Mideast Envoy Blair: Palestine or War

8

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

blair.jpgQuartet Mideast envoy Tony Blair, a former British prime minister, released a statement that the two-state solution must be implemented or in its absence, there will be “a hell of a fight”.

Speaking with CNN, Blair explained that the so-called two-state solution must be implemented, namely the declaration of an independent Palestinian state on portions of Eretz Yisrael. Alternatively he told CNN, there will be one state, Israel, but there will be a major conflict as a result.

He stressed the need for both sides to immediately return to the negotiating table, adding that after meeting with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, he is aware the prime minister is genuine in his statements calling for an immediate resumption of diplomatic talks with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) but the latter continues to refuse to sit down with Israel since the prime minister is unwilling to accept a total and conditional construction freeze throughout Yehuda, Shomron and Yerushalayim.

Blair stressed the need for US involvement, stating he will work side-by-side with White House special Mideast envoy George Mitchell towards advancing regional peace efforts.

The Quarter Forum represents the United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia.

(Yechiel Spira – YWN Israel)


8 COMMENTS

  1. England has such a “glorious” history of being impartial between the parties in the conflict.
    If I was a Brit, I would hide in shame in a corner for the next 100 years.

  2. L’shitaso!
    Why in the world can’t the declaration of a state for the Palestinians be in one of their arab countries? Why not in Jordan? Why must Israel give up territory for an arab state? They had to give up territory won in wars that were fought – wars in which the enemy attacked them, may I add! And now they have to give land to make a new state for the Palestinians? Mr. Blair, it’s ludicrous! There are more arabs in England than in Israel; perhaps the new state should be on British soil? Hmmmm! What do you think, Mr. Blair?

  3. Although Tony Blair has been an excellent ally to the USA in the war on terror, he is continuing the British tradition of being at best unsupportive of Israel. Except for a short alliance of convenience during the ’56 war, Britain has never been pro-Israel – from aiding Jordan’s legionaires in ’48, recognizing Jordan’s annexation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank after the war, to Jack Straw’s more recent statements.

  4. Two-state solution? Solution to what? The UN should put ARAB-Islam on trial for international terrorism; for it’s cold-blooded, insane murders on every continent, AND for the abuse of black muslims in the Sudan.

    This is nonsense! Israel is mean so we need our own country??? Every arab country is below the standards of everthing as compared to every other country. Arab muslims are committing the most heinous crimes in the Sudan while falsely crying about Israel. The facts are that arabs who are law abiding citizens in Israel live better than in any arab country.

    Enough of this nonsense. Lets get real!!!

  5. Mr blair the arabs have a state with a queen thhe country is called ENGLAND the are more arabs there then englishmen you can call it now Palestinian Arab state

  6. In the interest of fairness I must add the following:
    1) What Blair said is not in itself radical. Both Obama and Bush (and Israeli leaders) agreed to an Arab (“Palestinian”) state on the West Bank and Gaza. Bush’s strong pro-Israeli stance was in his support of Israel’s military actions and in placing the blame for the ongoing lack of peace on the Arabs.
    2) Blair strongly disagreed with Jack Straw and refused to condemn Israel for the war with Hezbola / Lebanon in 2006.

  7. to #3
    You ask “Why in the world can’t the declaration of a state for the Palestinians be in one of their arab countries? Why not in Jordan?” They tried this already. It was in 1971. It ended with then King Hussein ym”sh slaughtering tens of thousands of Palestinians and chasing arafat ym”sh into Lebanon (and we all know how well that worked out). The Palis referred to this time as “Black September,” thus the name of the 72 Munich terrorist group of the same name.

    You also state “They had to give up territory won in wars that were fought – wars in which the enemy attacked them, may I add! And now they have to give land to make a new state for the Palestinians?” Remember, 1) Israel NEVER annexed the territories; 2) Israel has always promised (from day one) to give them back as part of a peace deal(for 42 years now); 3) The creation of a Palestinian state as a solution to the “crisis” was originally an ISRAELI idea (from the political left, I grant you but) this was not a solution proposed by the US, the UN, Europe or anybody else. Isreal dreamed this up all by themselves. As the old saying goes: they made their own bed, now they have to sleep in it.

    to #9

    You state “the demographics are such that if all the palestinian arabs became citizens, eventually, if not immediately, Jews would become a minority and Israel would cease to be a Jewish state.” Based on current demographic trends, in another 20-30 years, Israel is probably going to have a non-Jewish majority anyway.

    All of that being said, Blair is 100% correct: Without the implementation of a two-state there will be, most probably, a war. Of course, there will most probably be a war even WITH a two-state solution anyway. IOW, you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

    Rav Avigdor Miller zt”l was right. He said (you will forgive me if I paraphrase) that the Zionist enterprise was like grabbing a mad dog by the ears: you dare not let go or the dog will bight you, but the longer you hold on the angrier the dog gets.