Israel signs a peace agreement with PA’s president, Mahmud Abbas, then a month later Hamas and Fatah form a unity government, where the new PA prime minister, a Hamas-affiliated leader, proclaims his desire to see Israel overrun by his people while letting the remaining Jews (those who survive the onslaught and the massacres) retrace their steps back to their “homes” in Europe (overlooking the fact that about 50% of Jews in Israel originated as refugees from Arab and Muslim countries).
Isn’t it better to have this Palestinian unity agreement now, before “peace” becomes a dated piece of paper, rather than later, when Israel must violate a “peace” agreement with an eye to defend itself?
As long as the US and the EU chose to ignore Hamas as a key Palestinian segment that must be taken into account in any peace agreement considerations, they advocated a distorted view, blaming Israel for laying landmines on the way to peace. Once the militant Palestinian terrorist segment, Hamas, cannot be disregarded, a middle-eastern reality will emerge, and a new realization will take effect—the Palestinians (a title that includes Hamas) will be the ones deemed responsible for the failure of the peace process. The unjustified pressure applied on the Jewish state by the US and the EU will fade away as soon as Hamas becomes an integral part of an official Palestinian entity.
Consequently, Israel should not abandon the peace negotiations but rather let Hamas do the obvious; let Hamas break the peace process; let Hamas represent the true face of the Palestinian authority; let the world hear them, notice them, understand what the Jewish state is facing on a daily basis.
History has made evident that peace and relaxation of tensions between adversaries has a stronger chance of bonding when leaders on the opposite sides are branded by their hawkish rhetoric rather than their dovish character. Nixon and China, Begin and Sadat are examples of tough-minded, combative leaders making tough calls in the name of peace. Their leftist opposition would be supportive of their daring peace-making move; their political allies at home would be, by and large, supportive of their leader, and the residual extreme right minority would be left stunned and unable to register any significant resistance in an effort to undermine the adhering peace process.
Consequently, if Israel is to make peace with the Palestinians, Hamas will have to add its signature to the agreement to make it long-lasting. This must be a condition that Israel must strive for should peace become more than just a thin piece of paper. If this is too much to ask, then let’s not pretend that Palestinian Arabs are capable of drawing up a peace agreement with the Jewish state in Israel.
We finally have an exposed reality check. Isn’t it better to deal with an adversary who admits to his true intentions rather than one who pretends to love peace, but harbors genocidal ambitions? Isn’t it better to have an Iranian president like Ahmadinejad who provokes world’s contempt rather than a smiling face named Rouhani, who harbors identical aspirations but pretends to vouch for peaceful nuclear energy? Isn’t it better to play poker when you know what cards your opponent holds rather than an opponent who hangs on to a full house but makes you believe he has nothing?
Isn’t it better to deal with a Palestinian entity that tells the ugly truth about its true intentions rather than one pretending to seek peace?
Let’s face it. Hamas is a real significant segment of the Palestinian Arabs. If Israel is to make peace with the Palestinians, Hamas must be involved in the negotiations. Otherwise, any peace agreement between Israel and the PA is bound to become unstable; it will never last beyond the next Palestinian popular or democratically elected government.
It will be extremely problematic to protect the Jewish State against rockets launched out of another country with which there is a peace agreement. It will be considerably more justified to fight and defend against a documented enemy.
Let’s not fuss about the PA and Hamas joining in on a unified government; let’s get used to reality before stepping into a world of make-believe; Let’s hope that the Palestinians’ camouflaged face is about to become unmasked.
Let’s be patient and await world leaders’ reaction once they witness the teeth of that Palestinian jaw trap. It’s about to happen, and it’s about to become a turning point, reversing Israel’s deteriorating image in the world. Just wait and see.
The Palestinian two-state confusion
I was watching CNN the other day when the anchor asked the “expert” for his opinion regarding the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange deal. “Do you believe it would help advance the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians?” he inquired.
The “expert” responded positively, “it would,” he concluded.
I almost screamed. “Are you totally oblivious to the fact that the Shalit deal was between Israel and Hamas while the so-called, non-existent “peace process” is between Israel and Mahmud Abbas who has nothing to do with Hamas?” “Don’t you see that relating the Shalit deal to the peace process is like tying NASA shuttle program to the recent price of cottage cheese?”
But then I realized that the rest of the world’s opinion-setters including the leaders of the US and Europe are just as confused.
In reality there are two separate Palestinian entities; one ruled by the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the major cities of the West Bank, the other is ruled by Hamas in Gaza. Abbas, the PA president, pretends to have jurisdiction over Gaza; it’s his personal fantasy, one that proves convenient to the civilized world.
What do they mean when they refer to the two-state solution? Does this solution include Hamas in Gaza?
Yes in the world of make-believe; No in the real world.
Abbas does not represent Gaza, and Hamas does not recognize Abbas’s authority, not even where he actually governs, not even in the West Bank. If anyone wishes to allude to a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they must stay real and recognize that either a two-state solution does not include Gaza, or alternatively, the only comprehensive solution is a three-state solution.
The informed public knows that Hamas does not recognize Israel’s right to exist. The core of this terrorist organization is formed around the concept of wiping Israel and its Jews off the map. They have even refused to support the UN move for recognizing a Palestinian state within the 1949 borders, because it would have implied a de facto recognition of Israel’s existence. Hamas will never sign a peace agreement with Israel. In their eyes, the mere idea of it is worse than blasphemy; it undermines their own existence.
Consequently, a two-state solution that does not include Gaza will not end the conflict between Israel and Hamas and its supporters in the West Bank. A peace agreement between Israel and Abbas will not constitute a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Furthermore, there is a strong probability that it may not last long, not even between Israel and the West Bank, because Hamas is too popular in Nablus, Jenin, and Hebron, and once Abbas retires peace (if ever concluded) will fade away together with him.
Unfortunately, this reality is not on the table when the two-state solution is pursued by the US, the EU or the media. They all pretend that Abbas is in charge of the two Palestinian entities. They all choose to ignore reality. They all want to pursue a convenient fantasy of a two-state solution where Mahmud Abbas is the head of a single Palestinian entity. They all ignore the fact that Gaza is not under Abbas’s jurisdiction, and that any agreement that includes Gaza without Hamas’s seal of approval is not going to stick.
Any talk of a two-state solution must spell out the nature of the Palestinian state. It must make sure that Gaza under Hamas is excluded from any such agreement. It must recognize that there are two different Palestinian entities, and that Abbas is in charge of only one of them.
Israel must make it clear to the rest of the world that a two-state solution is not a comprehensive solution, and that a three-state solution is infeasible as long as Hamas insists on wiping Israel off the map.
Enough with fantasies. It’s time for a reality check.
The Palestinians' Grand Concessions
It takes place every night.
At 9 PM New York time Piers Morgan takes to airwaves at CNN where he interviews celebrities, politicians and newsmakers. Recently, he was in Israel, where he dedicated the full hour to a face-to-face with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The next night he talked to PLO representative to the U.S., Maen Rashid Areikat who responded to Netanyahu’s claim that Israel had no partner for peace.
The PLO representative made it clear.
“The Palestinians have already made an enormous compromise for the sake of peace,” he claimed. “They have agreed to a two-state solution.”
Wow! Silly me! Why didn’t I think of that? Why did this down-to-earth veracity never cross my mind?
I guess, my logical reasoning points me to believe that when one offers to give away something he is not in the possession of and will never be, he engages in a con game. For all I know, Israel could play along, provided that con games are in fashion nowadays. Israel could counter offer:
“Dear Mr. Areikat, our deal is even better than a two-state solution. We offer Hawaii, Saudi Arabia and Norway, and if you are not fully satisfied, we will throw in New Jersey and the Brooklyn Bridge, merely for dessert.”
Problem is, rules in the Middle East are not symmetric. The Arabs are allowed to lie, to pretend, to double-cross. They are allowed to commit war crimes by claiming “resistance.” They can be charming in English when speaking to western reporters and politicians, then be contradictory, reversing their positions when speaking in Arabic to their own people.
In contrast, should Israel attempt any of these tactics, the sky will open and the acid will pour down in a tornado-packed thunderstorm.
Sorry, the Jewish state is not allowed to play by the same rules… Damn!
Case in point — the massacre in Itamar, an Israeli settlement in the Samarian hills, and its aftermath—it took place a couple of weeks ago. Palestinian terrorists broke into the home of Udi and Ruth Fogel and murdered the parents and their three children.
The killers slit the sleeping children’s throat, stabbed them in the heart, then stabbed the parents. Following the horrific slaughter, Palestinians in the Gaza strip handed out candy and pastries, celebrating their great triumph.
The Al-Qassam Brigades, a branch of Hamas, argued that the murder of Israeli settlers was permitted by international law. (Note the key rule they are playing by. They are allowed, I guess). A day later, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki, voiced doubt that the killers could have been Palestinian “The slaughter of people like this by Palestinians,’’ he claimed, “is unprecedented.’’
Really? Or does he get an F in history?
No F. He knows he is lying. Al-Malki merely employs the “swindling rule,” another tenet allowed under Palestinian’s constitution.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas went on Israel’s Channel 2 and condemned the massacre. He was a loveable peacemaker on Israeli TV, a charming idol among the Israeli left. He called it “a disgraceful act, inhuman and immoral.” The world, including left leaning Israelis were impressed. “Abbas is a partner for peace,” they concluded. How could Netanyahu claim otherwise?
Abbas never made it clear, never said it in Arabic to his own people. He did not try to stop the continuous incitement against Israel in the Palestinian towns.
On the contrary, he failed to cease his glorification campaign of Palestinian terrorists and child killers. In fact, he kept on idolizing them as heroes, role model martyrs.
What’s more, PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad honored female terrorists, including a terrorist who placed a bomb in a bus station. His praise for those terrorists came only a few hours before a bomb was placed at a bus stop in Jerusalem killing one woman and injuring 50. Fayyad later condemned that attack in English.
There is plenty of evidence that incitement and brainwashing of the young, teaching hatred of Jews and of Israel, rewriting of history and falsifying truths constitutes a full-fledged industry within the Palestinian territories. The celebrations in Gaza in the wake of the latest massacre in Itamar merely serve to highlight that point.
When the Palestinian Authority talks about the two-state solution, they are saying that they want Israel to dismantle its West Bank security check-points. They want the West Bank cleansed of Jews.
They want more freedom of movement and ease in launching terror attacks on Israeli civilians. They dream of cooking the next phase — unifying the two-states under a single Islamic regime.
If you don’t believe it, go learn Arabic. Listen to what they say in their own language; find out what lies they teach their young. Understand their con game.