A Shamefully Weak Link in the Defense of Civilization

Oct. 20 2014

The British parliament’s vote last week to recognize a nonexistent Palestinian state will not have any real effect on foreign policy. But the fictional state endorsed by Parliament is one that supports terrorism, allows no religious tolerance, and is dedicated to Israel’s destruction—not to mention one that stands on the brink of a Hamas takeover. All in all, therefore, the vote reveals something deeply wrong with the UK, writes Melanie Phillips:

What is so dismaying, indeed sickening, is what this vote says about Britain. Parliament has endorsed an agenda which should be anathema to all decent people. MPs have endorsed a racist Palestine state ethnically cleansed of Jews, encouraged Palestinian rejectionism, and put rocket fuel behind the Israel-bashing and Jew-hatred provoked by the unprecedented demonization of Israel based on lies, distortion, and bigotry.

Blaming Israel for its own victimization—endorsed so shallowly and treacherously by the Israeli left—the MPs ignored the fact that the sole reason there is no Palestine state alongside Israel is that the Arabs won’t accept it.

There was no mention of Abbas’s rejectionism; instead, harsh words against the settlements policy which apparently “makes it hard for its friends to make the case that Israel is committed to peace.” Why? Surely only for those who believe a precondition of peace is the ethnic cleansing of Jews from a state of Palestine.

Read more at Jerusalem Post

More about: Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian statehood, United Kingdom

The Next Diplomatic Steps for Israel, the Palestinians, and the Arab States

July 11 2025

Considering the current state of Israel-Arab relations, Ghaith al-Omari writes

First and foremost, no ceasefire will be possible without the release of Israeli hostages and commitments to disarm Hamas and remove it from power. The final say on these matters rests with Hamas commanders on the ground in Gaza, who have been largely impervious to foreign pressure so far. At minimum, however, the United States should insist that Qatari and Egyptian mediators push Hamas’s external leadership to accept these conditions publicly, which could increase pressure on the group’s Gaza leadership.

Washington should also demand a clear, public position from key Arab states regarding disarmament. The Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas endorsed this position in a June letter to Saudi Arabia and France, giving Arab states Palestinian cover for endorsing it themselves.

Some Arab states have already indicated a willingness to play a significant role, but they will have little incentive to commit resources and personnel to Gaza unless Israel (1) provides guarantees that it will not occupy the Strip indefinitely, and (2) removes its veto on a PA role in Gaza’s future, even if only symbolic at first. Arab officials are also seeking assurances that any role they play in Gaza will be in the context of a wider effort to reach a two-state solution.

On the other hand, Washington must remain mindful that current conditions between Israel and the Palestinians are not remotely conducive to . . . implementing a two-state solution.

Read more at Washington Institute for Near East Policy

More about: Gaza War 2023, Israel diplomacy, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict