The Palestinian Problem. By Mike Konrad. American Thinker, July 7, 2013.
Konrad:
The
chief problem in the Mideast, as far as the world is concerned, is that Israel
refuses to disappear. The chief problem in the Mideast, as far as Israel and
the United States is concerned, is that the Palestinians refuse to disappear.
Since they both demand the very same piece of land – motivated by history, and
fueled by uncompromising religion claims – the futility of sending American
diplomats to the Mideast to negotiate a peace should be obvious to everyone,
except the news media and the State Department.
Washington
dreads the appearance of doing nothing. The consequences of a failed peace
process are so enormous that dishonest pretense is preferred to honest failure.
However, pretense is far worse.
Let’s
give the Arabs their due. They have parlayed a weak hand masterfully. Crippling
defeats in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973 would have dissuaded a lesser opponent.
The
Arab focus has been singular. To that end, the 1965 Casablanca Protocols
forbade any Arab nation from awarding nationality to any Palestinian refugee,
thus keeping them in a permanent condition of statelessness. Palestinian rights
were trampled on. The purpose was to let the Palestinian situation fester.
Ever
determined, the Arab's new slogan is: “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free,” which is a thinly veiled catchy jingle for genocide of the Jews.
The
Israelis for their part are just as stubborn – or tenacious, if you prefer to
avoid vicious fights over adjectives. They also kept the Palestinians in a
position of statelessness, because while they wanted to annex Judea and
Samaria, they did not want to enfranchise the Palestinians on it. Instead, the
Israelis kept the area and the Palestinians under a twilight zone of military
(martial) law, with a myriad of discriminatory regulations that even a calmer,
more rational, people would never have tolerated without rebellion.
Israeli
pioneers (settlers) have made it clear that they do not want to surrender one
single inch of Judea and Samaria. Many of them have the aim of destroying the
peace process. Some have talked about ethnically cleansing the whole land of
Arabs, including pre-1967 Israel.
Now,
when Israel has finally started to talk about annexation – only because no one
will accept the status quo anymore, and many Israelis want to prevent a
two-state solution – Israeli politicians are inventing schemes to deny
enfranchisement to the Arabs on the land, by creating Bantustans which are
independent in name only. Maybe this is wise; but is it honest? They seem to
think this will fool people.
Both
sides pretty it up with floral descriptions, and hopeful desires for peace; but
never explain that their vision of peace leaves little or no room for the other’s
existence as a free and independent people.
Not
merely geography is fought over, but battles are now waged over descriptive
adjectives in news reports. People are charged with anti-Semitism, or
Islamophobia for not hewing to politically correct nouns. I myself have been
recently reduced to avoiding the objectively neutral term “settler,” in favor
of “pioneer,” for fear of being labeled a sellout to Arab propaganda. This is
total war.
Israel
and the West have avoided the real issue.
What is
to be done with the Palestinians, particularly in Judea and Samaria?
Until
this issue is settled, nothing else matters.
The
Arabs have shown no intention of helping the Palestinians, except to kill
Israeli Jews, through terrorism. Arab Muslim states will try to sabotage any
solution which does not involve the destruction of Israel.
Sadly,
Israel can be cruel in its application of laws against Palestinians Arabs;
using every trick to make their lives miserable; and to persuade them to leave.
Israel wants the land but not the Arabs on it.
Israel
stripped more than 100,000 residents of Gaza and some 140,000 residents of the
West Bank of their residency rights – Ha’aretz
Did the
Israelis think they could keep the Arabs under military (martial) law forever
with no blowback?! Were they expecting the Arabs to evaporate if they waited
long enough?
One
could say, let the foes duke it out; but frankly, it would get very bad, very
fast. A swift Israeli victory on the field would be met with large-scale
attacks on Jews throughout the planet. The Arabs have gas and chemical weapons,
and would use them. A sympathetic Pakistan might provide nukes. Unlike Israel,
the Muslim states could absorb large-scale losses, and are crazy enough to
consider such losses acceptable. Israeli Jews have no such options.
The
West will have to decide if it wants to offer citizenship and passports to
those Palestinians willing to leave and assimilate into the West. They could be
pre-screened to keep out radicals, with an eye to preferring those willing to
Christianize. I still recommend South America – which has a history of
assimilating Arabs well – but that option may be passing by, if it is not taken
up soon, as the Latins are being propagandized against Israel with Iranian and
Saudi money.
Instead
of paying $4 billion dollars for the Palestinians to negotiate, Kerry could
have offered 40,000 young Palestinians $100,000 each to move to the West. The
loss of 3% of its young population would have scared the PA out of its
obstinacy. We could have brought home the point by publically withdrawing
immigration approval for an equal number of Arabs, as punishment for abandoning
their brothers.
That
would have been a sane offer that would have produced some real results.
44% of
young Palestinians are willing to [e]migrate if given the opportunity. – Jpost
“Are
you mad to let the Palestinians into the West?”
I know
the Palestinians are troublemakers; but weren’t Jews in the early 20th century
considered trouble making revolutionaries? Although it’s politically incorrect
to mention it now, Jews had a high rate of participation in radical causes. A
few decades of equality, and now they are conservatives. Are we making a
mistake in labeling all Palestinians as innate Radical Islamists, when,
historically, Palestinians have a high rate of secularism for Arabs?
Since
governments will refuse to do anything, individuals and organizations should
act. I had hoped that many Jews would have shown a willingness to contribute,
since Israel would benefit by it; but from the responses I have gotten to my
suggestions, it is clear that many Jews do not want to pay a cent.
Sadly,
the World Jewish Community will pay – either in money or blood.
Though
the Arabs are much more guilty than Israel, no one is innocent. If this problem
is not solved, tens of millions of people will die. Count on it.
The
20th century gave us the Jewish problem. The West could easily have absorbed
the Jews of Europe in the 1930s, and prevented the Holocaust. A million Jews
would have been less than 1% of the U.S. population. Australia needed white
immigrants. So did New Zealand. South America was an open field. Canada was
famous for seeking immigrants; but rejected Jews. No one wanted them. Likewise,
helping Palestinians is not popular in the West, except by those methods which
would hurt Israel, rather than by allowing immigration of reasonable
Palestinians into the West, which would help everyone.
The
21st century has started with the Palestinian problem. Failure to solve it will
result in another World War.
