Yesterday, over seventy nations took part in a so-called “Peace Conference” in Paris, allegedly to further the “Peace Process” between Israel and the so-called “Palestinians”.
What a farce!
What kind of a “Peace Conference” can there be when neither of the rival parties is present?
Neither Israel, nor the “Palestinians” were present at the event.
What kind of “Peace Conference” requires the presence of seventy nations who have, in the past, demonstrated time and again their hostility to one party to the conflict (Israel) and their willingness to completely ignore the obstinacy and refusal to negotiate of the other party (the “Palestinians”)?
Indeed, even if the parties to the dispute had chosen to attend, why should seventy other countries be represented at such a conference?!
Israel quite rightly boycotted the Paris “Peace Conference” because it was clear that it would be no different from any United Nations session – a kangaroo court held with the intention of blaming Israel alone for the lack of progress in the (non-existent) “Peace Process”.
And the “Palestinians” didn’t attend because they had no need. There were plenty of supporters ready to do their work for them.
It is enough to point out that while the closing statement of the participants (or most of them, anyway) “reaffirmed that a negotiated solution with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security, is the only way to achieve enduring peace“, the fact that neither of the parties to the conflict was present contradicts the very idea of a negotiated solution, and that while “the Participants …..
call on each side ….. to refrain from unilateral steps that prejudge the outcome of negotiations on final status issues, including, inter alia, on Jerusalem, borders, security, refugees and which they will not recognize“, they themselves, in that selfsame closing statement, “reiterated that a negotiated two-state solution should ….. fully end the occupation that began in 1967 ….. and resolve all permanent status issues on the basis of United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973)“, thereby dictating the outcome of negotiations.
Why was such a conference even necessary, given that the organizers – the French – knew perfectly well that at least one party to the conflict, Israel, would be absent?
Merely to hector and lecture the bride?
And then, when the “Palestinians” also failed to turn up, it should have been doubly clear to the conferences’s sponsors that this was nothing more than a colossal waste of time and money.
In short, the much-vaunted Paris Peace Conference can best be compared to a wedding without the bride and groom.