Angela Rayner MUST NOT make up foreign policy on the hoof
Angela Rayner grovelling for votes from a room full of Muslim men – with hardly a woman to be seen – shows Labour is pandering to misogyny
At a meeting with a group of Muslim men, Angela Rayner spontaneously decided to pitch for their votes by firstly making a personal statement about ‘Palestine’ with the words.
“If me resigning as an MP now, would bring the ceasefire I would do it”
if that were not bad enough, she then went on to take the reckless and potentially internationally destabilising decision to promise that if the Labour party wins, they would recognise Palestine.
This must be one of the most reckless and inflaming statements that she could have possibly made, but why is that?
To understand the gravity of her ill-informed, virtue-signally but ultimately completely irresponsible words, we must first understand the facts. 
Jordan was formed as Palestine for the Arabs
This is a map of the mandate for Palestine following the Balfour declaration, the area referred to as Palestine was huge. However, in the years between the two world wars, the UK changed its position and by the end of WWII, the UK was AGAINST the formation of a Jewish homeland in the area. In fact, the British were so against it, that in the two years after the end of the war, they were actively preventing Jews from making their way to Palestine, the Jews were rounded up by the British Army and by 1946, there were 16,00 Jews held in open prison camps in British Cyprus, that the world did not know about.
By 1947, the stand-off got worse. The Jews took an old ship and stripped it bare, it was named Exodus 1947, it was filled with European Jews, mainly ex-concentration camp victims, who set off from Montpellier in France, for Palestine. The Royal Navy blockaded this ship in the Mediterranean for months, the people on-board were dying of thirst but once again, the world was totally oblivious to this, until it was made public and the British Government was humiliated on the world stage and had not alternative but to let them through.
On the political front, the large mass of land that was British Mandate Palestine had already been divided in to Palestine for the Arabas, which was Jordan, but there was immense pressure on the British by the Arabs, NOT to allow any Jews into the area. Keep in mind that when Jordan was formed in 1946, there were Jews living there too, they were living all over the region and as new Arab nations were formed, the Jews were ethnically cleansed, their land stolen and they left with nothing.
After the episode with Exodus 1947, the British had no option but to concede and the Jews were given a slither of land, and on the 14th of May 1948 the State of Israel was formed and declared independence.
Jordan immediately invaded Israel, ceasing the area we know as the West Bank and once again, the Jews were ethnically cleansed. In 1949, a ceasefire was brokered by the UN, but this was a CEASEFIRE, it was NOT a concession of land or borders, this is very important.
When Israel was formed, it was formed under the international principle known as Uti Possidetis Juris, but what is that?
The principle of Uti Possidetis Juris is that a country is re-formed based on a previous geo-political entity. This was the same principle which was applied to the reformation of Ukraine and many of the other former Soviet states, and this is not based on ethnicity, but a political entity and Israel met all the requirements.
In the meantime, the Arabs who were not any one nation, but rather many different tribes, began to become nation states, but prior to this, there were no Jordanians, or Syrians, for example and the people who now identify as ‘Palestinians’ were simply a few tribes who were not even indigenous to the area, as most had migrated to the region from north and south Arabia as it was known in the the preceding decades.
However, ‘Palestinians’ who were in Jordan who amounted to around 300,000 at the time, were so toxic, and engaged in so much crime, that in what became know as ‘Black September’ in 1970, Jordan deported them. As a departing gift, the recently formed Palestine Liberation Organisation then went on to assassinate the Jordanian Prime Minister in November 1971.
Jordan has maintained its position of banning ‘Palestinians’ from entering its country and in fact, they deported many more as recently as 2012!
What about the principle of Juti Possidetis Juris?
There remained one common denominator amongst most Arabs, and that was their hate for the Jews. Just as Arabs had left the area that became Israel, Jews had also left land that was formerly Arabia, which was part of the British-French creation of new states which was set in place by the ‘League of Nations’ (the predecessor to the UN) decades earlier, but there remains one factor that seems to be lost in ignorance of international law it is this:
- Under the principle of Juti Possedetis Juris, a country cannot occupy land that it owns.
- Under that same principle, the borders of a country cannot be changed by aggression.
Take a minute to think about that. The West Bank was created by the invasion of Israel by Jordan, and even though Israel agreed to the ceasefire, (Israel has agreed to every opportunity for peace and has never been the first to break it) Israel had NEVER relinquished sovereignty over the full extend of its borders, therefore, every time the BBC says that Israelis are building illegal settlements in the West Bank, they are lying!
Furthermore, under the second principle, no matter how much its neighbours may dislike it, the borders of Israel are set in stone under international law. In fact, many of the Arab nations have now moved on and want to live in peace, but the ‘Palestinian’ hate for the Jews continues.
What effect can the statement by Angela Rayner have?
In her haste to beg for votes, the deputy leader of the Labour Party has contradicted international law, which should have been left to the Foreign office. The mere suggestion of altering the borders of Israel actually serve to contradict the legal principle under which it was founded, and this could have wide and sinister consequences.
If a terrorist organisation like HAMAS and its supporters can invade, murder, rape, take hostages and summon up support from muslims around the world, who are aided and abetted by people who are completely ignorant to law, and be rewarded with a change in borders, that sets an international legal precedent.
What effect would this have on the Dombas, Crimea, Transnistria, occupied Cyprus or any other nation that is occupied or who’s borders are under threat?
What is the message that is being sent out to nations around the world, if they see that they can bully their neighbour and if they persist, the borders can be moved? Her reckless and ill-thought comments will inflame the situation and result in more conflict, not only in Israel, but also in other parts of the world.
This woman is far to irresponsible to hold the position that she may very well be holding in the near future. Peace only happens as a result of strong leadership, who clearly demonstrate the will to act against aggression, not virtue signalling hypocrites, who would sell their soul, their principles, their values and their allies for thirty pieces of Silver.