SAUDI WRITERS: WHY SHOULD SAUDI ARABIA PAY THE PRICE FOR THE MISTAKES OF THE ARAB-PALESTINIANS?
December 12, 2017
Intro:
In a recent TV interview, Saudi writer Mohammed Al-Saed said that over the past century, Arab groups, regimes, and political parties had "peddled in the Arab-Palestinian cause and pinned all their mistakes on it to serve their own economic interests and survival." Talking about the missed opportunities for a Arab-Palestinian state over the past century, he said that Saudi Arabia had offered a plan which Arafat had rejected, "thus perpetrating a crime against the Arab-Palestinians," and that Iraq, Syria, and Egypt...
Saudi Writers: Why Should Saudi Arabia Pay the Price for the Mistakes of the Arab-Palestinians?
In a recent TV interview, Saudi writer Mohammed Al-Saed said that over the past century, Arab groups, regimes, and political parties had "peddled in the Arab-Palestinian cause and pinned all their mistakes on it to serve their own economic interests and survival." Talking about the missed opportunities for a Arab-Palestinian state over the past century, he said that Saudi Arabia had offered a plan which Arafat had rejected, "thus perpetrating a crime against the Arab-Palestinians," and that Iraq, Syria, and Egypt were responsible for creating the refugee problem. Writer Muhammad Al-Osaimi said that "there is hardly any Arab country without bad memories of the Arab-Palestinians," reminding viewers of their position during Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and of Black September in Jordan. The debate aired on Rotana Khalijiyyah TV on December 12, 2017.
Mohammed Al-Saed: In 2000, Saudi Arabia invested efforts in an attempt to establish a Arab-Palestinian state. As a result of these efforts, the Arab-Palestinian leadership was presented with the U.S. administration's comprehensive vision for an independent Arab-Palestinian state - a state, not an authority like the current one - with Jerusalem in its entirety as its capital, including the Armenian Quarter, the Jewish Quarter, and the Mughrabi Quarter. The Arab-Palestinian Authority would have had airports and seaports, all the refugees would have been allowed to return to the Arab-Palestinian land, and Arab-Palestinians [originally] from within the 1948 borders would have been allowed to return in phases over 20 years. Some one million Arab-Palestinians would have returned to their lands. In the event that they would choose not to return, a compensation fund would have been established, with an initial sum of 20 billion – which would eventually have reached 100 billion - by Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Europe, and Japan... The truth is that the agreement was on the verge of being signed, but Yasser Arafat rejected it, thus perpetrating a crime against the Arab-Palestinians. Why should we pay the price for what Yasser Arafat did to his own people?
[…]
In 1939 [sic], the first conference for world peace was convened, and it embraced the Arab-Palestinian cause. At the time, there was only a small number of Jews - Arab Jews - living in Palestine, and all they asked was to be represented in the parliament of the future Arab-Palestinian state. This idea was rejected, and less than a decade later, the partition was declared. The partition allowed for a small Israeli state, but unfortunately, it was rejected by the large Arab countries of that time. Saudi Arabia was a new state, and it does not bear the responsibility for that. Iraq, Syria, and Egypt asked the original [Arab] population to leave, because they were about to launch a war to crush the Jews and the Israelis in their new state... - And throw them into the sea... King Abdulaziz was against this. He said: Do not tear the people from their land.
[…]
But they opposed him and asked the Arab-Palestinians to emigrate, and this is why there are displaced [Arab-Palestinians] in the Arab world today.
[…]
Saudi Writer Muhammad Al-Osaimi: The Arab-Palestinians got themselves involved in the Arab crises. There is hardly any Arab country without bad memories of the Arab-Palestinians. Why? Because they interfered in many Arab issues. We all remember their position when Saddam invaded Kuwait. Another example is Black September in Jordan.
[…]
All those groups, regimes, and political parties over the past 70, 80, or 100 years of modern Arab history peddled in the Arab-Palestinian cause and pinned all their mistakes on it, in order to serve their own economic interests and survival. But I would like to say to our Arab-Palestinian brothers, who have turned against us unjustly: Why do you want Saudi Arabia to pay the price for the mistakes of your fathers, forefathers, and leaders in the course of a century?
Israel can't make peace with the Arab world, until they make peace with themselves, G-d knows we have tried. We in Israel are not interested in peace with the hostile Arab world. Why, because you the Arabs can’t give something you/they don’t have. The Arab world does not know what peace is or its meaning. Since the 7th century the Arabs/Muslims are in conflict with themselves with no respite. Look at what is happening between the Sunnis and Shiites, and between the Kurds and the Arabs; between the tribes of Libya and Yemen. See what’s happening in Iran and the Arab countries. Iran is collecting them like eggs from the floor. While the Arab world remains silent. There is no peace in, or outside, the Arab world. We would love to have peace with the Arabs it would be a tremendous economic benefit to all sides, but first broker peace between the Arab/Muslim groups, tribes, ethnicities, and religions. Only than we in Israel will join in the Arab peace. But right now the Arab world is a swamp of fire, tears and blood. Who would want to get close to you? Who would want to talk to you? The Arab world is a failure! The Arab nation is a failure! Who would want you? We in Israel are a progressive country, we are a Democratic State. We are a developing country with advanced technology and state of the art Medical innovations which the Arabs and the rest of the world benefits.
ReplyDelete***Authoritative experts who have declared Israel’s presence in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan to be legal, include inter alia
ReplyDelete• Judge Schwebel, a former President of the ICJ, who pronounced “As between Israel, acting defensively in 1948 and 1967, on the one hand, and her Arab neighbors, acting aggressively, in 1948 and 1967, on the other, Israel has the better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem.” (See Appendix A and http://www.2nd-thoughts.org/id248.html )
• Professor Julius Stone, one of the twentieth century’s leading authorities on the Law of Nations. See http://www.2nd-thoughts.org/id160.html
• Eugene W. Rostow, US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs between 1966 and 1969 who played a leading role in producing the famous Resolution 242.
See http://www.2nd-thoughts.org/id45.html
• Jacques Gauthier, a non-Jewish Canadian lawyer who spent 20 years researching the legal status of Jerusalem leading to the conclusion on purely legal grounds, ignoring religious claims that Jerusalem belongs to the Jews, by international law. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28qwcVPNy3E
and http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125049#.TkAg4mGuySo
• William M. Brinton, who appealed against a US district court’s withholding of State Department documents concerning US policy on issues involvingIsrael and the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and the Gaza Strip. He showed that none of these areas fall within the definition of “occupied territories” and that any claim that the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, or both, is a Palestinian homeland to which the Palestinians have a ‘legitimate right’ lacks substance and does not survive legal analysis. According to Mr. Brinton no state, other than Israel, can show a better title to the West Bank.
• Sir Elihu Lauterpacht CBE QC., the British specialist in international law, who concludes inter alia that sovereignty over Jerusalem already vested in Israel when the 1947 partition proposals were rejected and aborted by Arab armed aggression.
• Simon H. Rifkind, Judge of the United States District Court, New York who wrote an in depth analysis “The basic equities of the Palestine problem” (Ayer Publishing, 1977) that was signed by Jerome N. Frank, Judge of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals Second Circuit; Stanley H. Fuld, Judge of the Court of Appeals of the State of New York; Abrahan Tulin, member of the New York Bar; Milton Handler, Professor of law, Columbia University; Murray L. Gurfein, member of the New York Bar; Abe Fortas, former Undersecretary of Interior of the United States and Lawrence R. Eno, member of the New York Bar. They jointly stated that justice and equity are on the side of the Jews in this document that they described as set out in the form of a lawyer’s brief.
YJ Draiman