Doc's Talk: The Bargaining Table Must Turn: The State the Palestinian-Arabs Do Not Deserve or Want

Thursday, May 14, 2009

The Bargaining Table Must Turn: The State the Palestinian-Arabs Do Not Deserve or Want

Nurit Greenger

For nearly two decades, Israel’s leaders have participated in failed peace meetings with one main question in mind: How much we are willing to pay for the peace we desire? In doing so, mistakenly they have acted as though the Arab-‘Palestinians’ actually have something to sell to them. During those meetings no one ever stood up to tell the Israeli leaders, i.e. Yitzchak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Ariel Sharon, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni: “Wait a minute, in this equation you’re not the buyers, you’re the sellers!” More so, none of the Israeli leaders ever stood up during one of those meetings to say to the Arab-‘Palestinians’: What you have to sell, we do not want to buy. If one day however, you arrive at the notion that you have something to sell to us, please approach us and we will then decide whether we want or do not want to buy it.”

Why Israelis are the sellers? Because everyone knows and relies on the fact that when Israel signs an agreement or treaty with an Arab country, it is capable of honoring and will honor it. On the other hand, it’s no secret that the Arab-‘Palestinians’, with or without Hamas, are in no position to deliver peace to Israel. In fact they do not want to achieve peace or statehood.

If any party should be selling, it is Israel. Yet, incredibly and most disturbingly, it is always the reverse: The Arab-‘Palestinians’ are selling ‘peace’ they can’t and have no intention to deliver, while the Israelis are buying [euphoric] ‘peace’ that simply doesn’t exist.

No wonder why all [Israel’s] the peace plans keep failing!

Groups like Peace Now keep banging their heads against the wall, hoping that more concessions from Israel, though most unrealistic, painful and of great danger to her, will somehow bring Israel closer to that elusive peace solution.

The problem with all those who are pressuring Israel to buy peace through concessions is that they help perpetuates the illusion that the Arab-‘Palestinians’ have something to sell.

What the world must finally realize, come to terms with and demand that the Arab-‘Palestinians’ indeed deliver their full end of the bargain so that the 20 years old [no] peace process can finally move forward. Until this happens, if ever, any question of creating Arab-‘Palestinians’ state is very much moot.

Solution? The sides must switch roles and with it state of minds.

Israel must act like she is the “peace shop owner in a bazaar [souk],” and the Arab-‘Palestinians’ must act like they are the “peace buyers in that bazaar [souk].” With a buyer’s mentality, the Arab-‘Palestinians’ will be more likely to make their own offers, rather than passively keep on rejecting the Israeli on going offers.

To secure the right product [peace leading to statehood] at the right price for both sides, as buyers and through negotiations, the Palestinian-Arabs will find out that Israel must have minimum security deposit which amounts to: they end teaching their children to hate Jews and Israelis and stop inciting Jihad against Israel; the Arab-‘Palestinians’ can’t offer peace while they’re teaching and inciting war; they either want peace or they want war but they cannot have both. Tragically, for the past 16-years, the Oslo Accords’ anti-incitement clause was totally ignored by the Arab-‘Palestinians’ as well as the International Community. For 16 years the Arab-‘Palestinians’ society continued its habit of demonizing Jews, which contributed to the growth of terrorism and the elevation of rejectionist forces like Hamas and indirectly to the surge of worldwide antisemitism.

Sadly, Israel is hardly blameless in this picture, and it has made its [major] share of mistakes. In my opinion, the ‘settlements’ is not one of them because according to the International Community, the League of Nations and the United Nation Organization (UN) the territories Israel gained in 1967 all legally belonged to her anyway before the 1948 Independence War. So who made it law that building new settlements in these territories is an illegal act? Why did Israel agree to it?

‘Settlements’ [shmetlements] or no ‘settlements,’ the fact remains that until now, in more than one way, the Israeli government has shown great willingness to pay a huge price for peace, even though not always with the agreement, rather with much resistance, from the Israelis they represent, i.e. the disengagement from Yamit in Sinai and the latest the unilateral disengagement from Gaza.

Had the Arab-‘Palestinians’ been smart, had they taken any responsibility for their situation and actions and had they developed a culture of co-existence, they would have long ago made Israel an offer it couldn’t refuse. They would have called Israel’s bluff and made the process real.

Instead, the entire world has been continuing the ‘sorry for the Palestinian-Arabs’ spectacle while global diplomats have been parachuting into Jerusalem to coax the adversaries into yet another round of the “let’s play the peace process” game.

Leading the latest surge of pressure—bordering threats from colder relations to ending the sale of arms—so Israel concedes to her adversaries, is blowing from the new, can-do it all, president Obama and his administration. Obama believes that a solution is possible if only the U.S. becomes more “engaged,” as if the U.S was not heavily vested and engaged in those hocus-pocus ‘peace’ talks for years. Obama will soon learn that no amount of American engagement, endless talks with the Arabs or more Israeli concessions can undo the reality that for the foreseeable future, the Arab-‘Palestinians’ are utterly incapable of delivering peace to Israel so they can deserve the statehood the International Community so badly wants to give them.

The Arab-‘Palestinians’ remaining statelessness is their ace card against Israel and their ransom card the West has been paying for these past 61 years! Who laughs last?

It is former President George Bush who wanted Iraq to become a democracy and though the USA Administrations will never openly admit it, Iraq will never be an exemplary Western Democracy enclave…It was former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who wanted and pushed for democratic elections in Gaza and in return for her thought to be good intentions, the experts begged her not to take, she got the terror organization Hamas to rule Gaza by terror and mayhem …It is the elite and enlightened of Europe and the USA and Israel who want to see a “Palestinian State” carved out Israel’s land and established in the heart of Judea and Samaria, a state the Arab-‘Palestinians’ do not really want, just pretend and put up a face they do!

As Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s Foreign Minister told the Jerusalem Post in his first interview with the newspaper: “…everybody, you know, speaks with you like you're in a campaign: ‘Occupation,’ ‘settlements,’ ‘settlers’...slogans like these, and others such as ‘land for peace’ and ‘two-state solution,’ were both overly simplistic and ignored the root causes of the ongoing conflict…the fact was that the Palestinian issue was ‘deadlocked’ despite the best efforts of a series of dovish Israeli governments. Israel has proved its good intentions, our desire for peace…the path forward lays in ensuring security for Israel, an improved economy for the Palestinians, and stability for both…it is impossible to artificially impose any political solution. It will fail, for sure. You cannot start any peace process from nothing…”

All this, of course, is rather sobering for those who fear for the future of Israel as a democratic Jewish State. One thing we can be sure of is that the International Community and groups like Peace Now will continue pressuring Israel to make concessions, and people like me will continue being frustrated that the entire process is upside down and so unfair to Israel.

Kindness is loving people more than they deserve.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk