Let us transcend our present era—an era trapped in the trivia and transience of the media, which know nothing of wisdom and courage and of national pride and purpose.
Prof. Paul Eidelberg
The writer is founder and president of the Israel-American Renaissance Institute (I-ARI)and co-founder and president of the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy. In 1976, Eidelberg joined the faculty of Bar-Ilan University. His books, on the Arab-Israel conflict and Judaism, include Demophrenia, Jewish Statesmanship, and Toward a Renaissance of Israel and America . His latest book, America's Unknown Hebraic Republic, discusses the Hebraic background of the American Republic in which he sees a solution to the threat of Islamic imperialism. He has a weekly program on Israel National Radio, writes and lectures throughout Israel and the United States on a broad variety of subjects.
► More from this writer
Part I concluded with a simple message: “We should not negotiate with warriors until they surrender. Until then we must kill them.”
To the contrary, Israel’s government has been wedded to the timid and castrated policy of “land for peace.”
I therefore propose a bold and ultimately life-enhancing policy of “Kill for Peace”—a policy seemingly cruel, but not one of indiscriminate killing, but one that would actually reduce Jewish as well as Arab death and destruction. The rationality and effectiveness of such a policy is substantiated not only by Ralph Peters but also by the greatest military theorists in history, Carl von Clausewitz and Sun Tzu. Moreover, the thinking of these military geniuses is supported by principles of statecraft enunciated by the great nineteenth-century Austrian scholar-statesman Prince Metternich. Accordingly, I shall now enumerate ten principles of statecraft and rules of warfare required for the policy “Kill for Peace” vis-à-vis Israel’s Janus-faced enemies: but with this challenge, let us be bold enough to escape the dungeon of political correctness.
Let us transcend our present era—an era trapped in the trivia and transience of the media, which know nothing of wisdom and courage and of national pride and purpose.
First Principle: A wise and courageous statesman must set forth a clear military goal. For Israel, this goal, justified by the historical mission and territorial prerequisite of the Jewish People, is the destruction of the Arab terrorist network in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. The statesman must tackle this goal vigorously.
For this to happen it is necessary that the goal should not only be clear in the eyes of the cabinet, but it should also be made clear in the eyes of the public and even clearer in the eyes of the enemy. Israel’s enemies must recognize that they are facing a spiritually dedicated and implacable force that will break them.
Second Principle: In this age of publicity the first concern of government is not only to be right, but more important, to see that everything is called by its right name. Israel’s political leaders must stop deluding themselves and others by using such Orwellian language as the “peace process” or about “peaceful coexistence” with the “Palestinians.”
Indeed, they should remove the word “Palestian” from their vocabulary, for this mendacious word represents the anti-thesis of Israel’s sacred and immemorial right to the Land of Israel. The constant use of this Orwellian language by friends and foes alike signifies that Israel is in a war for its survival. In this war, linguistic and moral clarity will decide the outcome.
Third Principle: There is no compromising with an uncompromising enemy—an enemy that regards compromise as weakness. Israel is confronted by the most evil of enemies—warriors contemptuous of human life who lust especially for Jewish blood.
Fourth Principle: Eliminate this evil at its source by eliminating the enemy’s Jihad-inspired leadership. Disarming the enemy must be the immediate object of hostilities, for as long as the enemy remains armed, he will wait for a more favorable moment for action.
Fifth Principle: Know that any strategy conceived in moderate terms will fail because the circumstances confronting Israel are extreme—its very existence is at stake. Therefore, where each of the possible lines of action involves difficulty, the strongest line is the best.
Sixth Principle: Tell the people of Israel that there will be casualties to Arab non-combatants or civilians. But let’s not be stupid: most of these civilians are not innocents. They allow terrorists to use them as human shields. Indeed, under the guise of democracy, they knowingly vote tyranny, for tyrants who vow to “wipe Israel off the map”.
Seventh Principle: for a change, and in the name of sanity and morality, impose rules of engagement that favor one’s own soldiers. Alas, Israel’s political elites are so insecure that to prove Israel’s moral superiority and thereby avoid hostility from abroad, these elites place greater value on the lives of the enemy than on the lives of their own people.
Accordingly, bomb terrorist havens from the air, rather than endanger Jewish soldiers by house-to-house combat.
Poet-Statesman King David writes: “I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and returned not until they were destroyed. I crushed them so that they are not able to rise …” (Psalm 18:38-43)
Eighth Principle: Operate offensively, never passively or defensively, and operate continuously. Give the enemy no rest. Hence, no ceasefires. They allow the enemy to regroup, obtain more weapons, and prepare for deadlier attacks. At the same time, they short-circuit the fighting spirit required in military combat, the spirit which Israel especially requires visi-a-vis her fanatical, Jihadic enemies.
Ninth Principle: Sun Tzu, who actually hated war, warns that “to kill the enemy, men must be roused to anger.” This leads to a tenth principle, for which we should consult Israel’s poet-statesman, the psalmist King David.
Tenth Principle: The statesman must exhibit hatred of his country’s enemies. King David said, “I hate them, O God, that hate you” (Psalm 139:21). In this context, to hate God means to hate God’s laws as well as the chosen bearer of those laws, the Jewish people. Hatred, however, is futile if it does not issue in action. Therefore King David writes: “I pursued my enemies and overtook them, and returned not until they were destroyed. I crushed them so that they are not able to rise …” (Psalm 18:38-43)
This is what must be done to Israel’s implacable enemies, whose fourteen-century bellicose theology is at war with the ethical and rational foundations of Western Civilization.
We therefore propose a high-minded policy of “Kill for Peace,” one that a civilized nation will pursue when attacked by a foe that scorns man’s natural rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
This tough but high-minded policy must replace the soft and self-effacing policy of “land for peace.” Obviously, this may be beyond the ability of a government led a chance coalition of paltry political parties. Israel therefore needs a very different kind of government, one whose elected leader represents the grandeur and purpose of the nation, something more than its transient parts and passions.
Israel also needs different generals. When bogged down in war, Lincoln discovered Grant and Sherman; Roosevelt had Bradley and Patton; and G. W. Bush found David Petraeus. As we learn from the statecraft of Metternich and of Machiavelli, in the protracted war between Israel and the disciples of Muhammad, better for Israel to err on the side of boldness than on the side of caution. This practical wisdom underlies the proposed policy, “Kill for Peace.” No other policy is worthy of a people that cherishes life and human dignity.
(For more by the writer, whose basic theme is “How to make Israel more democratic by means of Jewish principles, and how to make Israel more Jewish by means of democratic principles", see Israel-America Renaissance Institute (www.I-ari.org).
No comments:
Post a Comment