Sunday, November 3, 2013

Obstacles to Peace

Michael L.

In an editorial by the Jerusalem Post we read:
We find it problematic that this government is using building beyond the Green Line as a quid pro quo for prisoner releases. Building in east Jerusalem and in settlement blocs should never be construed as a form of punishment against the Palestinians or as an “evening of scores.” Rather, it should be a natural outcome of population growth. At the same time, we can understand the political expediency of emphasizing building to blunt criticism – particularly on the Right – of the unpopular move of freeing murderous terrorists.
And futher:
The idea that Jewish settlements are “an obstacle to peace” is based on the morally repugnant premise – supported by the international community – that the very presence of Jews in these territories is an affront to the Palestinians, while Palestinians expect Israel to absorb not just the 1.6 million Arabs with Israeli citizenship but also an unknown number of Palestinian “refugees.”

This should not be surprising considering the fact that Muslim countries regularly persecute religious and ethnic minorities without incurring serious international condemnation. Why should a Palestinian state be any different? The real obstacle to peace remains Palestinians’ rejection of the very idea of a uniquely Jewish state. Decades before Judea and Samaria came under Israeli control and “settlements” began to be built, Palestinians opposed the very existence of a “Zionist entity.” To this day Palestinians harbor hopes that Palestinian “refugees” will be allowed to settle in Israel; they deny the Jewish people’s ties to the Land of Israel; they refuse to see the Jews as a distinct people that has a right to its own state.

Peace will come the day that the Palestinian people recognize the Jewish people’s right to national self-determination in its historical homeland. Blaming settlements misses the point.
The notion that the building of Jewish townships on land where Jews have lived for thousands of years before the Arab invasion is an "obstacle to peace" is racist on its face.  Furthermore, those Jews who set themselves up in opposition to their fellow Jews who live in Judaea and Samaria are enabling and justifying that racism.

There was a time, during the period when Oslo still seemed at least somewhat viable, that it was understandable that Jewish people might oppose Jews building housing for themselves on land that might someday become part of an Arab state, but now that Oslo is over there is simply no justification, moral or practical, for supporting this rank bigotry against the Jewish people.

From the comments:
There is no "East Jerusalem" and "West Jerusalem" like some modern edition of Berlin. There is only ONE Jerusalem and it is Israel's capital.  
Jerusalem is Israel. Israel is Jerusalem.
I do not know that I would go so far as to say that Jerusalem is Israel, but certainly Jerusalem is of Israel and thus of the Jewish people.  Israel needs to declare total sovereignty over the entirety of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount.

If the Arabs accept a corrupt terrorist statelet for themselves on Jewish land, Ramallah should be its capital.  Or, if not Ramallah, any other Arab town, but not the ancient capital of the Jewish people, the City of David, Jerusalem.


  1. The irony of certain 'progressives' smearing Israel as an apartheid state, while calling for the creation of yet another Jew-free, medieval theocratic dictatorship, is truly astounding.

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but is there any other ethnicity anywhere in the world, against whom it is considered acceptable in polite Western society to tell them where they can, or can not, choose to live?

    In any case, not one inch of Jerusalem should be given up for a future Palestine. That's the cost of endlessly saying no, and launching numerous terror wars and campaigns. If it were up to me, at least...

    1. I agree.

      Dividing Jerusalem is an absolutely terrible idea and it will NOT lead to peace.

      So, what's the point?

  2. The idea that Jews living in Israel is the obstacle to peace is absurd. It's simply the next complaint from the idiots who are professional complainers.

  3. When Yaacov Lozowick still had a blog he covered this in great detail

    Lozowick is the German born former head of Israel's Yad Vashem archives and current chief achivist of the Israeli National Archives.

    I see he's restarted his personal blog to some degree without any of the political content of yore.

  4. I read somewhere recently there was a PA document showing negotiating positions so extreme that it would be hard for anyone claiming reason to see who was the obstacle, and it was being concealed from mass dissemination, much like the PA celebrations for the murderers.

    1. The Palestinian Arabs reject peace out of ideological principle and they exalt the love of death as the highest aspiration of their society.

      Between these two things, a meeting of the minds between the Arabs and the Jews half way is inconceivable. And there is no real dialogue going on and on the Arab side, there is no grassroots "peace camp." That alone is telling about why the prospects for peace are quite remote, indeed.

    2. It should be obvious to those of us who are closely following the Arab-Israel conflict that these negotiations are, for all intents and purposes, a set-up.

      The Palestinian-Arabs ask for more than they can reasonably get and then blame the Jews for the failure of talks, at which point John Kerry's "delegitimization on steroids" kicks in.

      This is imminent.


  5. The real obstacle to peace is the Arab hate culture. They teach their children to hate.

    A society raised on hate is incapable of living in peace with others. Nothing the Jews do will change how the Arabs see them.

    Therefore by definition, peace is impossible in the Middle East.

    1. Norman,

      what you say is true, but they frame that hatred within the language of human rights and social justice and thereby sucker well-meaning westerners into the "Palestinian narrative" of Arab innocence in the face of Jewish aggression in the middle of the last century.

      Our alliances are eroding because they are tending, more and more, to believe the lies told about the Jews who they call "Zionists."

      One cannot hate a Jew aloud in polite company in the west, but one can certainly despise a "Zionist," whatever that is, exactly.

  6. Some societies only understand how to function within a framework of failure. They have to manufacture failure to ensure an adequate supply. Success is toxic to them.

  7. "there is no grassroots "peace camp." That alone is telling about why the prospects for peace are quite remote, indeed

    An excellent point and one that you never seem to hear. Course you don't hear much about their "hate camps," except at places like this. Lots of those around.

  8. From IDF radio. Egads if true.

    " The radio station says the US has informed Israel and the Palestinian Authority that if negotiations between them do not advance, Washington will propose its own solution, that will include a US position on every point that is in contention. In effect, according to the report, this will be an attempt to force the sides to agree on a solution formulated by the US.

    The US moves comes after three months of talks between the sides which have reportedly made very little headway.

    The US plan reportedly is similar to the Clinton outline, which is based on an Israeli retreat to 1949 armistice lines, and some swaps of territory.

    The Obama Administration is reportedly determined to achieve “a diplomatic breakthrough” by mid-2014, and believes that Israel under Binyamin Netanyahu and the PA under Mahmoud Abbas are capable of reaching agreement.

    Until now, the talks were based on the idea that the two sides negotiate directly, with the US only acting as a mediator.

    The American decision to present a proposed agreement was reportedly communicated by several senior officials, including the Special representative to the talks, Martin Indyk. Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly briefed Netanyahu on the matter when they last met, in Italy...."

    1. Like Obamacare, unilaterally deciding for others what is in their own best interests, then acting to force compliance.

  9. Well that's pretty unlikely. It is classic Obama though. Obama only functions in a sphere were he can unilaterally dictate all terms. This is why he's so bad at working with Congress and a complete failure in foreign policy. They don't HAVE to obey him. He's not the boss of them.

  10. I would also suggest that the Arabs don't even and never will agree what 'peace' even is. Their so called working definition is pretty close to genocide.

  11. Hmmmmmmmmm. According to this guy most released Pal prisoners " join the efforts for peace after their release. ",7340,L-4449261,00.html

    Colour me all surprised and stuff.

  12. "Simply put, so long as the Palestinians honor murderers, there is no reason to believe they are willing to end the conflict."........Jonathan Tobin

    By George, I think he's got it!!!

  13. For those who think peace is just round the corner, here's a little bummer for ya.

    "Abbas' speech at PA event:
    All of Israel is occupied Palestine

    "Gaza... the West Bank...
    the 1948 lands (i.e., Israel) are occupied"

    Song glorifying violence at event:
    "There is no force in the world
    that can remove the weapon from my hand"

    Read it all then go for a ride on your Unicorn to calm down.