Monday, August 23, 2010

If It's "difficult, but possible," It's Not Peace

True peace, and please remember that if it isn't the genuine article it doesn't count bupkes, isn't climbing Mount Everest.  I wouldn't even compare it to a marriage, since some marriages end up as hateful, dangerous hells.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's statement sounds more like a desperate last minute cancer treatment:

...The achievement of a peace agreement between us and the Palestinian Authority is a difficult thing, but it is possible.

We are coming to talks from a real desire to achieve a peace agreement between the two peoples, while safeguarding Israel's national interests, foremostly security. I know that there is a considerable skepticism after 17 years having passed since the beginning of the Oslo process. It is possible to understand why this doubtfulness exists. We are seeking to surprise the critics and the skeptics, but in order to do this we need a real partner on the Palestinian side. It is possible to succeed with a hand extended in peace, but only if someone on the other likewise extends one. If we discover that we have a real partner on the Palestinian side, sincere and serious in negotiations, negotiations which will require both sides to take necessary measures, not only the Israeli side but also the Palestinian side, if we discover we have such a partner, we will be able to shortly reach a historic peace agreement between the two peoples.

This agreement will be based on three initial components: First of all, on real and sustainable security arrangements on the ground; secondly, upon recognition of Israel as the national state of the Jewish People, and this means that the solution of a problem like the demand for return will be realized in the territory of the Palestinian state; and the third component, the end to the conflict. We are discussing a peace agreement between Israel and a demilitarized Palestinian state. This state, if it should be established after this process, is due to end the conflict and not to be a façade for its continuation by other means.

Security, recognition of the national state of the Jewish People and the end of the conflict – these are the three components that will ensure us a real and lasting peace agreement.
Jerusalem, 22 August 2009, PM Netanyahu's Remarks at the Start of the Weekly Cabinet Meeting

There are a lot of "ifs" here in Netanyahu's statement.  His proposal is built on a very "iffy" premise, that our Arab enemies will agree to a "demilitarized Palestinian state."

At present the pragmatists among us recognize that the Arab terrorists aren't "demilitarized."  They have weapons.  And the Arabs in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan all have weapons, missiles, rockets which can easily reach every single city in Israel. 

Mahmoud Abbas, who is supposedly our "peace partner," has his minimum start-up demands:
"...ending the Israeli occupation of all territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem and the occupied Syrian Arab Golan and the remaining Lebanese territories, and the establishment of independent State of Palestine with its capital East Jerusalem..."

What sort of "lala land" does Bibi inhabit?  There will be no peace at this time, in our generation.  There's nothing to negotiate and nobody to speak to.  We (the Arabs and Israel) aren't two misbehaving siblings fighting over Lego pieces.  It's a matter of life and death.  The Arabs are prepared to kill us and destroy our country. 

This past Shabbat's weekly Torah Portion concluded with a timely reminder:
יז זָכוֹר, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-עָשָׂה לְךָ עֲמָלֵק, בַּדֶּרֶךְ, בְּצֵאתְכֶם מִמִּצְרָיִם. 17 Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way as ye came forth out of Egypt;
יח אֲשֶׁר קָרְךָ בַּדֶּרֶךְ, וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כָּל-הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחֲרֶיךָ--וְאַתָּה, עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ; וְלֹא יָרֵא, אֱלֹהִים. 18 how he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, all that were enfeebled in thy rear, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God.
יט וְהָיָה בְּהָנִיחַ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ מִכָּל-אֹיְבֶיךָ מִסָּבִיב, בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה-אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ--תִּמְחֶה אֶת-זֵכֶר עֲמָלֵק, מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם; לֹא, תִּשְׁכָּח. {פ} 19 Therefore it shall be, when the LORD thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget. {P}


yoni said...

your version of "true peace" seems to be unattainable even with married couples, let alone countries/states. the only other alternative would be victory, not peace. the destruction of the "other side's" potential to reach it's goals.

i too would like to see this, but if this is what you mean than say so. and what do you say to people who claim that the kind of peace we have with egypt and jordan is close enough, and suits our needs? do we really need or expect the arabs to love us?

Batya said...

yoni, Egypt and Jordan are pre-existing countries, and the borders are straight or geographical lines, pretty much. So there is absolutely no comparison with the psuedistinians aka palestinians sic.

We didn't give land to Jordan; it's in their pragmatic best interests not to attack us.

Using those countries as examples is like drinking orange paint for the health benefits of orange juice.

I agree that a perfectly peaceful marriage is rare, so the chances of people who want us dead being civil forever more is preposterous.

Anonymous said...

Jordan and Egypt only gained by signing "peace" agreements with us.

The Arabs of Gaza and Judea and Samaria were Jordan's and Egypt's proxy fighters against Israel since 1948 and it hasn't changed.

We are not at peace. It's all a facade of Israeli wishful thinking.

Batya said...

Shy, exactly, the Israeli psyche is totally and dangerously delusional.

yoni said...

>The Arabs of Gaza and Judea and Samaria were Jordan's and Egypt's proxy fighters against Israel since 1948 and it hasn't changed.-shy guy

the current understanding is that they are proxies of iran and syria. i don't know of any serious analiyst who claims they're proxies of egypt and jordan. this is just standard jewish paranoia taken to extremes. what, it's not bad enough that we have iran and syria in our back yards, you have to bring in egypt and jordan too? both egypt and jordan are involved on a security level with helping us contain the frothing hatred of the "palestinians" for their own political reasons. it doesnt mean they love us, it's just realpolitik. look it up. i'm surprised at you, shy guy. you usually sound pretty well informed.

yoni said...

>We didn't give land to Jordan; it's in their pragmatic best interests not to attack us.-batya

we gave them plenty of land- something like 80% of the british palestinian mandate, including the old city. their interests not to attack us are clear, but it didn't stop them in '67, which is why we have the shomron and yehuda and the old city now. the main thing we "gave" them in the peace accords with jordan was actually taking responsibility for yehuda and shomron- they didn't want it! i don't think your'e thinking clearly here. abdullah is not king hussein, in any case. the "israeli psyche being totally delusional" works both ways.