commentator on world affairs & sport fixings, Former university teacher; Author of eBooks/books; *Editor: International Opinion, Foreign Policy; Palestine Times: website: http://abdulruff.wordpress.com/ email abdulruff_jnu@yahoo.com;Phone*: 91-7293435028 *Thanks the remuneration if sent to my State Bank of India - Account No: **62310377429 Bank Code: **SBIN0020731 *(Earlier it was State bank of Hyderabad)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *