......Creative Ideas Consulting.....DrDanSolutions

DrDan.Solutions

. "Never underestimate the power of a small group of people to change the world.
In fact it is the only way it ever has." Margaret Mead

My Introduction - Basis for claims - The People's Claim - Intervention - The Great Peace -
Social Engineering - An Israeli View - Mapping Solutions - Historical Maps

An Open Letter

To Palestinians, Israelis, all Levantine peoples living in the Levant*

Addressing the profound state of failure you all have found yourselves in, I tell you - you have failed and the world has failed you. We suffer from what you suffer and not one of the previous agreements have proven their promises and brought peace for any one of you - this is a most profound kind of failure.

I have a better solution than anyone in the world. I challenge anyone anywhere to prove their solution is better than the one I have for you today, this moment. I tell you peace is at hand - this idea will free the Levant and the world with it.

I write you because your peace comes first, before world peace can form, and this idea will make the difference happen: Read on...

This wonderful approach establishes peace, security, and safety for everyone in the Middle East. There will be prosperity, well-being, and justice; there will be trust - all things which will become the hallmarks of a new society - in its new homeland. With trust and security, the people will be free to give up conflicting wants, enjoy a profound prosperity, and be able to share in what they will then have, a way forward in a new nation. The peoples of the world will help them make this magnificent transition from that which is - to what will be.

Global intervention means Israelis, Palestinians, and others, will all gain full resolution of differences and in such a comprehensive manner as to transcend generations, centuries, and millennia to come.

So, as I say, while there may be other approaches, this is the best, read on...

My motive for writing to all of you:

First, as hard as this is to say, neither Palestinians nor Israelis are like to achieve what anyone might think they'd both like to
have: peace and prosperity, a resolution of differences, and an end to the violence. Second, at this point, developments in Gaza, Israel, and the wider region, have taken a deeply complex local conflict global so that its effects are felt the world over. Third, because the peoples of the world have rights to safety and security, and these are endangered by the actions of both Israeli's and Palestinians, intervention is necessary.

So to begin a way forward, we must consider the distant past and the conflicting claims that Palestinians and Israeli's have on the Levant, perhaps the most important aspect, or consequence, of the long set of divisive events, and the perceptions of such, connecting today to the distant past of both peoples.


The Levant

* The Levant, the territory in dispute, is, for the purposes of this letter, the coastal region of the eastern Mediterranean, south of modern day Lebanon, north of Egypt, as well as the adjacent wetlands, the upland regions to the east of those, and, proceeding farther to the east, the riverine region of tributaries flowing to The River Jordan - an area once called British Mandate Palestine.

My Introduction

My introduction:

Decades ago I began
Creative Ideas Consulting and, not so long ago, DrDanSolutions. While Creative Ideas is focused on individuals or organizations, Dr. Dan offers transformative concepts that can revitalize our civilization. Both apply creativity to problem solving, the resolution of difficult issues, and to find new ways forward, please read on.

Basis for claims

The Israeli and Palestinians Claims:

When either Palestinians or Israelis hear any of the following terms:
Peace in the Holy Land, Peace for Israel, Peace for Gaza, Peace for Palestinians, land rights to the Levant, Israeli Land Rights, Palestinian Land Rights, Middle East Solutions, and Middle East Peace; or if they are asked either of these two questions: Who owns the Holy Land? or What could a new Middle East be like? - they each see very different things and their so their problems seem intractable. Just so, when we look at the basis, or validity, of Palestinian or Israeli claims to the Levant, we also find no agreement, and yet, it is by considering those very claims, and using their logic, that a profound road to peace and safety comes into view.

The Israeli claim is based upon their conquests in the territory and the subsequent establishment of a kingdom, or kingdoms, some of which endured for a few centuries. Ironically, their basis only serves to
illuminate a very inconvenient truth, for them, which is to say, that, in the holy books, known history, and archeological proofs, the Israelites had to have been preceded by others, as those they conquered, perhaps many others, were already settled in the Levant; with the Palestinians amongst that long list. Now, please follow on - inconveniently enough - for the Palestinians - their habitation, or the presence of their name, dates back to the period near when Philistine settlements were established along the coast; Gaza existed at that time. However, they too were preceded by others, perhaps many others.

The current claimants, Palestinians and Israelis alike, assert their ancestors inhabited the region some few thousands of years ago and that this is a basis for their claims. Certainly there is ample evidence that each of them
had forebears who settled in the Levant and I will not contest those facts nor the reasoning they both then use to regard the contested territory as their homeland because, ironically enough, it is their basis for a claim, and their reasoning, which create the pathway to resolving their profound differences, albeit not in a manner either of them, or others, might expect - or be happy with - at least at first!

Using their reasoning:

By accepting their basis and reasoning for a claim to the Levant, the world is free to also do the same on behalf of certain other peoples whose ancestors also settled in that same region - for long periods of time - preceding both
Israelis and Palestinians. These others, had names, built cities, and were, in sum, nation states and, therefore, also have legitimate claims to the territory, having, as they do, an identical basis for such. It is of no consequence that these other claimants have not been, to my knowledge, acknowledged, nor were they ever given any consideration over the millennia - and so it is that, in this document, I start that conversation to present the ignored, and very inconvenient truth, that there are peoples with claims to the Levant which are as valid as shoe of the Israelis or Palestinians.

More and more claimants:

In sum, both current claimants were preceded by settled peoples, nation states, all of which are well documented. One need only note the longtime existence of places such as Jericho, Damascus, and Ain Ghazal, to name but a very few; all
places in existence near to 10k BCE mark, and so are salient proof that civilized states existed several thousands of years before either of current clamoring claimants. In addition, there's ample archeological evidence of widespread agriculture and settled communities in the region dating from about 8k BCE to as far back as 23k BCE.

But wait, there's more! We can go back even further if we consider the unmistakable genetic evidence connecting many people in the world to those who settled in or along the migration route through the Levant during the millennia preceding the claims of those two current claimants. This is not at all surprising,
the Levant was, to say the least, quite welcoming, being as it was so well provisioned, had long growing seasons, a temperate climate, lush lowlands, as well as ample fresh water, fish, and game so that a wandering people would have reason to pause and settle in.

In sum the Levant was the super highway of human migratory routes leading out of Africa, into all of Eurasia, the islands of the
Pacific, and the Americas.

In terms of a personal connection to the Levant, although my Irish and Italian ancestry can be traced back a few centuries, my genetic connections trace back to that same migration route through the Levant - even some 30,000 years ago - just as with some billions of
others - all of whom have ancestral claim on the territory just as I do. A side note here, the European colonial period brought European genetic connections to many Africans and so they too have a claim even if their more ancient ancestors never traversed or settled in the Levant.

Summing up:

If, as both Israelis and Palestinians believe, laying claim to a territory may be based upon one's long ago ancestors having settled in it, even if at some distant time in the past, then anyone living in Europe, North and South
America, Asia, and the Pacific Islands also have a claim on the Levant. Simply put, most of the peoples in the world have ancestral claims to the Levant, which are as valid as anyone's - for a quick historical glimpse of a few possible candidates see Historical Maps, do some of your own investigations, and check your DNA history to see what comes up.

The consequences of that summation:

Now, if we amble on back to the thrilling modern day and ignore its doubly debilitating debacles of pride and prejudice, there is
The People's Claim to be heard. I assert this claim for
myself and the people of the world our wishes must be considered on the basis of common ancestry in the same manner that Palestinians and Israeli claims are.

 

The Peoples' Claim

The claim for the world's people:

The People's Claim precedes both that of the Israeli and Palestinians by some thousands of years.

To wit: In those long millennia prior to historical times the ancestors to many of the world's peoples passed through and or settled in the Levant. While they may well have been entangled in its continual contestations and were, as with so many, sorely abused, hard pressed to survive, subsumed by the subsequent series conquerors, forced to flee for want of their lives, or victims of attempted genocide - still they provide their descendants with a claim.

To wit: It is of no account how far and wide their Diasporas dispersed, or that their hard scrabble transcontinental and multigenerational migrations made a mystery of their history, occluding their very existence, so that their legitimate claims to the Levant have been ignored or buried with them - still they provide their descendants with a claim and so it is for their sake, our sake, and humanity's sake, that, we, the people of the world, now give them voice and act to assert their legitimate claims on our common homeland, the Levant.

To wit, Genetic analysis provides proof that billions of the worlds people have an ancestral claim to the Levant, so it is that we, the descendants of those earliest of inhabitants, have a right to a redress of grievances, compensation for damages - as well as the right to return and resettlement - if only to secure the general safety and well-being of our homeland and the world community.

Whereas: The foregoing being true and proven, I submit The Peoples' Claim, which must needs be adjudicated, for that reason, and more, intervention is necessary.

Intervention

The argument for intervention:

Both current contestants have engaged in warfare; and so are little different from the many others who have also waged war the world over, and in that region specifically, writing human history in blood ink, and, yes, there is quite the list! They cannot seem to help themselves out of the mire.

Whereas: The struggles in the Levant are, no doubt, very similar to the difficulties other peoples faced the world over, however, this region harbors an especially difficult situation, exemplifying, as it does, the complex consequences to the rise and fall of multitudinous nation states, which engendered chaos as each of them buried their predecessors; there is also a rich variety of religious differences, which exacerbated the severity of that chaotic historical process. All together, these factors created many a deep division between oh so many in oh so many ways. Then, during the past century or two, many players, local and global, complicated all those matters and so gave rise to the current difficulties and the violence, which has seriously impacted the world community for the negative. That said, the peoples currently living in the Levant have only made matters worse as they each assert they have the most worthy of claims to the Levant - which they do not; however, this does not stop them from being irreconcilable; thus, to this day, do they fall to in contest.

Whereas: The people of the world have long been impacted by their intransigence, violence, war-waging, and inability to find a way to a peaceful coexistence - a state of affairs that has continued on for as long as I've been alive - and now that the conflict has gone global, threatening to ignite a new war, adjudication of The Peoples' Claim is necessary - as is intervention.

Whereas: Neither of the current contestants can provide their publics with peace and safety so that all of us in the world can enjoy "… inalienable rights…  to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... " it is clear that the way forward, to secure such boons, is a global intervention of a kind that will, like as not, be transgenerational in duration.

Whereas: We, the peoples of the world, have a moral obligation to secure peace for our homeland, the Levant, and restore to it the commons of amity, harmony, and prosperity, global intervention of the kind I describe can provide all inhabitants with safety and security.

Whereas: We, the people of the world, having a claim to the Levant, also have a right to determine what is done with, to, and in our homeland.

Therefore: The way forward is a settlement made by the world at large.

The Great Peace

The Great Peace, a visionary settlement

The process to provide full redress of grievances, compensation for damages done over the millennia, and reparations consequent to the long time destruction of the region, will be undertaken. What follows are the considerations for creating The Great Peace.

Therefore: The peoples of the world, on behalf of their common homeland, ancestors, and future descendants, will honor the original peoples of that beautiful paradise, in part by exercising their rightful claim for residence, and, once there, dedicating their lives to enhancing common good securing the peaceful establishment of a profoundly purposeful commons.

Therefore: Because the Levant has become so profoundly troubled and in such deep disorder, and because this disorder has effected the world, there will be a communal effort enabling the world's people to understand the claims to the territory, the issues involved, and to participate in a global conversation regarding solutions. Free and open public discussions will be encouraged, whether they are in meeting halls, places of worship, a neighbor's home, or community center regarding the restoration of the inalienable rights of everyone who has an interest in the Levant. This communal effort will create set of possible solutions.

This great discussion will be facilitated by all manner of organizations, media outlets, and the relevant departments of governments. The world's judicial institutions and the United Nations will support and organize this discussion process so as to build global consensus regarding a set of viable solutions for the world's consideration.

Through this great conversation a set of possible solutions for the Levant will come to light. The inhabitants of the troubled region will be expected to participate in this discussion and consider the possible solutions for the political remapping of the territory in order to inform the world's consensus. This will allow humanity, together, to find a way forward. There would then be a global plebiscite so, together, we will all find a means to resolve the historical differences.

The Peace Service: Along with the great conversation, there will be global cooperation to organize a Peace Service. Ideally, volunteers would be called for, I would think three million in number, would be a low estimate of what may, in fact, be needed. The Peace Service will serve as reconciliators, counselors, and problem solvers. These will, in concert with the citizens and security organizations of the Levant, be an international presence fostering the peaceful transition from what was to what will be. They will be integrated with the law enforcement and security services of the Levant and the surrounding nations; all of them together will be trained to provide citizens with access to their inalienable rights and help every citizen of this new nation to have their voices heard, so as to hold their governmental bodies to account.

Security: With the the completion of the following tasks: 1) a global agreement on territorial mapping 2) the arrival of the Peace Service 3) the establishment of an interim government 4) the institutionalizing of
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the use of iVote to support a peaceful society and 5) The Peace Service being integrated with all military and security organizations and being retrained for operations in support of the new nation - there will then be the complete cessation of warlike actions, all military personnel will be barracked during the retraining, and all military equipment either returned to base or repurposed for the common good.

Social Engineering
the establishment of trust

Social Engineering:

This is the conscientious and purposeful redesign of a society's structural components to generate healthful results, ensure stability, and continuance.

The Name is the Thing: We begin with the essential, the very first idea we need to consider is creating a name for this new nation, something as simple as it is profound. It will frame the deepest and most important considerations in proposing this idea to the peoples of the region and the world. While the world and the people there may voice many options, I suggest Levant. This has many advantages for the people there and the world as a whole. It is an ancient name, one understood by everyone involved, indeed, one with world renown. As such its use would only help forward the causes of peace, harmony, prosperity, and freedom. That all said, I would expect the names Palestine, Israel, and others, will be well represented in this new nation.

Goodwill Embassies: The nations of the world will establish good will embassies in Levant; these will be fully dedicated to implementing societal programs so as to make a success of this nation building effort. The citizens of Levant will be expected to do their level best to make all such efforts win-win. Citizens will be supplied with a universal supportive income and, through their many efforts local, national, or international, they will act to provide for themselves as well as many, many others.

The Peace Service: This organization will provide direct person to person assistance. They could work out of households, businesses, religious buildings, theaters, arenas, as well any governmental office or social resource center; on the whole they'll be designed to be accessible to any and everyone. They'll provide a means to resolve disagreements and differences and establish safety, protection and peace. Also, the service will facilitate cooperative local networking via live-person-to-person meetings so that people can access communal support via the resources of their neighbors including professionals, friends, family, neighbors, and more. The service will support interpersonal trade or barter, banking, and the day to day exchanges of goods, services, and currencies, both real and virtual. The organization will be designed to continue on for some few generations to come. The Peace Service, being interested in a long term solution, with idealism being essential to the entire effort, will be instrumental in making
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights the foundation for the laws and regulations of Levant, guide its legal framework, and be foundational to its societal design. This is a first necessary step to secure the promises of freedom, equity, security, health, well-being, and prosperity for all.

Keeping the People's Voice: Via the Peace Service people will have a multilayered and universally accessible identification system encompassing the use of cell phones, ID cards, government or credit cards, websites, emails, affidavits written notes, phone calls, and personal interviews. This will be a means, in part, to register the people's input on social issues, the approval of candidates, polling on people of note and influence, weighing in on proposed governmental actions, and more. In sum it will be a system depending, ultimately, upon simple handshakes which will allow anyone to participate in the ongoing polling that will be used to help them make their will known via
iVote,

iVote, or a variant of it, will be the means by which the people will weigh in on societal decisions. Instant polling will allow the people to be heard in a manner never before possible. Imagine citizens, able to manage their own governments, because they'll be able to voice approval or disapproval of policies, programs, laws, office holders, regulations, and any who may have extensive societal influence, to a degree never before seen on this planet. As a result, the will of those who've been impacted by the long and trying conflicts of the Middle will finally have the means to influence policies of their governments, even as they receive assistance from the world community - the result: the future will be bright.

Generations to Come: The Peace Service will be a new generation's bona causa· - much, much larger in scope than the antiwar movent of the 60's. In time, the Levant will create and model a means to resolve one of the most profound societal divides in the world and the world's people will have a common homeland to take joy in, a place of peace and harmony for anyone, and a promised land for us all. The world will see a cooperative bartering system promoting ready access to goods and services, health care, and more - no one will be on their own; assistance will be as close as a roommate, neighbor, phone, or community center. There will be rapid economic growth as cooperative groups take hold in businesses and in living arrangements yielding a generous prosperity because the cost of living will be reduced.

Economic progress: The people will have access to the sea, a duty free international zone and an offshore porting facility, be allowed to travel to and from the territory, and control their borders along with others from around the world. Every citizen will be allowed unencumbered access to global markets for their goods or services. Within a generation the region will be profoundly transformed, prosperous, free, and restfully peaceful.

Some terms for consideration

Consider some goals:

Simple peace in the Holy Land, for Israel, Gaza, Palestinians. We began by understanding the profound nature of everyone's interest in the Levant. Then, because it is a homeland for so many, we want to hear everyone's views regarding a resolution of differences - the heart of this new approach, which has more promise than any of the current efforts on anyone's table. We all want peace, everywhere and can make the Middle East home to an inclusive, harmonious, prosperous, and generously peaceful people.

The pride of accomplishment: The people of Levant will show the world how to resolve the deepest of divides and so become a global resource for social reconciliation efforts, something vital to export to be sure!

An Israeli View

This text below is attributed to Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon when speaking to the Security Council at a quarterly meeting concerning the situation in the Middle East. What he said was, in part, prompted by a particularly egregious act, a murderous attack, recent at the time, in Poway, California; which had happened on April 27th, 2019. That all said, in the main, he spoke of the reasons, the justifications, or rationales, for Israeli rights to the lands they now occupy. I respond point by point in refutation of most while showing how accepting certain others, in turn, supports the basis by which others may also lay claim to the territory occupied by Israel. I was fascinated to find important points of agreement between Palestinian and Israeli hopes and needs.

A copy of Dannon's text can be found here: https://embassies.gov.il/un/statements/security_council/Pages/stme-sc-danon-april-2019.aspx

Here are some clips from that speech: https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Israeli-ambassadors-Bible-speech-at-UN-goes-viral-589986 And https://www.pressreader.com/israel/jerusalem-post/20190501/281595241953073



Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you Under-Secretary Dicarlo

I'd like to thank EcoPeace for their statements, thank you.

We come together at a painful time for the Jewish people. On Saturday, as Jews everywhere were concluding the holiday of Passover, a gunman ran into the Chabad of Poway, California and opened fire.

Over 100 people, in the middle of prayer, were forced to duck for cover as the bullets flew across the room. Lori Kaye was shot and killed as she jumped in the line of fire to protect Rabbi Yisrael Goldstein, who founded the synagogue and sustained injuries. Despite having been shot, Rabbi Goldstein continued his sermon. Thirty-four-year-old Almog Peretz and eight-year-old Noya Dahan were also shot and injured.

This is the second synagogue shooting in six months. It is unacceptable that we live in a time in which worshippers must be on guard, or look behind their backs while praying, out of fear of being shot. We pray for Chabad of Poway and stand with the families affected during this painful time.

Distinguished colleagues,

When we last gathered in this chamber, the President of the Council, the Ambassador of Germany, asked me to explain how Israel implements international law, specifically with regard to the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria. Today, I will provide the answers.

But before we discuss international law, we must understand the context and facts. Today, I will present to you the four pillars that prove the case for Jewish ownership of the Land of Israel.

(* Point One) The first pillar is the Bible. The Jewish people's rightful ownership of Eretz Yisrael the Land of Israel is well documented throughout the Old Testament and beyond.

(* Response to Point One)
The The Old Testament is a religious tome. It is subjective, prejudiced, and offers no rational basis, has no validity as a reasoning point for supporting the Jewish people's claim to any part of Palestine. As has been implied there are other religions, other books, other perspectives, peoples, who can make similar historical claims, which makes The First Pillar a claim that invites others, who can say the same. Having a book you believe is the word of God, which you believe provides rights to a particular portion of the Earth's surface, is, to be polite, irrational and is, therefore dismissed.

(* Point Two) The second pillar is history. The Jewish claim to the Land of Israel is confirmed, time and again, not just through Jewish history, but through the history of the world.

(* Response to Point Two)
The Levant, as a whole, has been claimed, and can be claimed, by many. Granted there was a time Israel existed with Jerusalem as its capital, and this is part of the Jewish claim to the land. That said, other nations preceded it, some came afterwards, and many endured for longer periods of time than did Israel. Are we to accept any people's claim to any portion of the Earth's surface if their ancestors dwelt there for some time? How long must a nation exist in order to give their descendants a claim to it? Do we ask how those people came to inhabit the land, how they took ownership, and isn't that a worthy point of consideration?

(* Point Three) The third pillar is the legal claim. Our rights to the land are codified in international law, including in the documents that founded this very body.

(* Response to Point Three) I believe this is a referral to the Balfour agreement in which England committed itself to providing for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the Levant, where the ancient Jewish kingdom existed. If so, it is but one more stellar example of the English making a cess of things for whatever purposes served them at the time. In sum: what right did England have to assign territory to anyone in the Levant without the permission of the people already living there, those who had lived there for centuries or millennia at that point? The same criticism may be levied at any world body.

(* Point Four) And the fourth pillar is the pursuit of international peace and security. A stronger and safer Israel means a stronger and safer world

(* Response to Point Four)
It would be difficult to assert that during the past 70 plus years, a stronger and safer Israel has always made for peace as well as safer world. Such is the fruit of the original errors, sins if you will, of pride, prejudice, ignorance, and willfulness. I hasten to add that those shortcomings were on the the part of many. Thus the Zionist dream, now something of a nightmare, continues on

It is through these four pillars, Mr. President, that I will provide you with the answers to your questions

Let us discuss our first pillar of proof: the Bible

The Jewish people's right to the Land of Israel is mentioned over a dozen times in the Tanakh the Hebrew bible which includes the Torah (the Old Testament) the Prophets and the Writings. In the book of Genesis, the very first book of the Old Testament, God says to Abraham... the translation in English:

"And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant. And I will give to you, and to your descendants after you, all the land of Cana'an, for an everlasting possession. And I will be their God."

"This is the deed to our land"

(In response) Those things are not deeds to a land. It is text from a document written under the influence of inspiration, or a profound prophetic state of mind or spirit, but such has no standing. It is not rational, has no foundation in demonstrable fact, in fact, it is a fiction, a dream, a wish, the mental visions and delusions which prophetic writing is. A deed is a legal document that is an official record of an agreement or official proof that someone, or some organization, owns land or property because the prior owner has assigned it to them, with consideration - nothing like that is spelled out in any of the Holy Books.

From the book of Genesis; to the Jewish exodus from Egypt; to receiving the Torah on Mount Sinai; and to the realization of God's covenant in the Holy Land of Israel; the Bible paints a consistent picture. The entire history of our people, and our connection to Eretz Yisrael, begins right here.

It is not just the Hebrew Bible or the fifteen million Jews worldwide that accepts this right. It is accepted across all three monotheistic religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The Quran itself accepts the divine deed of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.

(In response) A memorable event, or sequence of events, historical even, but these still do not constitute any kind of valid claim. Nor do religious texts however important or widely accepted. There is no such thing as a divine deed, save in the imaginations of those who benefit from such mental fits of irrationality. Those texts have no standing in reason, in law, or in justice and so falls of its own dead weight.

Mr. President,

The second pillar is the history of the Land of Israel and the Jewish people over the past two millennia. The Jewish kingdom in Eretz Yisrael comprised twelve tribes. The largest of those tribes, the tribe of Judah, lived in the area now known as Judea.

We all know the words "Jew" and "Jewish." "Jew" and "Jewish" come from "Judea."

This was the kingdom over which King David and King Solomon ruled. It was the kingdom, with Jerusalem as its capital. It was home to the first Temple, destroyed by the Babylonians in the year 587 BCE, and the second Temple, destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 CE.

When the Romans destroyed the Jewish kingdom, they sent our people into the 2000-year exile that kept us from our land. Even the Romans themselves admitted the land was ours.

Those of you have visited Rome may have seen, that Emperor Titus famously commemorated his victory and the Jewish expulsion by building an enormous arch on the Via Sacra in Rome. If you look at the Arch, it includes an illustration of his men carrying away the menorah from the Jewish Temple.

But even though the Romans knew that the Land was ours and we belonged in it, they attempted to erase our age-old connection to the land by renaming it "Syria-Palestina."

Why Palestina? They attributed it as a southern province of the Syrian empire.

This is how the narrow strip of land in Eretz Yisrael, nestled between Egypt in the south and Lebanon in the north, came to be called "Palestine."

For the next 2000 years, the Land of Yisrael was conquered by the Crusaders, followed by the Ottoman Empire. But despite centuries of wars and conquests, the Jewish people never left.

(A response) None of that matters, really. No matter what the Romans did, said or believed, it is the people, Israeli or not, who remained in the land who provide a rationale for a claim to the land, no matter the names given to it, or the people there, over time.

A Jewish community remained in Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel, throughout this entire time.

(A response) To this particular point: Gaza, the city, existed throughout this entire time as well and there are many settlements that preceded Israeli ones, with diverse peoples whose descendants have dispersed all over the world.

Although most of our community was forced into exile by the Roman Empire, we knew that someday we would return to our ancient homeland.

For two millennia, Jews across the world continued to pray three times every day for our long-awaited return home to Zion, to Jerusalem. As we just said on Passover last week, as we do every year, "Next year in Jerusalem!"

(In response) All of this is heartfelt, one can sense that. While historical notes such as this can be accepted as true, none of such means a thing. It all goes back to the same errors of pride, willfulness, and more. Just because your faith tells you a place is yours does not mean it is. Just because you have cultural and ancestral connections to a place does not mean you have any basis for a claim or, if you so claim, then it opens the gate for others with a similar claim.

Mr. President,

If the Jewish people's deep and ancient roots in the Land of Israel are not sufficient proof, let us consider international law the third pillar.

In 1917, Lord Balfour, Britain's Foreign Secretary, issued a statement of British support for the establishment of, and I quote, "a national home for the Jewish people." The Balfour Declaration designated this national homeland in Eretz Yisrael

The Balfour Declaration also, in its own words, specifically endorsed the Zionist cause. As Lord Balfour wrote, and I quote, "I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations, which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet."

After the Ottoman Empire surrendered in World War One, the British took legal ownership over the Land of Israel. With that legal ownership, they were able to issue the Balfour declaration and commit to helping establish a national home for the Jewish people in our historic homeland.

In 1922, the mandate of the League of Nations not only states its support for the establishment of a Jewish national home, it encouraged and facilitated the return of Jews in the Diaspora to our homeland. It confirms, and I quote, "the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."

These documents are Zionist documents. By definition, Zionism is the realization of the right of the Jewish people to self-determination and sovereignty in the land of Israel. That is what Zionism means no more, no less. It appears in international law, in essence and word-for-word.

In 1945, the UN charter was adopted. Drafted in the wake of the Holocaust, it guarantees the right of peoples to exercise self-determination. It also refers to, and I quote, "the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the UN."

(In response) One would assume that Palestinians have a right to self determination, sovereignty in the Levant, as well as to the rights of collective self-defense. Hey, what do you know a point of agreement!

One people's pursuit of self-determination could not undermine the safety and security of another nation.

(In response) Well, yet another point of agreement; I am sure the Palestinians, as well as the multitudes of other claimants could agree with this.

Two years later, the UN Partition Plan called for the establishment of a Jewish state and an Arab state in the Land of Israel.

(In response) As was said before the Balfour Declaration was an Empire making a decision regarding a territory, which it conquered during a war, then decided, without consent of the peoples of the area, to make incredibly important policy changes that affected their lives, livelihoods, rights, children, and all of their descendants. Does might make right? It is only a question.

What did we do?

We accepted it.

But the Palestinians did not.

(In response) And why should they accept something that changed their lives forever in many profound ways without having much of a say in those changes? Again they were not heard and so it came to war. Always the symptom of profound errors made by the parties that engage in it. In this case there were also external forces, neighboring nations, those involved with the cold war, and others, who all had a hand in this cess of a mess, plenty of blame to go around, to be sure.

Instead of peace, they chose war and opened fire on the Jews. Our small, tiny, newly declared nation was suddenly under attack.

In 1948, on the last day of the British Mandate, Israel declared independence and immediately was attacked by five Arab armies that joined the Palestinians, hoping to destroy it. Israel won that war, and the hope and future of the Jewish people was saved.

But the war of 1948 did not end with peace. It ended with armistice agreements between Israel and its neighbors. The armistice lines between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon were never considered international borders. They were simply lines designating the end of the first battle in the Arab war against Israel. Jordan maintained control of Judea and Samaria, and Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip. These agreements were formed in the absence of permanent peace treaties, which would only be signed decades later.

Mr. President,

It was the Arabs who insisted that the armistice lines would not be permanent borders. As stated in the Jordanian-Israeli agreement of 1949, these lines, and I quote, "are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines."

(In response) And why should they accept something that changed their lives forever in many profound ways? Why should they abandon the hope of returning to their homelands? After all the Zionists want to return to their homeland, yet another similarity, or point of agreement.

Because these lines are not borders, the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, to this day, do not cross any international borders. They are built on strategic land for Israel's security and, as agreed by the parties in the Oslo Accords, would be classified as final status issues.

(In response) It is hard to unpack the interlaced errata here, but, in sum, The Oslo Accords did not recognize the many inalienable rights of the Palestinians, nor the raft of others whom also have claims as valid as those of the Zionist faction of the Israelis.

Mr. President,

To support the right of Israel to exist in our homeland is, therefore, essential to international peace and security the final pillar.

(In response) Well, pardon the sarcasm here but, of course, as we see, peace is flourishing in the region, religious freedom is a way of life, people have rights, are respected, everyone is happy, having access to life, liberty, fraternity, the pursuit of happiness, everyone has a way forward, education is universal and it is a wonderful story land of people living happily ever after.

For decades, many Arab leaders have chosen the sword over the olive branch long before even one of these "so-called" settlements was established.

(In response) One wonders what he means by "so called" there were settlements, there have been sanctions on Israel by the UN in part because of them and, in fact, Israel has been condemned by an impressive number UN resolutions, pretty much head and shoulders above any other nation.

You know when the PLO was established?

The Palestinian Liberation Organization? In 1964, three years before 1967. What did they need to liberate before 1967? And in 1964, not a single settlement existed in Judea and Samaria, and our right to exist was still rejected.

(In response) Ok, while apparently Mr. Danon believes what he says, as do many other Israelis, there comes then quite the mystery. If between 1964 and 1967 not a single settlement existed in Judea or Samaria, a region that had been settled for thousands of yeas, how was it that it was emptied. What happened? Did everyone who had lived there vanish? It is clear that he is wrong: see
Historical Maps

But let's answer the first question: they needed to liberate their original homeland that was taken from them by many, but most recently the Ottomans, the English, and then Zionists. And then there are the original sins of pride and prejudice. Just because a territory is unused, is no reason for the owner to agree to having it used, taken over.

To blame the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria for the lack of peace between Israelis and Palestinians would be a deliberate oversight of history at best.

(In response) At this point, the ambassador simply builds on the prior errata, sins, ignorance and more and then he continues on.

The Arabs rejected opportunities for peace time and again:

The 1937 Peel Commission Report? The Arabs rejected it.

The 1947 UN Partition Plan? Rejected.

The 1948 Israeli offer for truce? Rejected.

The 2000 Camp David Summit? Rejected.

The 2001 Taba Summit? Rejected.

The 2007 Annapolis Conference? Rejected.

The 2008 offer of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert? We are still waiting for an answer on that.

The 2014 Secretary of State Kerry's Peace Initiative? Abbas chose Hamas.

And today, in the upcoming US peace plan? The Palestinians say it is "dead on arrival."

(In response) And why should they accept something that changed their lives forever in many profound ways without having much of a say in those changes? To me, it seems like the Brits bit off more than they could chew and lost their lunch on it, making another fine mess.

Mr. President,

It weakens the mandate of this body, which is tasked with making our world more peaceful and secure, to continue blaming the side that offers solutions, and reward the side that rejects them. It is dangerous to praise the side that encourages hatred and bankrolls terrorism.

(In response) It is dangerous to recreate a nation known for its warring, aggression, and conquering ways.

Palestinian rejectionism is chronic.

(In response) The Israeli's reject the legitimate claims to the Levant by the Palestinians and others, their long history of war mongering spells this out in detail.

Palestinian leaders refuse to acknowledge the right of the Jewish people to self-determination in the Land of Israel and insist on returning to the land in droves. This behavior directly contradicts all four pillars of the past and keeps us locked from forging peace in the future.

There should be no reward for rejectionism

(In response) Israeli leaders refuse to acknowledge the fact that Palestinians, and others, have equal or prior claim to what some call the Land of Israel.

There should be no prize for aggression.

(In response) I think the Palestinians, and others, would agree with that statement, yet another point of agreement, just amazed here.

Mr. President,

Real peace will be possible when the four pillars of the past are accepted and realized. But real peace will come when the four pillars of the future are put into action.

These are the four pillars of the future:

First: the Palestinians must accept and recognize the Jewish State of Israel. No Palestinian leader has ever said those words.

(In response) And why should they accept something that changed their lives forever in many profound ways without having much of a say in those changes?

Second: the Palestinians must end their campaign of incitement. Enough is enough. How can the international community expect us to make any concessions to a leader who pays his people to kill ours?

(In response) What about the right to return, for all those who left? If the Jewish people can come back after nearly 2000 years why cannot the Palestinians come back; it hasn't been more than a century, after all?

Third: regional cooperation. We are already working together with many of our neighbors on security, on common goals and on building relations. We want these relationships to flourish and present themselves in the open.

(In response) It is certainly interesting to consider the broad base of support and acceptance Israel has garnered among the peoples of the area, the nations that border them, and the world in general. One wonders what percentage of the Middle East peoples have a strongly positive view of Israel.

And fourth: we will never do or agree to anything that compromises our security. We want a peaceful future with our neighbors. But our security is non-negotiable, and we will decide where to draw the line.

(In response) A perfect example of pride, "we will decide where to draw the line" quite the negotiation tactic. It seems to me that the Palestinians, and others, want to do the same thing. Perhaps another point of agreement.

Mr. President,We are ready to work together. We are ready to talk. And we are ready to create a better future for our children

(In response) As long as the Israeli's believe they will be the ones to draw the line, and do nothing to address Israel's original sins of pride, prejudice, ignorance, and willfulness - it is unlikely such hopes will come not come to pass.

It is only when the four pillars of the past and the four pillars of the future are accepted that peace will come.

Thank you.

(In response) Indeed, the final sentence needs no rebuttal, it's prideful nature and self assurance evidence the pride, before which, goes a fall.

Mapping Solutions

If the peoples of Gaza, Israel, and the West Bank trusted one another it would be possible to create Palestine as a single nation using the borders drawn up in 1922 for what was called British Mandate Palestine. In a similar fashion, with complete trust, it would also be possible for the mapping made in 1947 to work. The point is, assuming trust, there are other mappings that would, of course, also work, some better than others.

The four mapping options that follow assume the prerequisite Herculean global intervention to establish trust for all those involved has been successful. With that understood, I offer a simple compare and contrast set of considerations for the four possibilities.

While the world could create other models, which would allow us all to proceed into the future in good form, I am providing these with my take on their advantages and disadvantages.

 







The Two State Solution:

This possibility is what was, more or less, the state of affairs for most of my life. It is also what many people think of when the term Two State Solution is talked about.

However, while this may make for an easier transition as, comparatively speaking, not much would have to change, overall. Nor would the bordering states have to do much to continue interacting economically so as to create a good measure of prosperity.

The disadvantages are that there would be still be a considerable effort to resettle people, maintain a border to separate the two peoples, and the Palestinians would still be a divided people, with those in the West Bank having no access to the sea.

Also, with the people separated, the egregious wounds would not heal for some long, long, long time and then there are other issues: the right of return being one of them, riparian rights another, as well as access to the sea and border control. not to mention determining how Jerusalem would be managed.










The Three State Solution:

This is what the United Nations proposed in 1947 with Palestine divided into an Arab state, tan, a Jewish state, yellow, and Jerusalem as an independent city state, the small rosy area.

Assuming trust, this would work but it also has more difficulties than the first option above. First, redressing the population shifts that have occurred over the decades would be more difficult, also it has a much longer and more complex border to manage, and the West Bank would still have no access to the sea.

Also, for Jerusalem to be an independent entity, a City State as it were, it would need access to the sea to connect with the world for trade and more; it would also have to be much larger so that it could be self sustaining in terms of food production.



 






The Four State Solution:

This solution seems similar to the Three State Solution , however this one reflects the reality that Gaza is an independent state so it would need to be treated as such. It would have be changed from this depiction to accommodate sustainability, generally, an increase in size so as to include water sources and agricultural production. It would also require full rights to the sea, its resources, and trade routes.

The advantages: Gaza would be self sustainable, the peoples of the West Bank would have access to the sea and a more secure source of water. Jerusalem would be an independent City State, removing it from any contestation, and it would have a corridor to a port and, with an increase in its size,compared to other solutions, have a better chance of sustainability.

The disadvantages are the very difficult task of resettling people and a more complex border than either of the two preceding options. Israel would have to divest of territory and the Golan Heights would still be a thorny,complex issue that would have to be resolved for everyone concerned.



The One State Solution:


This is a map of British Mandate Palestine; it is also the absolutely best solution being both the simplest and allowing many advantages. First and foremost, of all the choices, it does not require mass resettlement, would allow everyone to enjoy the land of their ancestors. It would have the largest population base increasing the likelihood of security, prosperity, and societal progress. It requires real integration, which would be facilitated by the Peace Service. With every success, the people, as a whole, would heal of their horrific wounding - and then, in their unity,they would model a profound process of reconciliation. In this way they will, together, become a much honored nation and so have influence in world affairs.

While the difficulties would be immense, seemingly impossible, as the generations proceed and the long role of the Peace Service will prove its worth, for there would be born an absolutely glorious nation.

I have optimism that this, best of all solutions, will create a state that would endure for millennia.

Historical Maps

This is a set of historical maps from a variety of sources; they are organized along a time line that stretches back from 1800's to 7,500 BCE. There is some overlap between them but the picture they portray, of the Levant, shows that many peoples have called that region home, occupied it, often time for periods of time longer than the duration of the Israeli kingdoms, and so proves the claims of the many peoples in that region and beyond.


This is a map showing settlements 1878 - 1927 CE, note the many Palestinian settlements in Samaria and Judea. as well elsewhere.

This is a map from 1881 CE, note the well settled areas in Judea and Samaria.



This is a map of the region as it was in 1683 CE, or thereabouts. As one can see, the Levant is directly administered by the Ottomans. Now, as Jerusalem was taken in 1512 and only lost during World War One, they held the territory for some 400 years

.

This is a map of the region showing the progress of the Ottoman Empire over the centuries, an interesting diversion to say the least.



This is a map of the region as it was in 1453 CE, or thereabouts and it provides another support for an Egyptian claim, as well as that of the Moslem world.

This is a map of the region as it was in 1215 CE, or thereabouts, it seems the Egyptian Sultanate held sway over the Levant for over two centuries. Please note the Crusader states, which is another reason for Europeans to have a claim on the region.



This larger scale map, circa 700 CE, shows the Levant as part of the Arab world, a state of affairs that continued, the Crusades notwithstanding for some many centuries.

Prior to the Arab ascendency, there were other long standing nations with a claim upon the Levant, Rome, for example. This map approximates their claims as of the year 200 CE.



By 600 BCE the Babylonian empire well established in the Levant and so their descendants also have a claim, it would seem that modern day Syrians, Iraqi's, Lebanese, Turks and Egyptians have a claim.




By 900 BCE the Philistines and Phoenicians were in the Levant and so their claim is as old as that of the Jewish descendants of the Israelis also living there at this time.



Here we see a case supporting Syrian claims to the Levant, as well as for the Philistines, Gazans, Phoenicians; it seems Syria was included in the Empire of David and Solomon, interesting note - 1000 to 925 BCE

Here we see a case supporting a Philistine claim to the Levant, as well as the independent states of Moab and Edom, this from 1200 - 1050 BCE.



Here we can see the Philistine State and Gaza coexistent with ancient Israel circa 1250 - 1125 BCE.

Here is a basis for the Egyptian Claim to the Levant, circa 1500 BCE.



It seems as though Syrians have quite the claim on Palestine or the Levant. This map is from circa 2500 BCE.

And this last, a map of cities in the region circa 7500 BCE, each indicating the region was rich in cultural diversity, with civilizations evident long before either of the two current claimants appeared in history.