Rewarding Aggression

Pages: 1 2

Wafa, the Palestinian Authority’s news agency, reports that Hanan Ashrawi, Palestinian legislator and member of the PLO’s Executive Committee, has told Tony Blair, former British prime minister and currently representative of the Middle East Quartet, that unless Israel stops its objectionable behavior the Palestinians won’t return to negotiations.

She was referring to two meetings that were held in Amman this month between an Israeli and a Palestinian negotiator. All accounts agree that the talks were held to appease Quartet pressure and haven’t yielded anything. Whereas Israel expresses an ongoing willingness to keep trying, PA president Mahmoud Abbas has said that if Israel does not submit to Palestinian preconditions by January 26 “all options will be open”—by which he means finalizing a deal with Hamas and Islamic Jihad leading to “popular resistance.”

What Israel has to do, Ashrawi told Blair, is stop settlement activity and precommit to the 1967 borders. She complained: “With its stepped-up illegal settlement campaign and continued efforts to create facts on the ground, Israel is undermining any and all efforts to stimulate peace.”

One notable thing here is the demand that, to enable negotiations at all, one side cede the whole store to the other. What is supposed to be in dispute, what is supposed to be the subject of negotiations, is land Israel conquered in the Six Day War of 1967. If Israel is required to agree beforehand that it is illegal to build a single Jewish home anywhere in this land, and that it does not have valid claim to an inch of it, it is not clear what is the point of negotiations or what they are supposed to be about.

And another notable thing is that the Palestinian preconditions imply a curious new international norm: that when one side is attacked, it has to hand back to the attacker(s) everything that party(ies) may have lost, so that the attacker suffers no penalty whatsoever for having carried out aggression in the first place.

On the morning of June 5, 1967, as the Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian, and Iraqi armies closed in, Israel launched a preemptive strike that saved it from obliteration. In the preceding weeks—among other such statements—Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser had said, “Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel”; Syrian defense minister (later prime minister) Hafez Assad had said, “I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation”; Iraqi president Abdur Rahman Aref had said, “The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear—to wipe Israel off the map.”

By June 10, 1967, the Six Day War was over and Israel had conquered the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, the Golan Heights from Syria, and Gaza and the Sinai from Egypt. According to both simple moral logic and international precedent, Israel was under no obligation to return any of the land that was supposed to serve as a springboard for a final, annihilatory attack. For instance, Germany, as a consequence of its aggression in World War II, permanently lost land to Poland and Russia.

Pages: 1 2

  • Alvaro

    "Israel, however, was ready to give back land it had conquered—but not all of it, and only in return for peace."

    That is in my opinion the biggest strategic blunder Israel has done. They should have done like Stalin did in Eastern Prussia. Chase the hostile civilians away in the chaos of war – and annex everything. That is the proper way of rewarding aggressors.

    • WildJew

      I think you are right. Take the North American example. White European colonists and settlers did not reward aggression. They were the aggressors. Today's Americans are the beneficiaries. Who is complaining today? No one in the criminal United Nations is complaining. Americans pay their salaries.

    • ziontruth

      "Chase the hostile civilians away in the chaos of war – and annex everything."

      Exactly. But you needn't bring the genocidal madman Stalin to make that point. The Torah calls for expelling the entire hostile population, and it says that is to be done without genocide.

      In fact, where multiple nations compete for a single plot of land and hate each other's guts, ethnic cleansing is just about the only way to prevent genocide. It's not nice, but neither is dental treatment that is done for the sake of preventing much greater toothache.

  • oldtimer

    The Egyptians got the Sinai in a land for peace treaty. The US is suppose to enforce this. However, the Arab Spring leaders want all Jews killed, not peace. So, my question is this: If the treaty is nulllified, shouldn't the Sinai go back to Israel? And if this treaty is nullified by the new Egyptian government, won't the so-called Palestinian's, who want the same agreement, do the same?

    • JasonPappas

      Of course. Every Moslem gain is ultimately met with more demands. Truce is only a means of regrouping for the next wave of jihad. Appeasement makes matters worse. Israel has been to generous. It's time to get tough.

      • oldtimer

        Right on, my point exactly..

      • angelie

        receiving a reward seems to be so easy these days especially if you are working hard. For me, it feels great that there is someone recognizes my effort and etc.. what is the best beef for steak

  • mrbean

    Muslim Arabs and their proxy terrorists have chosen the rules of the game. Jews should let them know in no uncertain terms what "Never Again" means. As for the Palestinian Muslim terrorists, it is a matter of record that Palestinians strap munitions on their own women and children and send them out on homicide-suicide missions to murder other innocent Jewish women and children in markets, restuarants, on school buses, and in their homes. The Palestinians in their own words and by their actions are committed to the genocide of the Jewish people therefore, have foreited their rights to even exist at all let alone be given a UN and US sanctioned terrorist state.

  • Cynic

    The quartet is not blind because it is what it wants.
    As Newt Gingrich pointed out in his TV interview, when he said that the Palestinians are an invented people, that the sad thing is that the US has been helping sustain the war, since the 1940s, against Israel.

  • WilliamJamesWard

    The enemies surrounding Israel should be forced to march back to Jordan or
    Egypt and Israel then should expand it's borders with the advertised intent of
    moving further into their ancestal lands. Playing lame duck and hoping for a few
    crumbs from the plates of the rotten world leaders while being more powerful
    and able to protect Israel, the Israel Government needs to quit the false face
    of inferiority, it provokes intense stupidity in the enemy leadership……William

  • PAthena

    Newt Gingrich was right – Arabs as "Palestinians" are an invented people, invented by Gamal Nasser, ruler of Egypt, and the Soviet Union in Cairo in 1974, when they invented the "Palestine Liberation Organization" (P.L.O), with all the phony history and propaganda that followed. The name "Palestine" had been synonymous with "land of the Jews" or "the Holy Land" since Jesus was a Jew, and "Palestinian" was synonymous with "Jew," from the time the Roman Emperor Hadrian in 135 A.D., after having defeated the last Jewish rebellion under Bar Kochba. That is why Great Britain was awarded the "Palestine Mandate" after World War I to be the "homeland of the Jews."

  • Dispozadaburka

    Our foregin policy is doing a great job of Islamasizing the world.
    Which is actrally the strategy.
    NWO needs a New World Religion,