It Gives me a Headache

Trying to keep my head from exploding over the kerfuffle regarding the UN  resolution on Israel.  Rather than attempt to detail all the nuance of this (since 1948) soap opera, I will post the url of an excellent, fact driven article  

 http://www.vox.com/world/2016/12/28/14090228/9-questions-un-vote-israel-settlements-explained

Having done that, I will attempt to  explore a bit closer to the less well defined edges of this 68 year old dilemma.

          Briefly, then, Israel exists primarily due to the civilized world's shock and horror of the Holocaust and the fact that Zionists aided by wealthy European Jews and at the urging Zionism's founders,  Theodor Herzl, and later Chaim Weizmann,  had , by that time, already been settling in the British mandate region of the Levant known as Palestine.

        As European Jews stepped up immigration in the period after WWI,  Britain  tried in 1922, 1930, and 1939 to limit immigration (and acquisition of land) by Zionist Jews in response to indigenous Arab pressures. This was a bit odd, in that the Balfour Declaration of 1917 had supported the concept of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Unfortunately, the British had also made promises to the Sharif of Mecca which said in part, "Great Britain is prepared to recognize and support the independence of the Arabs in all the regions within the limits demanded by the Sharif of Mecca." These assurances were given as an inducement for Arabs to take arms against the Turks. Remember that whole Peter O'Toole/Lawrence of Arabia  thing? This had been understood by the Arabs as including  all of what is today Israel and its occupied territories of Palestinian Arab majority, but a year later the British, who apparently had their fingers crossed earlier, pulled all of Syria and a bit of northern Palestine out of the mix. meanwhile, regardless of British pressures, more Zionists came to Palestine.

       Following WWII, there came a  realization that there was a multitude of homeless or nationless  Jews as a result of the holocaust and equally horrid, but less well published, Russian atrocities at home and elsewhere. There was great sympathy almost everywhere except Arab Palestine for what now became a tidal wave of Jewish immigration to the region. There was significant monetary and moral support from most victor nations including the USA, many of whose Jewish citizens had a sort of "There, but for the grace of God, go I" revelation.

       Without too much detail, the Zionists used many tactics including the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 by the militant Zionist Irgun, led by Menachem Begin,  eventually to become Israel's sixth prime minister. It must be noted that during the time period in question, Britain was,  by UN edict, still nominally responsible for governing the region. The Irgun action was simply terrorism, as British government officials based at the hotel were targets, and 91 of them died in the blast. Soon after, Britain, a la Pontius Pilate washed their hands of this largely home grown mess, turning it over to the United Nations.

          In November,  1947, the UN  adopted a resolution recommending the adoption and implementation of the Partition Plan, which among other verbiage provided as follows:- Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem. The resolution acknowledged noted Britain's planned termination of the British Mandate for Palestine and recommended the partition of Palestine into two states, one Arab and one Jewish, with the Jerusalem-Bethlehem area being under special UN/International  protection.  The resolution included a  detailed description of the recommended boundaries for each proposed state as well as a plan for economic union between the proposed states, and for the protection of religious and minority rights. The resolution sought to address the conflicting objectives and claims to the Mandate territory of two competing nationalist movements, Zionism (Jewish nationalism) and Arab nationalism, as well as, predictably,  to resolve the plight of Jews displaced as a result of the Holocaust.  Along with all the above, it should be noted that there had been no Jewish state in the Levant for the previous 18 centuries!

        The more recent history of Arab Israeli conflict is well enough know by many that I shall elide past it. to focus on why I am concerned about the present state of affairs, which includes Alan Dershowitz and, believe it or not, Don King, (who knew?) siding with Mr. Trump in castigating SecState Kerry and President Obama  for supporting a UN resolution calling for Israel to stop expanding settlements in the territories occupied since 1967, which are nominally Palestinian, but occupied by Israel , frequently at bayonet point.

        First, and perhaps most persuasive to me, is the fact that the vast majority of the world's nations hold the Israeli occupation of the west bank and Gaza to be illegal. We, the great advocates of democracy and majority rule, are in the minority here.

        Second, the gist of the proposal is simply that increased settlement by Israel makes the chance of a peaceful settlement of any kind remote. This is complicated by Israeli P.M. Netanyahu, who ignores all counsel save his own, refusing any such advice.

       Third, the proposal does not in any sense weaken US military  or even more significantly, economic  commitment,  to Israel's defense or independence, and the  facts are staggering. The following information is from an  article from the Washington report, and is  revelatory. I have abridged for length, not meaning:

       "Since 1992, the U.S. has provided  Israel an additional $2 billion annually in loan guarantees...... between 1974 and 1989, $16.4 billion in U.S. military loans were converted to grants...... Indeed, all past U.S. loans to Israel have  been forgiven by Congress, spiking Israel's often-touted claim that they have "never defaulted" on a U.S. government loan. (ed. note: because it's impossible to default on a gift!) U.S. policy since 1984 has been that economic assistance to Israel must equal or exceed Israel's annual debt repayment to the United States. Unlike other countries, which receive aid in quarterly installments, aid to Israel since 1982 has been given in a lump sum at the beginning of the fiscal year, leaving the U.S. government to borrow from future revenues. Israel even lends some of this money back through purchase U.S. treasury bills and collects the additional interest.

        In addition, there is the more than $1.5 billion in private U.S. funds that go to Israel annually in the form of $1 billion in private tax-deductible donations and $500 million in Israeli bonds. The ability of Americans to make what amounts to tax-deductible contributions to a foreign government, made possible through a number of Jewish charities, does not exist with any other country. Nor do these figures include short- and long-term commercial loans from U.S. banks. ( as high as $1 billion annually in recent years)

       Total U.S. aid to Israel is approximately one-third of the American foreign-aid budget, even though Israel comprises just .001 percent of the world's population and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes. Israel's Gross national Product (GNP)  is higher than the combined GNP of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the West Bank and Gaza. At a per capita income of about $14,000, Israel ranks as the sixteenth wealthiest country in the world; Israelis enjoy a higher per capita income than oil-rich Saudi Arabia and are only slightly less well-off than most Western European countries.

        The resolution in question would have zero effect on any of these commitments or military assurances, moreover, President Obama signed  the largest single Israeli aid package ever granted, which makes one question Trump's true agenda, but wait...!

        Fourth in line of concerns I have is that if this were any nation except Israel, we'd almost certainly be "siding" with the other guys. The Ukraine is relevant here, as are the three Baltic States, all of whose independence from an uninvited invader we (the US) have supported. based on the current state of affairs, it almost makes one wonder if the Mohawks wanted to reclaim New York State whose side would the rest of us favor? Yes, that last is a reductio ad absurdum, yet it is relevant, and the circumstances troublingly similar. In fact, any American Indian tribe can relate! Anyone supporting the Republic of Ireland should also be able to relate.

        Fifth, and most absurd, is to examine the real reasons for US slavish support for Netanyahu's adventures in Palestine. As sick and sad as it may seem to many, religion is at the root - not Judaism, but fanatical Evangelical Christianity. A fair number of Republican legislators and their supporters have been conned by their shamans into believing that the Bible foretells that the "end times" must be precipitated by the resurgence of the nation of Israel. To them, this means the modern state. Now, I'm all in favor of these people going to meet whatever cosmic muffin they envision, but I refuse to get on the bus with them. Of course there have been more than a thousand such prophesies, including the one which makes the rest irrelevant, and that was the alleged statement by Yeshua bar Yusef  that he'd be back with the pork chops while some witnesses to his life were still living. Didn't happen. I imagine wealthy Jewish supporters of Israel laughing up their sleeves at these yokels, and saying , oh, well the checks cash anyway!" Of course there are some wealthy members of the tribe who might also consider a reputed 3600 year old oral contract  as worthless; that is, of course unless it's the deed to Palestine.