Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Green-Lined: A counting and an accounting

Yisrael Medad

As Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made clear in Washington last week, recalling the 2009 speech he gave at Bar-Ilan University in Israel when he had outlined the two pillars of peace that he presumes will enable all the outstanding issues of peace negotiations to be resolved, he last week announced with Hillary Clinton and Mahmoud Abbas at his side:

And these are legitimacy and security. Just as you expect us to be ready to recognize a Palestinian state as the nation state of the Palestinian people, we expect you to be prepared to recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. There are more than a million non-Jews living in Israel, the nation state of the Jewish people, who have full civil rights. There is no contradiction between a nation state that guarantees the national rights of the majority and guaranteeing the civil rights, the full equality of the minority." And the issue of security, being currently different than it was a dozen years ago, Netanyahu tclarified in that Bar Ilan speech:

a real peace must take into account the genuine security needs of Israel that have changed; they've changed since I was last here...In these 12 years, new forces have risen in our region, and we've had the rise of Iran and its proxies, and the rise of missile warfare. And so a peace agreements - a peace agreement must take into account security arrangement against these real threats that have been directed against my country."

I am aware that his words were meant mainly for the American Administration and the media. Nevertheless, we Israelis were listening closely. With the Rosh Hashana High Holiday season upon us, I have two comments on his words.

First, despite the attempt to clothe Arab violence as some form of "resistance" which could be, in certain circumstances, justified, Israel's representatives must make it clear that Arab terror was and is different from any previous form of national liberation struggle. Terror is an intimidating force that appears to be indiscriminate but one which has a political goal. Arab terror is a form of violence whose goal is simply to kill Jews. It is not political in character but quite personal. It is not primarily intended to alter a regime or government or policy but rather to cause the death of Jews as Jews. During the Mandate, the Arab terrorists tried to claim a distinction between Zionists and non-Zionists but it was false. Arab terror is the ultimate form of indiscriminate death: men, women, children, old, young, religious, secular, Zionist or post-Zionist, peace campers or Yesha residents. It is evil and those who employ it can never be peace partners of whatever level and without regard to any future security safeguards.

Secondly, the "two-state solution" has really little to do with Israel. It is a smokescreen that hides the real problem to be solved which is, I suggest, a goal of foremost shoring up the Hasemite Kingdom of Jordan and preventing a Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt. Israel has to pay up for the problems of these two Arab countries. This is the real "two-state solution".

Jordan fears the status quo which only increases the pressure on it to solve the problem of an Arab state in the former Mandate territory. Jordan is an artificial state entity which has almost a 70% population that could be characterized as "Palestinian." Egypt, the most repressive regime the Arabs who refer to themselves as "Palestinians" have suffered (military rule of Gaza; no granting of citizenship), fears the influx of Hamas in Egypt, already meeting with success in the Sinai Peninsula.

Moreover, the present Obama-driven "two-state solution" does not solve the winds of change among Israel's Arab intellectuals who are demanding a break-up of Israel, whether through ethnic autonomy other forms of administration prefering to refer themselves as Palestinians who are citizens of Israel rather than the former "Arab Israelis" (much of which is served by radical Jewish funding from abroad). Their future vision is subversive and the establishment of a second Arab state within the former Mandate borders not only is unfair (three states for two people) but dangerous for Israel.

All talk about "territorial compromise" but Arabs are excluded from this framework. They refused the 1947 partition, set up the fedayeen terrorists of 1949-1956, launched PLO terror in 1965, precipitated the 1967 war and they refuse to be responsible for being part of the solution but rather solely the recipients of largesse: diplomatic pressure on Israel, foreign donations (which are embezzled), continuation of the refugee camps and the championing of a fictional 'right of return', the boycott of Israel and the fomenting of a campaign of apartheid libel but will not yield.

As Mahmoud Abbas has now made clear, again:

[His approach to borders would begin with the 1967 lines and demarcating a Palestinian state from there]. Once we have the borders set, we can find a solution for Jerusalem, the water and the settlements... I will not give up on any of the constants and if they ask me to make concessions on the right of refugees or the 1967 borders, I will leave. I will not accept it on myself to sign on one single concession."

Israel led by Netanyahu may presume to be involved in negotiations but they are not about peace or security. They are a diktat of capitulation.

Israel needs to count and realize there are already two Arab states that define themselves as "Palestinian": the Gaza Hamastan and the Fatah "West Bank". The thrust of Arabs within Israel only point to the danger for Israel if a "Palestine" becomes a reality. We need to make an accounting of this situation and announce that given these circumstances, there is no need for Israel to yield or compromise.

To read more, click here

No comments: