Pages: 1 2
And later on Sunday Palestinian Media Watch released another bulletin. This one discloses that just three weeks ago, PA TV broadcast a tribute to “martyrs”—and it included a terrorist who, in a 2002 attack, murdered three Israeli high school students in the very same settlement, Itamar.
In addition to complaining about PA incitement, the Israeli government announced on Sunday that it was building a few hundred new housing units in large settlements that Israel would supposedly retain in a peace deal with the Palestinians. The UN hardly waited for the members of the Fogel family to be buried before condemning the move.
Indeed, given the blasé media reaction and de rigueur, none too hasty condemnations by world leaders, it is hard to imagine that Friday night’s atrocity will have much effect on the ongoing, relentless pressure on Israel to cede land to the Palestinians. The question is—with the attack already perceived as a milestone and new revelation of the depths of Palestinian barbarity—what effect it will have in Israel itself.
Netanyahu has painted himself into a difficult corner by, on the one hand, frequently declaring his eagerness to negotiate with the Palestinians on creating a state for them and, on the other, denouncing their “wild incitement [that] ends up prompting the murder of children.” Clearly, setting up a murderously hateful state alongside Israel could not be a rational, responsible step. Whether Netanyahu will adopt a more truthful, assertive approach remains to be seen.
As for the Israeli population, the attack has had an unmistakable impact and takes its place beside other dire epiphanies—the 2000 lynch of two soldiers in Ramallah, the 2002 Park Hotel massacre, the post-disengagement relentless rocket fire from Gaza, and others—that have led the population away from the dovish illusions of the 1990s and toward greater strength and realism. In that regard, if Netanyahu takes a flintier tack—even if its means defying Obama—he will have Israel behind him.
Pages: 1 2