Fine, ruling govt (BN) and opposition (PR) will in the special parliamentary session on Gaza be united in condemning Israeli aggression, calling for cease fire and end to humanitarian crisis beginning from Dec 27th , and following that, Malaysia will through our PM call for a UN General Assembly meeting to end Israel’s incursion into Gaza, where the UN Security Council has failed to do so : (se todays papers).

Israel’s incursion into Gaza is result of a long standing feud in which Israel fights for her right to exist in peace and security as opposed Hama’s claim of its right to resist Israel’s claim, and to fight and destroy it.

So when proceeding on this special parliamentary session on Gaza what is the government’s and the Opposition stand on this conflict of claims between Israel and Hamas :

Does Israel have the ‘right to exist as a separate state where it is now?’

We know that Israel exists as a state. It has a population of about 7.28 million, the majority of whom are Jews, that it meets international law requirements (as laid out in the 1933 Montevideo Convention) of statehood namely, a permanent population, a territory, a government and capacity to enter into relations with other States.

The only problem is its territory about which there is considerable dispute as it has since “expanded” by occupation and settlement over West Bank, Gaza and Golan or parts thereof.

Do the government and Opposition PR agree that:

1. the only Jewish state in the world Israel exists;
2. if so, is there common ground over the extent of territory in which it exists;
3. if Israel exists, does it have the right to remain so, since the opposing faction Hamas has been (rightly or wrongly) construed as taking the stand that Israel has no right to exist and is out to destroy it?

[In respect of (3) if one listens/reads media statements of Hamas members and representatives their religious and cultural beliefs include the fundamental thesis that all of the region that we now know as the ‘Middle East’ belong to Islamic communities, the very existence of the Jewish/Zionist state in the midst within the region as an aberration if not abomination. Based on that, it is Hamas doctrine to destroy Israel by shooting rockets and mortar shells at Israeli communities].

In proceeding with this special parliamentary session on Gaza where govt and opposition take common stand to condemn Israel’s military incursion into Gaza, is there the comopn ground between govt and opposition on one of the roots of conflict – Israel’s claim to her right to exist as opposed to Hama’s claim that it does not?

Can one proceed to condemn Israel’s military incursion into Gaza, skirting around and not addressing the root cause of this conflict expressed in 1, 2 and 3 above, when it clearly bears on the question of right of self defence guaranteed in UN charter raised by Israel to justify its actions, (it being the case that the answer to the question whether one exists and has right to remain so as a state must first be in the affirmative, before the next, “whether the incursion is legitimate self defence by international law and a proportionate response)?

Does PR (Opposition) have common ground with the ruling government – and where do all of you stand – on the question of whether Isreal has the right to exist that Hamas says it does not?

‘Whatever it is, the historical fact is, Palestine was home for millions indigenous people consisting of roughly 85% Muslims, 10% Christians and 5% Jews, up to 1948.’ – Anti-Kezaliman.

So Anti-Kezaliman, you are arguing that you oppose the United Nation’s determination by UN resolution 181 passed in 1947 that brought into existence the State of Israel by partitioning of the British-ruled palestine mandate [75% to Jewish state, 25% to Arab] of that mandated land?

The partition plan was approved by 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions.
The 13 countries that voted against were: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen; the 10 that abstained are: Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.

Our country wasn’t even independent in 1947 to take a position.

What is Malaysia’s stand now? That is why I pose the above 3 questions necessitated by Hamas stand to destroy Israel.

Being member and responsible international citizen of the Unitd Nation, and now calling a UN General Assembly meeting, surely we are abiding by UN resolution 181 passed by then “democratic” majority vote or we are not? :)

So what does anti-kezaliman imply or mean by the last posting?

You (anti-kezaliman) don’t accept the legitimacy of United Nations (UN) as a global association of governments facilitating cooperation in international law, security, economic development, and social equity?

Or you accept UN’s legitimacy as a supra international organisation but you don’t accept its resolution 181 passed in 1947 that brought into existence the State of Israel passed by majority of 33 to 13 member countries with 10 abstentions.

If you don’t, is it reconcilable with the much touted claims to workings of majority by majority vote as they always say here?

Or you don’t want to abide by international law by UN, don’t acknowledge the right of Israel to exist as a state, and support Hamas to lobb some more rockets into Israel???

Mind you when talking about superpowers imposing their will, at least two such – China and United Kingdom – were amongst the minority of 13 member countries voting against resolution 181!

It is also a question whether we as a nation or a people through our parliament ought or can, from standards of reasonableness, be ‘selective’ on issues relating to the UN and its decisions.

For example, can we “respect” the UN and participate by calling for a UN General Assembly meeting and a resolution condemning Israel’s military incursion and yet refuse to acknowledge Israel’s right to self defence as provided in the UN Charter or refuse like Hamas to acknowledge even its right to exist as a nation state when UN resolution 181 was democratically by majority passed in 1947 establishing the present Israel by that same body, the UN?

Can we (as member country) selectively abide or flout as we like the decisions, resolutions, norms and what constitute international law as determined by the United Nations?