Will they ever be out of our hair?

At the State Department on Wednesday, John Kerry tried to emulate the late Fidel Castro with a tedious, whiny, self-absorbed and self-serving 72-minute marathon of musings about Israeli-Palestinian peace.

Contrary to the event’s title and hype, Kerry’s homily was light on “vision.” That part of the speech was summarized, an hour into the thing, in a sketchy, six-point plan only a political theoretician could like, which will soon join numerous other peace plans now collecting dust in forgotten archives.

Most of the speech was a defense of President Obama’s decision to allow (Israel says orchestrate) a one-sided UN resolution last Friday. Why did America abstain? Israel settlement policies bury the two-state solution, boomed Kerry, and that “promises there will be greater violence and instability” in the Mideast.

Wait, “promises”?

After eight years of Obama, genocide and wholesale slaughter are already rampant in Syria, Yemen, Libya and the rest of the Mideast. ISIS controls land and exports terrorists to Europe and America. Russia and China instill fear in their neighbors. Kim Jong Un’s nukes threaten US territory, and soon Iran will join him.

So Obama rushes to put out a fire in the only place that isn’t burning at the end of his presidency.

In his Wednesday sermon, Kerry conveniently forgot key events of the last eight years. So let’s remind him.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, for one, refused to negotiate with Israel even after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu froze settlements for 10 months in 2010. In 2014, Kerry himself proposed to the two sides “parameters for peace” — likely the same six-point plan that he made public Wednesday. Netanyahu accepted it “with reservations.” Abbas has yet to give an answer.

Elected for a four-year term, Abbas has been in power for nearly 12. Throughout, he has refused to negotiate with Israel’s elected prime minister, because, he argues, Netanyahu is no man of peace — and just look at Israel’s settlement policies.

So rather than shaping Palestine’s future with Israel, Abbas has sought to take his beef to the world.

Which is why Kerry’s endless protestation — the US abstention was no different than votes by “every past US administration” — is so off: Ronald Reagan, indeed, abstained on anti-settlement UN votes. But the US opposed an independent Palestinian state at the time. And Reagan opposed Israel’s return to the “indefensible” armistice line that existed between 1949 and 1967.

Friday’s US abstention was different because it enabled the Palestinian notion that the United Nations, speeches in Washington and international conferences — like the one scheduled to take place in Paris Jan. 15 — will deliver Israel’s acquiescence and help bring Palestinian goals to fruition. Can international prosecutions and renewed boycott drives be far behind?

In his (thankfully short) response to Kerry Wednesday, Netanyahu expressed concern that a version of Kerry’s “vision” would be adopted in Paris, and then, once again, quickly translated to a Security Council resolution.

And as Friday’s vote shows, ganging up on Israel is the lowest common denominator for world diplomats. (Even America’s closest allies at the Security Council, by contrast, rejected UN Ambassador Samantha Power’s attempt that same day to impose an arms embargo on South Sudan.)

By elevating the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to the top of the global agenda as the world burns, Obama and Kerry gave themselves an easy way out. In the process, they made agreements between future Palestinian and Israeli leaders less likely, and harmed the ties that are being formed behind the scenes between Israel and Sunni Arab countries.

And Kerry still has three weeks left.

“Stay strong Israel, January 20 is fast approaching,” President-elect Donald Trump tweeted Wednesday.

Let’s hope no more irreversible harm is committed before then.