Why the Palestinians Must Pay a Price

Pages: 1 2

I was at the United Nations on Friday when President Abbas made his speech demanding full recognition of Palestine as a state with the borders as they existed just before the Jordanians and Palestinians attacked Israel. In other words he wants a “do over.” He wants the nations that attacked Israel to suffer no consequences for their attempt to destroy the Jewish State. He wants to get back The Western Wall, The Jewish Quarter, and the access road to Hebrew University. Only then will he begin negotiations from this position of strength. But why then negotiate if the UN gives him more than he can possibly get through negotiation? Will he be in a position to seek less from Israel than what the UN gave him? Will he survive if he is seen as less Palestinian than the UN? Abbas blamed Israel for the self-inflicted wound the Palestinians cynically call the Nakba (the catastrophe). He denied the Jewish history of the land of Israel and he quoted with approval his terrorist predecessor Arafat. He refused to acknowledge Israel’s legitimate security needs. Abbas’s message, in sum, left little or no room for further compromise.

I also sat in the General Assembly as Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered to begin negotiations with Abbas, with absolutely no preconditions, in New York, at the United Nations, that very day. He said he would come to Ramallah to negotiate with him or keep the door of his Jerusalem office open. He did not even require as a precondition to negotiations that the Palestinians acknowledge what the UN recognized in 1947—namely, that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people.

Although many in the international communities and on the editorial pages of newspapers claim that Abbas wants to negotiate a two-state solution, while Netanyahu has refused to do so, the truth was on full and open display at the General Assembly on Friday: Netanyahu wants to negotiate a peace now, whereas Abbas wants to win recognition from the United Nations before any negotiations begin. As Netanyahu put it: “Let’s stop negotiating about negotiating and let’s just start negotiating right now.”

If the Palestinians accept Netanyahu’s offer to negotiate a peaceful two-state solution, it will get a real state on the ground—a state that Israel, the United States, and the rest of the international community will recognize. It will not be on the pre-1967 borders because the Palestinians are not entitled to such borders and because such borders are not conducive to peace, but it will be close. The Palestinians will get a viable state and Israel will get a secure state.

If, on the other hand, the UN were to reward nearly a century of Palestinian rejectionism and violence by simply turning the clock back to 1967 (or 1947), it will be encouraging more cost-free rejectionism and violence. The Palestinians must pay a price for the thousands of lives their rejectionism and violence have caused. The price must not be so heavy as to preclude peace, but it must be heavy enough to deter war.

This article originally appeared in The New Republic.

Pages: 1 2

  • UCSPanther

    Statehood may be a blessing in disguise, for it will open a Pandora's box for the Palestinian terrorists, and it may very well cut down on any last-minute intervention options for Hamas.

    I wager that in the next Operation: Cast Lead redux, Hamas may cease to exist due it being wiped out, and they probably know it. They were bellowing how they won and defeated the Israelis, but it was a" victory" that at best, I would classify as a pyrrhic victory, and at worst, a stay of well-deserved execution.

  • IamJoseph

    Its not a 2-state:

    "It will be a historic compromise to grant two states in Palestine – one for the Jews – and one for the Arabs' – A cigar chomping Churchill.

    Serial 2-state demands in the same land = 100% Genocide.

  • http://apollospaeks.blogtownhall.com/ ApolloSpeaks

    !I once heard Dershowitz say that he was "pro-Palestinian." It annoyed me until I realized that I too in a sense was pro-Palestinian in so far as I'm all for the Palestinians becoming peace loving, civilized, and democratic like Israeli Jews. Will that ever happen? Not in our lifetime.

    • ziontruth

      To be truly pro-Palestinian is to be pro-Israel, for the nation state of the one and only true Palestinian nation, the Jewish nation.

      To side with the Arab settler-colonist land-thieves falsely calling themselves "Palestinian" is to be pro-Islamic-imperialism, whether intentionally or not.

  • aspacia

    The Muslim majority lands will not tolerate the Jewish state. Israel will probably have to annihilate or expel all Muslims from Israel proper, Gaza and The West Bank.

    THERE NEVER WILL BE PEACE@

  • http://historyscoper.angelfire.com tlwinslow

    Dershy doesn't really support a 2-state solution: he's a LAWYER and he's not in court :)
    If the Palestinians aren't happy with JORDAN then why would they want a 2nd state on Israeli land? Answer: because they are Saudi pawns in their chess game aimed at annihilating Israel for their dead god Allah. That's why it won't work.
    http://tinyurl.com/muslimscope http://tinyurl.com/jerusalemhistory http://tinyurl.com/islamvids http://tinyurl.com/islamwatch http://go.to/islamhistory

  • Inis_Magrath

    Dershowitz wrote above that he supports a negotiated peaceful two-state solution with borders that should, "not be on the pre-1967 borders because the Palestinians are not entitled to such borders and because such borders are not conducive to peace, BUT IT WILL BE CLOSE." (emphasis added).

    I'm glad the Mr. Dershowitz supports President Obama who took the same position by saying to AIPAC, "We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps."

    You can't arrive at negotiated borders that are "close" to the 1967 lines, unless you start your negotiations from the 1967 lines with the understanding that the negotiating parties must then "mutually agree" on some variances to the 1967 lines.

    Thank you Mr. Dershowitz for agreeing with President Obama.

  • http://www.contextflexed.com Flipside

    Alan Dershowitz loves to dictate prerequisites. The video in which he tried to pressure J Street to join AIPAC and voice all of its differences privately was indicative of his falangist desires for control, and the domination of all discussions behind a wall of corporate secrecy. The fact that he shouts down any criticism of Israel and tries to dictate terms by manipulating the ground rules for discussion means that while it is necessary to take him seriously as a machinator, it would be foolish to take him seriously as a political comentator or peace negotiator.

    • maturin20

      It's classic academia. "Of COURSE you have to take Poli Sci 302 before joining my seminar!"

  • crypticguise

    The Palestinians will continue to demand what they can not get through negotiations. I think their position is totally intractable and they will not change in our lifetimes.

    Are they STUPID? Perhaps, hypnotized by 1,400 years of Islamic hatred of the Jewish People. Their position is neither logical nor "sane".

  • Raymond in DC

    Perhaps the greatest flaw in the 1979 Camp David treaty with Egypt was that Egypt itself paid no price for its aggression, as it got back every square inch of what it lost in 1967, as well as Israeli upgrades to infrastructure and oil fields. Egypt was made whole, and then some. Now everyone wants a comparable deal. Had Egypt been required to, say, cede Sharm el Sheikh or territory up to the Mitla Pass, it would have been clear that such aggression would not be cost-free.

    Fast forward to the present. It's not just that Syria wants all the Golan back and the PA wants all the land previously held by Egypt (Gaza) and Jordan (Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem). It's that they know even if they start another war, as Hamas did in 2008, it will be quickly followed by a "donors conference" to rebuild all that their aggression led to.

    Most insulting is that those who insist on pre-1967 lines "with agreed swaps" expect Israel to "pay for" lands that previously belonged to Jews before they were seized by her enemies – the Gush Etzion settlement block, the Old City's Jewish Quarter, the Sheikh Jarra neighborhood, and much more – even the Western Wall plaza, if they want to retain them with other territory. That's simply madness.

  • Marty

    palestinians are not a nation and they do not deserve a state. There was no peace when Israel was at the 1967 lines. The palestinians even then wanted to "drive the Jews into the sea." Their policy of genocide is consistent and relentless.

  • Pathena

    The phony history and propaganda of Arabs being "Palestinian" came from the invention of the "Palestine Liberation Organization" by Gamal Nasser, ruler of Egypt, and the Soviet Union, both haters of Jews, in 1964 in Cairo.
    "Palestine" meant "land of the Jews" from the time that the Roman Emperor Hadrian in 135 A.D, after defeating the last Jewish uprising under Bar Kochba, changed the name of Judea to Palestina. (He also outlawed Judaism and renamed Jerusalem "Aelia Capitolin," his gens name being "Aelius." "Palestinian" meant "Jew." After World War I, Great Britain was given the "Palestine Mandate" to be the "homeland of the Jews."
    The so-called "two state solution" is ridiculous – the Arabs do not need or deserve yet another state.

  • 080

    For the Palestinians there is only a one state solution. It's called Jordan. Placing a state headed by Hamas or the PA on your border is insanity. The only people who can possibly believe in it is called a Liberal.

  • http://www.contextflexed.com Flipside

    "Liberal" is just a euphemism for "Jew," so that can't make much sense.

  • joy52

    Just continue to contain them. They have demonstrated over decades they are not smart enough to take the money handed to them and make something of themselves other than what they are. As much as islam is a threat, their history shows they destroy any culture and country they encounter, including their own. That's what hate does. Manage them, but be realistic about them. Handout-dependent cultures all end up floundering at the bottom, asking for more handouts but not realising why they are always on the bottom. A few get wise and get out while the rest self destruct. Too bad you have to live next to them.

  • maturin20

    Why should Palestinians accept less than Zionists did?

  • Thomas N. Fleming

    Dershowitz is against rewarding violence!?!?!? Hmmm…., can anybody recall the OJ Simpson trial?! I guess if Dershowitz personally profits financially by defending a double murderer, that’s different. This man is corrupt and his contempt for conservative Christians is obvious. The dishonesty of his high profile legal defense of criminals makes his moralizing bankrupt and hypocritical.

  • phillyfanatic

    To agree with Alan is a leap for me but I do. The Pals are simply un-reconstructed Islamofascist terrorists. Why reward them with a phony state which never existed in the first place? It makes no difference whether Alan is a lefty dope sometimes, he is right here. Israel is the only ally we have in the ME and the Islamofascists, notwithstanding Bama's love for them, will not change that.

  • http://OTVEgypt OTV Egypt

    Good, Why the Palestinians Must Pay a Price | FrontPage Magazine.

  • http://malaysiapalmoil.blogspot.com/2011_10_26_archive.html Palm Oil

    Magnificent beat ! I wish to apprentice while you amend your site, how could i subscribe for a blog web site? The account helped me a appropriate deal. I have been tiny bit acquainted of this your broadcast provided shiny clear idea