Just in case there were any doubts, last week provided conclusive proof: Yes, Palestinian violence pays. And the so-called “enlightened” countries–those Western states who claim to deplore violence and favor the peaceful resolution of conflicts–are the very ones who will reward violence the most. That’s precisely what happened with the Palestinians’ successful bid for UN recognition as a nonmember observer state.
Most European countries understood that this move would at best not advance the peace process, and at worst hinder it. So some had planned to vote no, while others planned to abstain. But then Hamas dramatically escalated its rocket fire on Israel, forcing Israel to respond; Hamas thus became the center of world attention while the Palestinian Authority was sidelined. So in an effort to give the PA a boost, European governments switched their votes at the last minute: Those who had planned to vote no abstained, and those who had planned to abstain voted yes. In other words, they agreed to support something they had previously considered “unhelpful” just because Hamas fired lots of rockets at Israel.
But the hypocrisy doesn’t end there. These same European countries are now furious at Israel’s response: They thought they had an understanding with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel would let the UN vote pass quietly. And in fact, they did. The only minor detail they’re overlooking is that Netanyahu agreed not to retaliate for the UN vote in exchange for what he thought was a European commitment to either vote against or abstain. In short, the Europeans reneged on their side of the unwritten deal, but are furious that Israel isn’t upholding its side anyway.
That is a microcosm of what’s wrong with the peace process as a whole: As far as most of the world is concerned, bilateral Israeli agreements are binding on one side only: Israel. Thus it’s perfectly fine with the Europeans for the PA to violate one of its cardinal commitments under the peace process: that all disputes will be resolved through negotiations rather than unilaterally–or as the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement put it, “Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.” But it’s an outrage, completely beyond the pale, for Israel to respond by doing something that no signed agreement actually bars it from doing: In no agreement did Israel ever promise to halt construction in the West Bank or East Jerusalem.
So here’s what we’ve learned from the past week’s events: Palestinians should keep shooting rockets at Israel, because Europe will reward them for it by punishing Israel. And Israel should never again make any agreement with the Palestinians, because the Palestinians won’t be bound by it at all, whereas Israel will be bound not only by what the deal actually says, but by what the Palestinians and their Europeans allies think it should have said.
You’d think countries that claim to abhor violence and favor diplomacy could find better lessons to be teaching, wouldn’t you?
The the Bensky Corollary in action, once again.
My son and I had an argument about this. Why? Because he reads the New York Times, so Saturday's headline read "Move (i.e. Israel annonced settlement plan) After UN Vote Seen as Setback for 2-State Solution". Of course there was no NY Times headline after the UN vote stating "UN Vote Seen as Setback for 2-State Solution". Fairness from a "Jewish owned " media source would be too much to ask for. But my takeaway is that Israelis and their leaders are no longer cowed by European and even US reaction to its policies. Israel is condemned if it accedes to or ignores such reaction. The boy has cried wolf once too often.
The new list of Likud for the elections prove that the Israelis are finding their "cojones' again. When Danny Danon (an out and out hawk) is number six on the list and general Moshe Yaalon is number 8, Moshe Feiglin makes it at 15 and many other hawks in strategic places, Likud is reverting to its source. The people on that list are not cowed anymore by Europe and will even confront the US, if needed. Menachem Begin's spirit is back- evenv though his son did not make it on a realistic place..
Just as important as who got in or got many votes in the primaries are those who got dumped; all leftists that gave Bibi cover for ignoring Likud principles. Among the defeated there was the leftist, opportunist prince Dan Meridor and the ineffective, Hamlet-like son of the great Menachem Begin, prince Benny Begin, who regularly blocked every attempt to make the Israeli Supreme Court like the American Supreme Court, subjecting it to democratic accountability. (Currently Israeli Supreme Court judges essentially fill any vacancies themselves.) Also Avi Dichter, a leftist opportunist who went to Kadima from Labor , was defeated as well as another left-leaning Likud member Michael Eitan. All of these MKs are part of Bibi's inner circle, who have helped counterbalance those insisting that Likud once again should be a nationalist party. The only leftist crony of Bibi who made it this time was Tzachi Hanegbi, a sleaze-bag convicted of moral turpitude who had abandoned Likud for Kadima and now is back in Likud. Had it not been for Bibi and others who pleaded with the judge to not ban Hanegbi from political office he would have been ineligible to serve in the Knesset.
Brilliant, Evelyn.
Build build build. n nDon't complain, don't explain.
The San Remo conference gave Jews the right to settle in the WHOLE of Palestine in perpetuity. The British Mandate of 1922 includes Gaza and the West Bank as Jewish territory. The British Mandate also provided for the establishment of a Palestinian State. It's name is JORDAN today. Hence there are today NO Palestinians as the former Turkish Protectorate of Palestine no longer exists. Those who refer to themselves as "Palestinians" are the true occupiers as their legal homeland is Jordan. The 'pre-1967 borders' that many speak of were nothing but de-facto cease fire lines, and had no legal basis at all. When Israel took control of Gaza and the West Bank in 1967, they simply reclaimed what was rightfully theirs and so Israel building these 3000 new homes is completely legal. Something else to consider, the UN, in bifurcating Palestine, violated international law, Article 80 of the UN Charter prohibits this action.
John S Gordon, you lost me with your "Punjabi" comment. Race is more of a product of perception than it is of biology. If you are of Arab or Punjabi decent you might be classified as "Caucasian", but you will not be perceived as being "white" in America. Race is a very complicated issue, especially in the U.S. with its history on the subject. The comments that professor Reed made have to be understood in the context of what people have gone through with racism in this country, if you don't you are just being ignorant.