In “A U.N. Plan for Israel” (column, Dec. 14), Robert Wright says, “The United Nations created a Jewish state six decades ago, and it can create a Palestinian state now.” But it cannot and would be well advised not to try.
First, the United Nations didn’t “create” Israel — sovereignty was asserted by its provisional government at the termination of British authority in the territory — nor indeed was the 1947 General Assembly partition resolution even legally binding. It would have been, had both Jews and Arabs accepted it, but Arabs did not. Had Arab arms prevailed over the Jewish forces, there would have been no Israel, regardless of United Nations resolutions.
Second, despite the importance of that resolution in changing the conditions surrounding Israel’s emergence, the United Nations came onto a scene that Britain, the governing power, was vacating. In short, it filled a vacuum. There is no such vacuum today.
Third, this idea suffers from the flawed tendency to believe that creating a Palestinian state will produce peace. Yet no perusal of Palestinian sermons, statements or publications suggests that Palestinians accept the idea of a peaceful state alongside Israel. If a Palestinian state won’t bring peace, why create it?
A United States policy that devises carrots and sticks to induce Palestinians to relinquish their war on Israel’s continued existence provides the best basis for future, fruitful negotiations.
Haddonfield, N.J., Dec. 14, 2010
The writer is the author of “H. V. Evatt & the Establishment of Israel.”
Ymr is perfectly correct and his point regarding Kosovo is of particular importance. There are of course differences, such as Security Council resolutions, but those should not prove an impediment in the pursuit of the UN"s anti-Israel agenda. After all, if the Germans could compel Jews to pay for damages after Kristalnacht, mere legalities would pose no problems for the UN in declaring statehood for "Palestine" and in formalising its membership in that body.
by paul2 on 2010-12-24 01:08:20 GMT