Today's conference in London, entitled 'We Believe in Israel,' was a rousing affair. There were plenty of expert speakers, including Natan Sharansky, Ron Prosor and Colonel Richard Kemp, and a truly inspiring display of solidarity with the Jewish state. The buzz that such events create can never be underestimated.
It all kicked off with a speech by Liam Fox, a man who in previous years has never shied away from demonstrating his solidly pro Israel credentials. Today was a matter for some disappointment, however. True, he made some impressive remarks about how he supported Israel's right to exist and to defend herself. He spoke of the threats from other countries, including Iran, and how Israel was a proud democracy in a region stuffed full of autocracies. But his pro Israel position was badly undermined by some of his other comments.
He described the Israeli settlements as 'illegal' and an 'obstacle to peace.' The condemnation of settlements as illegal is naturally contentious and can be disputed by pointing to some technical points of international law. But no, for Dr. Fox the issue was settled (pardon the pun). But if settlements are such an obstacle to peace, then Netanyahu's 10 month freeze should have brought Mahmoud Abbas racing to the negotiating table only last year. It did not. So why did Dr. Fox not acknowledge this?
Dr. Fox then talked at another point of how he believed in a two state solution based on the 1967 borders. The 1967 borders? That goes beyond what even UN Resolution 242 says (which talks of giving up territories, not 'the' territories.) Were Israel to revert to these territorial limits, her security would be emasculated at once, inviting the very next stage of a bloody conflict in the region. He also spoke of how Jerusalem had to be the capital of two countries, not one, a position directly at odds with that of the Israeli government.
When Liam Fox mentioned the unity government of Fatah and Hamas, he declared that any such government would have to be judged by its 'actions' and not merely its words. But what actions can he reasonably expect from a Hamas dominated government? Can he expect it to become more moderate than the Abbas dominated PA which has consistently spurned opportunities for peace, incited hatred against Jews and spoken of the right of return as non negotiable? This is a risible reflection of the current government's analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Nonetheless, this was a dark moment in an otherwise exciting conference.