NY Times tells Obama to force peace deal on Israel at UN

The New York Times editorial board has demanded that President Obama lead the charge in the UN Security Council to approve a resolution that would pressure Israel into an unfavorable peace deal.

The NY Times’ demand to pressure Israel into a peace deal is apparently in response to Israel approving the construction of a new Jewish settlement in the West Bank, which is simply “another step in the steady march under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to build on land needed to create a Palestinian state.”

The NY Times article states that “the best idea under discussion now would be to have the United Nations Security Council, in an official resolution, lay down guidelines for a peace agreement covering such issues as Israel’s security, the future of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees and borders for both states.”

This new area “is designed to house settlers from a nearby illegal outpost, called Amona, which an Israeli court has ordered demolished because it is built on private, Palestinian-owned land.”

The NY Times continues by claiming that “the most plausible pressure would come from Mr. Obama’s leading the Security Council to put its authority behind a resolution to support a two-state solution and offer the outlines of what that could be…it is the kind of political pressure Mr. Netanyahu abhors and has been working assiduously to prevent.”

According to Israel National News, “no one has yet come forward claiming ownership of the land Amona is built on. Instead, left-wing organizations have found property deeds given out by King Hussein of Jordan. No taxes were paid on the land, no one did anything to it, no one knows who the owners are, and the founders of Amona built in good faith on land they were told was unowned.”

“Though there has been a de-facto building freeze in Judea and Samaria for several years, the NY Times insists that, “A failure to freeze settlements has long been at the center of tensions between successive American administrations and Israel. This latest decision was especially insulting…If the new settlement was known earlier, it might have affected those [military aid package] negotiations.”

The article continues, “The most plausible pressure would come from Mr. Obama’s leading the Security Council to put its authority behind a resolution to support a two-state solution and offer the outlines of what that could be…it is the kind of political pressure Mr. Netanyahu abhors and has been working assiduously to prevent.”

INN reports that although “the US has historically blocked Palestinian-led attempts by the UN to issue condemnations or resolutions against Israel, particularly with regard to the settlements, there is speculation that US President Barack Obama might utilize his lame duck last two months in office to pressure Israel and aid the ‘Palestinian’ cause.”

“The PA has consistently refused to conduct direct talks with Israel until a list of pre-conditions are met, though Israel has repeatedly called on the Palestinians to hold such talks without pre-conditions”, says Israel National News.

Although PA chairman Abbas “constantly talks about peace and a two-state solution, he continues to incite hate and encourage terror attacks, in addition to paying salaries to imprisoned terrorists and their families and naming schools and streets after them.”

Credit: Israel National News

NY TimesObamaSecurity CouncilUNUNSC