I doubt very much if the UN will decide what goes on in the Middle East, or elsewhere. The UN isn’t an actor of its own accord, it is merely a forum through which nations can work together if they choose to do so.

Back in September, the UN were given authority to establish a ‘Peacebuilding Commission’ for the world. On the detail, the Middle East seems a good area to start – supported perhaps by a worldwide network of mini NATO’s.

Anyway, the UN have been attempting to solve the Israel-Palestine dispute for a long, long time. Some history is here.

Extract:
In its statement today [10 November], which responded to recent events, the [UN] Committee expressed concern “about the creation by Israel, the occupying Power, of new facts on the ground that include settlement expansion in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and accelerated construction of the illegal wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.” The Committee noted that those activities contravene international law.

Let’s take these points one by one. (1) there are maybe 15 million Muslims in the EU out of a total population of 450 million – 3% of the total. They are not electorally important enough to matter much to politicians. (2) the USA like the EU is dependent on imported oil. (3) there are fewer Jews in the EU than in the USA. So only one of these three factors would in itself cause the EU to be less sympathetic to Israel than the US is.

And if Israel were in the EU, Europeans would be much more sympathetivc to Israeli concerns, particularly at the political level.

Israel would not trust Europe to defend its security. There is the memory of the Holocaust which took place in the centre of Europe. Europe is historically the centre of anti-semitism.

Anti-Jewish bigotry didn’t originate in Europe. Consider that bigotry exists in all societies and that any identifiable group of people is hated by *someone*. Therefore, since Jews originally became an identifiable group in the middle east, that’s where anti-Jewish bigotry originated (and is strongest — when’s the last time a European head of state called for Israel to be destroyed?

Regarding Israel trusting Europe, if they joined the EU they would probably be joining NATO too (most countries that have joined one organisation in recent years have joined the other). So they would also be allied with the USA and other NATO countries.

Sympathetic or impartial? It depends what stance the Israeli Government insists on. If left to its own devices, the EU might prefer instead a speedier settlement of the ages old dispute which is agreeable to the international community – the website

Israel would not trust Europe to defend its security. There is the memory of the Holocaust which took place in the centre of Europe. Europe is historically the centre of anti-semitism.

It’s certainly arguable that the special relationship between Israel and the USA in fact does Israel no favours since it enables Israel to get away with disregarding the Palestinians and the Arab world. Because its military technology is guaranteed to be light years ahead of its enemies so long as it has America’s support.Israel feels no pressure to make serious concessions and can get away with pandering to its extremists.

Some more information on the contract is here. The key weakness is that checks and balances on public spending are few.

Indeed so. The guy has hit the nail on the head.

Regarding Britain’s involvement with the JSF, I don’t think we should have shelled out any hard cash unless we got some pretty explicit assurances about what aircraft we’d be getting at the end of the day, with the contract including penalty clauses if the USA reneged on it, or the aircraft was late. If the USA wasn’t prepared to sign such a contrct, then Britain shouldn’t have got involved with the development work?

The interview also talks about what Britain shoudl do if there are problems with the F-35. Options include the American F/A-18, the French Rafale, or a navalised version of the Typhoon. my understanding is that a navalised Typhoon has been consdiered and rejected in the past, although it would have the advantage of having the RAF and RN operating only one aircraft.

UK foreign policy is also linked closely to the US administration’s. But today’s news suggests that timeous deliveries of the JSF are unlikely. Replacements are reported to include the Eurofighter Typhoon. The Radio broadcast is here. For more details.