The truth about the Jewish settlements and Jerusalem

The pressure on Israel continues.

French President François Hollande summoned a gathering of 70 countries with the intention of pressuring Israel on the alleged problem that the Jewish settlements on the West Bank supposedly signify for the Middle East, and how that situation endangers the solution for the two states.

Curiously, neither Israel nor the Palestinians heeded the summons. Israel, with reason, said that the important meeting is that of Israelis and Palestinians, face to face, without the mediation of other powers.

Simultaneously, the meeting in Paris had another objective. To ask President-elect Donald Trump to reconsider his pledge to relocate the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, because that change in location -- the embassy is in Tel Aviv today -- also would prevent the creation of a Palestinian state someday.

In my opinion, both petitions are wrong.

The basic problem is not the Jewish settlements on the West Bank or Jerusalem as the capital. Those are pretexts not to reach an agreement.

The basic problem is the tenacious refusal of the Palestinian leadership -- both the one in Ramallah, the West Bank, linked to Al Fatah, and the one that controls the Gaza Strip, subordinated to Hamas -- to recognize the existence of the Jewish state and declare clearly that they are willing to live peacefully with their neighbors.

I have gone to Israel several times and have interviewed almost all the Jewish leaders. To most of them, the creation of a Palestinian state is an acceptable outcome, but only if that state is willing to coexist peacefully with Israel, as Egypt and Jordan do.

In addition, it is essential that the Palestinians of Al Fatah and Hamas stop fighting each other because, in practice, there's not just one but two Palestinian proto-states today, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, that kill, kidnap and torture each other with unusual ferocity.

Israel is no longer the problem in the Middle East. In Syria, the cruel bombings of Aleppo have nothing to do with Israel. Nor have the civil war attempts in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen been provoked by Israel.

The problem lies in the Islamic nations.

The problem lies in the culture of death that rules those societies, where many families view with admiration how some of their youngsters sacrifice themselves to harm other people, almost always civilian, who have been drawn into the conflict.

It might even be useful if a percentage of Jews lived in a hypothetical Palestinian state created on the West Bank. Isn't 20 percent of Israel's population Islamic, and do they not have their own deputies, and are they not integrated in the only democratic country in the region that respects women?

Who came up with the foolish nonsense that a Palestinian nation should be inhabited only by Palestinians? That's the shortest route to racial intolerance and aggression.

As to Jerusalem, although may Jews accept the partition of the city, there are many who oppose it.

It seems to me that fragmenting the city will encourage future conflict.

From the foundation of Israel until the war of 1967, Jerusalem was divided. The western part of the city was governed by Israel. The eastern part was ruled by Jordan -- and that was a horror.

From this point of view, there's no reason why the United States shouldn't relocate its embassy in Jerusalem. If a new Palestinian state is finally generated, Washington would create another embassy, although it could temporarily serve both nations from the same building. That would be the reasonable thing to do.

There's no reason to cave to the blackmail of people who are incapable of pondering Israel's interests.