Letter to NY Times - Jan 1st 2017

Letter to NY Times - Jan 1st 2017

I have listened carefully to secretary Kerry's speech about Israel, read the UN resolution about Israel, and the UN resolution about Syria. If this is not hypocrisy, then I do not what hypocrisy is. 

As was the custom of the US under President Obama, this administration betrayed friends. No, it did not start with Israel. President Mubarak in Egypt. The groups fighting Assad, you will be surprised what King Abdallah thinks of the president. The Saudis feel betrayed by Obama. 

Talking about principles? Really? Waiting 6 weeks after the commencement of the civil war in Syria for president Obama to make a statement? Or supporting governments in whose country slavery is welcomed? Kerry is introducing a plan? Was he such a good Secretary of State? He should be trusted to know what he is doing? Really? was he so successful in the Ukraine? How well did he do in Syria? How did the US influence the Arab spring [or what was left of it]? Iran and Afghanistan? North Korea? And frankly, Iran. Even according to Kerry, Teheran is still the world leading supporter of terror. The US can do nothing about it. 

John Kerry

As for the values preached by Mr. Kerry, this presentation is a grave economization of the truth. Just read the last chapters of Peter Frankopan’s latest book “The Silk Road”. These values were not considered when Iraq used chemicals against Iran or against the Kurds, these values have meaningless consideration when it comes to the last UN resolution about Syria and the betrayal of the rebels in Syria. Values? Mr. Kerry? What values?

Was the speech one-sided? Mostly. Secretary Kerry thinks the leadership in Ramallah aims for peace. Is this why the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are studied in schools there?  Is this why terrorists are idolized by both the man in the street and the leadership?

Kerry spoke about the refugees. What about the Jewish refugees that were forced out of the Arab world? Did he mention the Arab leaders' "promotion" in 1948 to Palestinians to leave and come back with the Arab tanks? Or President Nasser's famous interview to a newspaper in Zurich in which he said that the Arabs need the refugees as an ammunition?

Settlements are the obstacles? Utter nonsense. Israel vacated cities and villages for peace.  In Sinai, in Gaza. It can do it again. In a week. You cannot uproot the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in a month or a year or more, or the hate preached to children and adults in Mosques around “Palestine”. 

Arabs have to suffer under military rules. That is true. Did Secretary Kerry mention how many Arabs are treated in Israeli hospitals [yes, including children from Gaza]?  Palestinians working in Jewish enterprises in The West Bank make more money than in any other establishment. Palestinians study in Ariel University and get recognized university degrees. Can you see a Jew just walking to Bir Zeit? Judging Israel? But not mentioning Israel’s contribution to the Arab man in the street? Kerry does not know that?  He did not see the Syrian children in Israeli hospitals? 

Mr.  Kerry forgot that Ehud Barak offered Arafat everything. Literally everything. The latter did not agree. Ehud Olmert tried to, Abbas refused. The problem is not the settlements. It is the educations Palestinian get in schools, the stunning speeches in the mosques.

The truth of the matter since the end of World War One, US Foreign policy success is very embarrassing. Kerry proved it again in his speech. He once asked "What do they think.  We are idiots"? In a year’s time I will let him answer his own question.


Zalli Jaffe