1. ‘Ass-Backwards’ so well describes the article’s implicit premise: that Israel’s ‘domination’ of the Palestinians is somehow a big problem, compared with alternatives. But the only reason that Israel yet exists at all, given the hostility of her enemies, is that Israel IS the stronger of the two parties west of the Jordan. Obviously this situation is the lesser evil for the Israelis. (The greater good would be a situation of mutual acceptance and coexistence, but that’s the first thing rejected unconditionally by Hamas – now the PLO’s full partner.) Compared with the alternatives Israel’s strength is not the biggest problem for Palestinians either. Absent the Israelis, they would most likely be fighting themselves more violently – or the existing Arab states.

    ‘Ass-Backwards’ is true also of depiction of the situation as primarily a conflict between Israel and Palestinians. The prime overall conflict has been not between Israel and Palestinians but between Arab states and Israel, the former using ‘the cause of Palestine’ as an excuse. In 1948, even as the Palestinians themselves failed to create their UN-authorized state, seven Arab states used their ’cause’ as an excuse to seek to extinguish Israel and capture Israel-Palestine lands. Three of those states DID capture such land. Not one of them sought to help set up an independent Palestine state. Of the original seven states, only two have signed peace treaties with Israel; the remaining five claim still to be at war with her, and yet more have on occasion joined in at least verbally.

    ‘Ass-Backwards’ applies especially to Obama’s take. Contrary to his quoted remarks, it’s not democratic Israel that ‘needs to create the context’ for peace. It’s the ‘leadership’ of the two Palestinian thugocracies, and even more so the leadership of neighboring Arab and Islamic states.

    It’s these guys who now – 63 years late – seek UN recognition of a Palestinian Arab state. They do so not as a necessary end toward a peaceful and better life for its citizens but as a tactical tool toward the same objective that in 1948 was the reason their predecessors rejected the UN’s recognition of such a state: namely, in order to extinguish Israel. As the PLO’s Abbas wrote recently in the NY Times, the PLO-Hamas quest for a UN-recognized Palestine state is intended above all as a weapon for more effectively fighting Israel.

    Ironically the author claims that the party who has already given up 78% of former land and moreover was victimized shouldn’t be the one who is being asked to make concessions. That claim might seem to vindicate Palestine Arabs vs Israel, but in fact it vindicates Israel vs her neighbors. The original British mandate for Palestine, to include a Jewish national home, included what is now Jordan – 78% of the area of the mandate. The British lost little time acting to exclude – ethnically cleanse – Jews from that 78% of the potential homeland, and to immediately set up an Arab monarchy there. Had they proceeded with equal dispatch to honor their commitments to the Jews – and to the remaining Arabs of Palestine – ensuing history might have turned out far happier.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.