On November 24, 1947, 61 years ago, the UN General Assembly decided to partition the remaining territory of the British mandate over Palestine into two independent states - one for the Jews and the other for the Arab Palestinians. We used the word “remaining” because of the fact that out of the territory of that British mandate was previously carved also the present Kingdom of Jordan.

The brute facts are that the Jews seized the opportunity and created the State of Israel, but the Islamic  world did not accept and the neighboring Arab States invaded and seized whatever land they could.

The facts are thus that a State of Palestine was not created - not because of an opposition from the Jewish side, BUT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE ARABS GRABBED WHAT THEY COULD. Yes, there were many wars since, and the Palestinians woke up and demanded their due. Nobody negates their right to a State if they can accept that history does not stand still, and what you refused or you were not allowed by your brothers to accept YESTERDAY, cannot become your negotiating position today.

On above basis, it is not that the Palestinians or their brothers in the Arab World discredited themselves on November 24, 2008 - it is the whole UN leadership that discredited themselves yesterday - See the photo bellow - it includes the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, President of the General Assembly, and the person who was left nameless by Ms. Bayefsky, the Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, who happens to be an American who was put there on the UN leadership quota filled by President G.W. Bush -  the US diplomat  B. Lynn Pascoe (we found the ommission of this name disgusting as well).

Yes, what we find completely unforgiving was to celebrate at the UN - the British Mandate Partition Day with the flag of Palestine flying on stage - a non-State as of yet - while omitting the Israeli flag - a UN Full-Member State.
So, under Secretery-General Ban Ki-moon, and with the OK of the United States, probably thanks to the power of Arab Oil-States money, and the otherwise rational President of the General Assembly, a former foreign minister of Nicaragua, the UN made a PARODY of itself. How can one trust this bunch to do any better at these days of total collapse of the global economy? Will they just turn around and wax fine the MDG talk? Do they not understand that success requires first impartiality and that requires honesty - and not the bending to money?

For Immediate Release:
November 25, 2008
Contact:  Anne Bayefsky
(917) 488-1558
 anne at hudsonny.org

NEW YORK - The President of the UN General Assembly has launched an unprecedented attack on a UN member state from the Assembly podium. Going beyond even existing UN resolutions, Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann of Nicaragua accused Israel of apartheid and called for “a campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions” against it. Reminiscent of a classic antisemitic slur, Brockmann (himself a Roman Catholic priest and one-time official of the World Council of Churches) also claimed our Palestinian “brothers and sisters are being crucified” by Israel.

His remarks were made on November 24, 2008 during the UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. This annual event marks the adoption of the General Assembly’s partition resolution which called for the creation of a Jewish and an Arab state on November 29, 1947.

“Brockmann’s assault is a gross abuse of the position of Assembly President,” commented Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN. “He knows full well that his outrageous personal views will be translated into six languages and webcast around the world.” Brockmann assumed the Presidency in September 2008, having been nominated by the Latin American and Caribbean regional group.

Brockmann made the apartheid allegation twice in one day, once in the morning at the annual meeting of the UN Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, and again in the General Assembly in the afternoon. In his words:
“I spoke this morning about apartheid and how Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories appear so similar to the apartheid of an earlier era, a continent away. I believe it is very important that we in the United Nations use this term. We must not be afraid to call something what it is. It is the United Nations, after all, that passed the International Convention against the Crime of Apartheid, making clear to all the world that such practices of official discrimination must be outlawed wherever they occur.”

“Brockmann’s call,” said Bayefsky, “was in effect, a call for the political destruction of Israel by means of the same strategy adopted against apartheid South Africa.” Brockmann said:

• “More than twenty years ago we in the United Nations took the lead from civil society when we agreed that sanctions were required to provide a non-violent means of pressuring South Africa…Today, perhaps we in the United Nations should consider following the lead of a new generation of civil society, who are calling for a similar non-violent campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions to pressure Israel…”

The adoption of the 1947 partition resolution, accepted by Jews and rejected by Arabs, is now bemoaned by the UN. Former Secretary-General Kofi Annan described Palestinian Solidarity Day as “a day of mourning and a day of grief.” This year, as in years past, the UN used the occasion to fly only two flags, that of “Palestine” and that of the United Nations. Though the resolution was ostensibly the UN’s first commitment to a two-state solution, today the flag of the member state of Israel is left out.

The Palestinian flag is on the left, the United Nations flag on the right. Speakers from left to right who voiced no difficulty with the omission of the flag of Israel:

Riyad Malki, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Palestinian Authority; Jorge Urbina, Representative of the President of the Security Council; Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, President of the General Assembly; Paul Badji, Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People; Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations; H.M.G.S. Palihakkara, Chairman of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories; and the Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs.

Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2008

Obama offers new Asia tack: Vogel - New administration will solicit Japan, China cooperation to help remedy world’s ills; Japan will continue to be a friend of the United States, but incoming President Barack Obama may try to approach China more to solve international issues because Beijing can more quickly effect policy, according to a noted American expert on Japan and China.

By SAYURI DAIMON, Staff writer, The Japan Times online.

“It’ll be easier to get the Chinese government to make an agreement, because when they make it, they can enforce it much more quickly,” said Ezra Vogel, Henry Ford II professor of social sciences, emeritus, at Harvard University.

“So on international issues, even though Japan is our ally and our friend, for a lot of problems we’ll be talking more to China because they can solve issues more and they are now beginning to play a big role,” Vogel said in a recent interview with The Japan Times.

Even though Obama faces daunting challenges, ranging from the economic crisis to Middle East peace negotiations to North Korea’s nuclear threat, the incoming administration is signaling it is ready to be cooperative with the rest of the world, Vogel said.

“Obama is an unusually good choice for trying to bring back a good will that has been lost during the (George W.) Bush administration.During the Bush era, there were some people in America who were quite proud and arrogant, who didn’t realize the world has changed,” said the author of the renowned book “Japan as Number One,” which was published in 1979.

“There are so many diplomats in Washington who felt we should be more cooperative with other countries. Now they will have more chances to express a cooperative attitude.”

As for Asia policy, Obama has surrounded himself with experts, including Jeffrey Bader, who worked at the State Department and National Security Council and headed the Asia team during Obama’s campaign, Vogel said.

Obama also tapped several Japan experts as advisers during the election campaign, including Gerald Curtis, a professor at Columbia University, Kurt Campbell, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asia and the Pacific, and Rust Deming, former deputy chief of mission at the embassy in Tokyo and former ambassador to Tunisia. Because Deming’s father served in Okinawa and he spent his childhood in Japan, he speaks Japanese well, Vogel added.

“There are a lot of good people Obama can use. So much talent wants to work for him that he will have good choices,” he said.

But while the United States may look to be more cooperative with the rest of the world, Vogel said it will demand reciprocal cooperation at the same time.

“So if other nations do not cooperate in trying to deal with big refugee problems, in trying to resolve (the) North Korea (nuclear threat) and in trying to resolve the Middle East issues, there will be a lot of frustration in the United States about the failures of other nations to do their share.”

For example, more than 10 years have passed since an agreement to relocate the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Futenma in Okinawa was reached, but the move is nowhere near happening. On North Korea, Japan’s tough stance and strict focus on the abductee problem is a stark difference with the other nations in the six-party denuclearization talks.

“If Japan only stresses the abductee issue and does not show signs publicly of cooperating, then there will be increasing frustration,” Vogel said.

He also touched on Japan’s internal political malaise.

Obama may have a hard time trying to form a close personal relationship with Prime Minister Taro Aso, whose stint may be fleeting amid the rotating door of Tokyo’s recent leadership, Vogel said.

Bush was fortunate to be able to form a relationship with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, because he held office for several years, he said.

“But now Aso is already almost a lame duck. So will Obama spend so much time to form a relationship with Aso? Of course he will form some relationship, but given all the other pressing issues, he may decide to wait for the (next) election, see who emerges as the new leader and try to work with that leader,” Vogel said.

——————–

The Shift in the Way the US Views East Asia Started Already in President G,W, Bush Days. The US-China tie is a reality that was cemented by the US financial debt to China - as per the following article:

Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2008

U.S.-China ties weaken alliances. {Says further a Japanese Opinion Piece that Comes From A different Japanese Publication.}
As the United States works harder than ever to strengthen relations with China, there are signs its alliances with Japan and Taiwan are weakening. A conspicuous sign of change in Japan-U.S. ties came early Oct. 12 when President George W. Bush telephoned Prime Minister Taro Aso to inform the latter of the decision to remove North Korea from Washington’s list of terrorism-supporting nations.

To make matters worse, a Chinese diplomat hints that North Korean strongman Kim Jong Il has regretted pursuing “mea culpa” diplomacy with Japan since admitting to then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in 2002 that his followers were responsible for the abductions. A handful of abductees were returned to Japan; Pyongyang has not made known the whereabouts of others.

Ever since the end of the Cold War, the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Strait have been hot spots for American military operations in Asia. The Bush administration, however, has shifted its diplomatic strategy toward building a stronger cooperative relationship with China, as Washington has been beset with wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and annual military expenditures of $200 billion.

Even though Russia has developed Su-35 fighters and China has come up with Jian-10 fighters, to compete with the F-22 Raptor, the U.S. has refused to provide the ASDF with its most advanced fighter apparently because Washington attaches greater importance to easing tension with Beijing than to strengthening the military alliance with Tokyo.

In early October, when the Pentagon announced the sale of weapons worth $6.463 billion to Taiwan, China lost no time lodging a protest against the sale as a violation of the 1982 Sino-American joint communique. On other hand, it says it is not really worried about the deal.

Among the weapons sold to Taipei were four E-2T Hawkeye early warning aircraft; 330 Patriot III surface-to-air missiles; 30 Apache anti-tank attack helicopters; 32 Harpoon anti-ship missiles; and 182 Javelin anti-tank guided missiles as well as spare parts for F-16A/B fighters and other aircraft.

Conspicuously missing from the list, though, were UH-60 Black Hawk attack helicopters and diesel-powered submarines.

In July, Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou of the Nationalist Party, who replaced Chen Shui-bian of the Democratic Progressive Party in May, had sent a high-level delegation headed by Legislature President Wang Jin-pyng to Washington to request the helicopters and submarines. The message from Washington to Beijing lay not in the sale of the five groups of weapons to Taiwan, but in the refusal to sell the two others.

Furthermore, the U.S. has not acceded to Taiwan’s request for providing Aegis ships, which Taipei has long hoped would replace four Kidd-class destroyers commissioned by the Taiwanese navy in 2005. This mirrors Washington’s refusal to sell the F-22 Raptor fighters to Japan.

Shortly after taking office in 2001, President George W. Bush said he would not hesitate to use force to defend Taiwan from Chinese attacks. He subsequently declared he would oppose any independence move by the island, and turned the cold shoulder to independence-minded President Chen. Since Ma replaced Chen, Bush has worked harder than ever to avert a military confrontation with the regime in mainland China, as a way to prevent tensions from mounting on the Korean Peninsula or in the Taiwan Strait.

From the Chinese perspective, the U.S. is no longer a hypothetical enemy, but rather an inseparable economic partner. Indeed, China owns $518.7 billion of the U.S. government’s bonds — the second largest sum owned by any country. When mortgage securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are added, Chinese holdings of American securities come to $900 billion. Thus a fall in the value of the dollar would hurt the Chinese economy.

The Sino-American relationship has reached a turning point, as has the alliance between Washington and Tokyo, which played a key role when the U.S. was the undisputed sole superpower. The U.S. may have begun viewing Japan, like Taiwan, as a minor global player.

This is an abridged translation of an article from the November issue of Sentaku, a monthly magazine covering the Japanese political, social and economic scene.

————–

Others have a different opinion that amounts to having them believe that Asia as a whole will have more enhanced role in the future through the enhanced importance of the G-20 negotiating arena.

Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2008

Room for Asian influence in G20 structure

By MICHAEL RICHARDSON - Special to The Japan Times.
SINGAPORE — Finance ministers and central bank governors from the Group of 20 advanced and emerging economies have been meeting regularly for nearly a decade. But the decision to convene a summit of the G20 heads of government in Washington the weekend of Nov. 15 marked an important turning point in the way global economic problems are handled. The summit agreed on a plan for tackling the financial crisis and the deepening slump.

This is an opportunity for Asia to increase its influence in managing the world economy, provided leading players — China, India, Japan and South Korea — can put aside long-standing geopolitical rivalry and intensify coordination.

As a forum for consultation and cooperation, the G20 seems set to become a prominent feature of the global economic landscape. Its leaders will meet again by the end of April to review their ambitious action plan, which ranges from reform of banking, accounting and credit-rating standards to stimulating economic recovery, sustaining world trade and investment flows, and ensuring that the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have enough resources to cope with future challenges.

The scope of the problems confronting many economies, both developed and developing, have propelled the G20 from obscurity to the front line. These problems can no longer be tackled by North American and European powers alone or in a dominant position, even though they retain hefty economic and financial clout.

The G20 members, although still a relatively small and cohesive group, stand a better chance of success. Collectively, they account for two-thirds of the world’s population, 80 percent of its trade, 85 percent of the banking system, and 90 percent of global economic activity.

Second, Asia’s potential clout is huge. Measured by purchasing power, Asia accounts for more than 35 percent of world GDP, compared with the U.S. and the EU at 20 percent each.

Moreover, Asia has been contributing to around half of world growth in recent years. Although hurt by the current crisis, major Asian economies have not slowed as much as Western counterparts. Asian resilience and the fact that the region holds about one-third of the world’s central bank reserves could play a key role in cushioning the recession and aiding recovery. Whether it does so will depend on the extent to which major Asian players are prepared to put aside rivalry and align and coordinate their economic and financial interests.

A start has been made in this direction through the proposed expansion of the network of currency swaps in Asia and plans for a regional bond market and an Asian currency unit. This kind of cooperation needs to be intensified if Asia’s punch is to reflect its true weight.

It would help, too, if China were to follow Japan, which announced it would lend up to $100 billion to the IMF to help provide financial lifelines to crisis-hit emerging countries.

The current structure of the G20 leaves plenty of room for Asian influence. The G20 operates without a permanent secretariat or staff. The chairmanship of the group rotates each year among members and is selected from a different regional grouping of countries each time. Continuity and direction are given by a revolving three-member management body of past, present and future country chairs, referred to as the Troika.

Brazil, Britain and South Korea form the current Troika. If Asia wants to reshape the global economy and financial system, there is no better opportunity to do so than now.

Michael Richardson is a security specialist at the Institute of South East Asian Studies in Singapore.

(E-mail:  mriht at pacific.net.sg)

American Task Force on Palestine, Foundation for Middle East Peace & Middle East Institute,

1761 N Street NW, Washington, DC 20036

invite you to a discussion on:  The Future of the Peace Process: A Palestinian Perspective.

with
PLO Negotiation Affairs Department’s
Maen Areikat
Rami Dajani
Khaled Elgindy

Thursday December 4 - 12:00-2:00PM
Middle East Institute Boardman Room
1761 N Street, NW - Washington DC

A light lunch  will be provided

As a new Administration gets ready to take office in the United States, and as Israel prepares for elections, questions arise regarding the future direction of Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. What are the Palestinian positions on the format for negotiations and the substance of permanent status issues. i.e. borders, settlements, Jerusalem, refugees, after more than a year of negotiations?  How much progress has been achieved in the Annapolis negotiations on specific issues? What is the Palestinian position on the Arab Peace Initiative as a basis for negotiations? Can peace negotiations survive the political “down-time” until the political maps in Israel and the US become clear in the coming months? If so, how can the intervening period be best used to preserve progress and lay the ground for renewed negotiations? What effect does the situation in Gaza and the turbulent Palestinian domestic developments have on the negotiation process? What do the Palestinians want from the new US Administration?

Maen Areikat is the Deputy Head and Coordinator General of the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) of the PLO. In addition to overseeing NAD operations, Mr. Areikat supervises the Negotiations Support Unit (NSU) and the Negotiations Secretariat, which was recently established to follow up on committee meetings between Israelis and Palestinians. Rami Dajani is the Legal Advisor for the Security File at the Negotiations Support Unit (NSU). Mr. Dajani is responsible for overseeing technical preparations on issues related to final status negotiations on security and is among the primary advisers to the Palestinian leadership on Palestinian Roadmap obligations. Khaled Elgindy is the Policy Advisor for the Settlements File at the Negotiations Support Unit (NSU). In addition to managing the NSU’s settlements file, Mr. Elgindy is heavily involved in strategic planning and U.S. outreach efforts at the NSU.

RSVP Foundation for Middle East Peace: info@fmep, or call 202 835 3650

The Drylands, Deserts, and Desertification - 2008 Conference. December 14-17, 2008, Sede Boqer Campus, The Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Israel.

www.desertification.co.il

THE PROGRAM As Available on November 18, 2008. There might be still Changes and Additions, as well -  further Poster Sessions.

Download this schedule: detailed_program_sessions_1611_publish.doc

Please note that the list of presentations is still not final.