The Treachery of the "Two-State Solution"
by Rachel Neuwirth
Almost everyone involved in diplomacy aimed at a peaceful resolution of the
Arab-Israel conflict thinks that the solution is a "two-state solution" - a
state of Israel and a state of Palestine, living in mutual harmony side by side,
without terror or conflict between them. President George Bush, Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert of Israel, the leaders of the European Community, Russia and the
United Nations - all are advocates of the "two-state solution." In effect, it is
a call for a "three-state solution" - Jordan, Israel and a terror state in
between, threatening the elimination of both.
However, I respectfully disagree with the view of these world leaders that a
"two-state solution" is viable.
The Palestinian Arab leadership has violated almost every agreement that it has
signed with Israel since the "peace process" began in 1993, including and
especially their repeated pledges to halt terror attacks on Israelis. Instead,
these attacks have multiplied greatly in the past thirteen years and Israeli
casualties, especially civilian casualties, have increased sharply.
Palestinian children are systematically indoctrinated in relentless hatred of
Israel, Israelis and Jews in general in the Palestinian Authority schools. The
mosques indoctrinate Palestinian adults in the same hatred, and openly incite
terror and murder against Jews ("martyrdom"). And all this, with the support of
the United States State Department, paid for by the US taxpayer.
Plainly, Israel cannot coexist peacefully with a Palestinian state ruled by the
dominant Palestinian factions in the PA-ruled territories (Fatah, Hamas, Islamic
Jihad and others). Even Israeli Arab leaders (such as Ahmed Tibi and Azmi
Bishara) have increasingly endorsed war and hatred against Israel. Clearly, no
"two-state solution" with a leadership possessed of this kind of mindset could
possibly bring peace to Israel.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and some of his rapidly dwindling
number of supporters say that they will accept a "two-state solution." However,
they will do so only if the 450,000 or so Israelis who live beyond the "Green
Line" in eastern Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria are expelled, while more than
three million Palestinians who claim descent from the Palestinians who left the
"Green Line" borders of Israel during the war of 1948 (most of them of their own
volition, at the
behest of Arab leaders
who falsely promised them a quick return) are all allowed to "return" to Israel
within its reduced frontiers.
Before we take Abbas's reputation for "moderation" at face value, we should
reflect on his remarks not long ago, at a rally commemorating his late mentor
Yasser Arafat, when he openly called on Palestinians to "use their
[American-supplied] arms" against the "occupation" (meaning Israel).
Nor should we forget that the political-terrorist organization to which Abbas
and his supporters belong, Fatah, continues to openly proclaim in
its constitution (in
both Arabic and English on its website) that its goal is "complete liberation of
Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural
existence" (Article 12, "Goals" section), and that
armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab people's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated (Article 19, "Methods" section).
As for Hamas, which now controls the Palestinian government, it has never said that it will accept a "two-state solution" or the existence of Israel in any shape or form. Its covenant (also freely available in both Arabic and English on sympathetic web sites; its official website has apparently been taken off the Web) calls not only for the destruction of Israel, but for the extermination of all Jews. It quotes a Hadith (or written tradition recording the sayings of the prophet Muhammad, the second holiest source of Moslem teaching after the Koran) as follows:
The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: "The End Time will not come until Moslems will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: 'O Moslem! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!'" (Article Seven) ...
Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Moslems. (Article Twenty-Eight)
Islamic Jihad and the smaller Palestinian terror
groups all take similar positions.
However, ideology is not the only reason why the present crop of Palestinian
leaders will never make peace with Israel and will never accept a "two-state
solution" as more than an opportunity to have a safe base of operations for
terror against Israel. There is also a practical reason. The vast sums of money
that flow to them and their followers every year from the Arab states, from
Iran, from the European Community and also from the United States are all
predicated, in one way or another, on the continuation of the terror war and the
anti-terrorist measures that these attacks have compelled Israel to take in
self-defense.
It is this constant violence that creates a Palestinian "problem" or "question"
that the West thinks it can solve, or at least appease, by throwing money at it.
And it is this "problem" that allows Arab governments to distract their peoples
from the poverty and inequality, the oppression of women, and the general
backwardness that afflict their societies. It provides a ready-made excuse for
not dealing with these problems ("We must solve the Palestinian problem and get
justice for the Palestinians first").
Peace with Israel would cut off the gravy train that has made Palestinian
leaders multimillionaires, including Arafat's widow and daughter. It would also
cut off the international publicity and spotlight that Palestinian leaders
thrive on and are addicted to. A peaceful Palestine would be off the world's
radar screen and no longer a magnet for aid. Leaders used to the glamour and
wealth conferred by their status as armed, dangerous revolutionaries would be
reduced to managing garbage collection in an impoverished, 2,500-square-mile
mini-state (the size of Delaware, but without resources or contiguity), without
even oil to make themselves important. Why in the world would they trade their
present prominence and wealth for this?
Israel has already withdrawn from 90 percent of the territory it acquired in the
1967 defensive war, in return for a "cold peace" with Egypt. Egypt has violated
the treaty by filling its state-owned media with anti-Israel and anti-Semitic
hate propaganda, and by giving arms and political support to Hamas. Israeli
unilateral withdrawals from Lebanon (2000) and from large parts of the disputed
"Palestinian" territories (1994-2005) have not brought about peace or even a
reduction in the level of violence. Why should we expect still more Israeli
territorial concessions to bring peace?
The West can never begin to think of a realistic prospect for peace until we
extirpate the root cause of
Islamist ideology and
its terrorist infrastructure organizations (such as Fatah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas,
Hezbollah, Moslem Brotherhood and others) from the midst of the Middle East and
elsewhere. There can never be peace with terrorists determined to destroy
another nation or people. Nor can those willing to tolerate such terrorists
contribute to peace.
CFPA: "Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Moslems." (Article 28)....That in itself is enough reason to support Israel.
11 February 2007 21:56:08