Are the EU and France Becoming Mouthpieces for Palestinian Terrorists?

A Gallup poll released Monday shows that 91% of American said they would vote fo a presidential candidate who is Jewish. The Gallup poll testing American voting preferences also showed that 73% of Americans would support an evangelical Christian for President, while 60% would back a Moslem and 58% an atheist. The latest results on voting for a Jewish candidate matched those from June 2012. When the question about religion was first asked in 1937, less than half of Americans said they would vote for a Jewish candidate. In addition to asking about religions, the poll, conducted from June 2 to 7, asked the 1,527 participants aged 18 and older about their willingness to vote for gay or lesbian, African-American, Latino, female and socialist presidential candidates. Ninety-two percent said they would vote for an African-American and/or a woman and 74% a gay or lesbian, while just 47% said they would consider voting for a socialist. Both Democrats (92%) and Republicans (95%) expressed willingness to vote for a Jewish candidate. But voting for a Jewish presidential candidate is the only point of agreement between Democrats and Republicans. In all other categories, their willingness to vote for various categories of candidates differed significantly. Among Republicans, 84% said they would vote for an evangelical, compared to 66% of Democrats, and more Democrats were willing to vote for a Moslem (73%) than Republicans (45%). And, while 64% of Democrats would vote for an atheist, only 45% of Republicans would. Noticeably higher percentages of Democrats (85%) than Republicans (61%) would vote for a gay or lesbian. ~~~~~ But, it appears that Americans' willingness to vote for a Jewish presidential candidate is lost on European, and in particular French, politicians, who seem determined to recognize a state of Palestine and penalize Israel, however they can. The UN General Assembly led the way in November 2012, voting by an overwhelming majority -- 138 in favor to 9 against (Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Panama, Palau, United States), with 41 abstentions -- to grant Palestine non-Member Observer State status in the UN. Two years later, in November 2014, Sweden became the 135th UN member state to recognize the state of Palestine. The only other European Union state to have recognized the state of Palestine is Iceland. ~~~~~ But, that may soon change. The establishment French Le Monde newspaper is reporting that France plans to present a new Israeli-Palestinian peace resolution with a strict deadline to the UN Security Council by the September General Assembly annual meeting. According to Le Monde, the French resolution will : (1) set both the parameters of a negotiated end to the conflict and a limited timeframe of 18 months for these negotiations to take place, (2) call for the creation of a demilitarized Palestinian state on the basis of the 1967 borders, with exchange of territories agreed by both parts, and with Israel pledging to pull out its troops during a transition period, (3) define Jerusalem as the capital of the two future states, and (4) suggest compensation for the Palestinian refugees' right of return, implicitly ending the validity of any demand for right of return. But contrary to demands by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Le Monde says the French plan doesn't include a date for the end of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. France reportedly feels that the situation has reached the point where time can no longer be allowed to run its course. France's previous efforts to draft a resolution were thwarted by the Palestinian Authority's hardline. Le Monde reports that the French decided to make a new attempt after the Israeli general election which saw Benjamin Netanyahu remain as Prime Minister with a coalition that leans farther to the right. Since 2009, Netanyahu has said he supports the peaceful coexistence of the two neighbor states, but he continues to encourage the development of additional West Bank settlements, while the Palestinian Authority has since late 2014 chosen a new negative strategy by denouncing Israeli occupation on all fronts : courts, diplomacy and even sporting institutions. The Le Monde article says that France believes it has an ultimate card to play in favor of pushing forward its plan -- if after 18 months no deal has been reached, France will officially recognize the state of Palestine. ~~~~~ But, says Le Monde, the Israeli government knows there are other priorities on the global agenda -- France has agreed to the American demand to delay all public announcements until after the negotiations on Iran's nuclear program. And, Paris is also uncertain about Obama's intentions. Will the US break away from its history of using its UN veto to block any resolution that would place Israel under pressure? French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told France's Foreign Affairs Committee on June 9 that he isn't sure what the US is thinking : "It varies, depending on the statements. We're keeping an eye on it." Le Monde says : "What we know of the text's formulation shows how very cautious it is, seeming to have given Israel a small concession by using the phrase "two states for two people," even though the Jews aren't the only Israeli citizens, there are also the 20% of Arabs." ~~~~~ The French compromise apparently hasn't convinced the Arab League that prefers to save these debates for the negotiations. The Palestinians would also prefer that the resolution refer to East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state, to avoid debates about its perimeter. The starting point for them would be the 1949 "green line." But on Jerusalem Day in May, Netanyahu was clear on the future of the Holy City : "Jerusalem has always been the capital of the Jewish people alone and not of any other people. A divided Jerusalem is a past memory: The future belongs to a complete Jerusalem which will not be divided again." ~~~~~ Dear readers, in a recent op-ed piece in the left-wing Israeli daily Haaretz, journalist Roy Isacowitz suggested that France not "waste its time with the UN" and recognize the state of Palestine now. "What France appears to have forgotten in its visionary zeal is that both the Israelis and the Palestinians are deeply split over the future of the Palestinian territories and that neither is in a position to actually decide on anything." And on the ground, a separate Palestinian state is far from a reality. Israel occupies the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and it partially blockades the Gaza Strip. The continued expansion of Israeli settlements into the West Bank makes tackling the question of Palestinian sovereignty difficult. And the Palestinians continue to throw up artificial roadblocks to getting negotiations started. So, too, do the continuing rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel since last summer's ceasefire -- largely ignored by European and American media. Israel holds Hamas responsible for the rockets because Hamas controls Gaza. Hamas is also in a coalition government with Abbas and the Palestinian Authority in Ramalla, a sticking point with Israel, which calls the rocket attacks part of the continuing Palestinian terrorist war against Israel -- whose right to existence seems to be missing from the French plan. And, Israel has repeatedly explained that having 1967 borders would expose it to bombardment from the Syrian-Hezbollah side of the Golan Heights. What seems clear about the French plan is that it is meant to pave the way for the EU and its member states to recognize a state of Palestine. Why else would France present a plan it knows has no chance of succeeding? In the EU, only British Prime Minister David Cameron speaks out for Israel : "Because Israel is trying to defend against indiscriminate attacks, while trying to stop the attackers - and there’s such a difference between that and the nature of the indiscriminate attacks that Israel receives. I feel that very clearly. I’ve seen it very clearly as Prime Minister and I think it’s important to speak out about it. Obviously, we regret the loss of life wherever it takes place, but I do think there’s an important difference - as Prime Minister Netanyahu put it : Israel uses its weapons to defend its people and Hamas uses its people to defend its weapons." Sweden said when it recognized a state of Palestine that it wanted to support those who support negotiation over those who support violence. Sweden got it backwards. France is getting it all wrong. How sad and dangerous to see Europe, led by France, sink into being a mouthpiece for Palestinian terrorists.