----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 11:28 PM Subject: Re: Tragedy in Israel > . Israel is not realistically in any danger > of being displaced, not with their military might and the full might > of the US behind them. They were in danger in the past, but Israel > demonstrated in 1947-48, and again, decisively in 1967, that they are > the force to be reckoned with in the region. >
You didn't include the Yom Kipper war. During that war, they were almost destroyed. That was 1973, IIRC. While I agree that Israel is now a strong military force, one needs to look at the pre 1967 map to understand why a return to those borders requires security guarantees. I don't think that even the present military power is enough to guarantee security if they are forced to operate their security forces within the old borders. > > But it is very hard for Israel to do this. Palestinian terrorists are > murdering Israelis, and it is very hard to separate the horrific acts of > murder of a few evil terrorist groups from the innocent, poor, suffering > masses of Palestinians. But it needs to be done. I don't think it is quite that simple. First, Palestinians have been taught slanderous lies about Jews and Israel for years. For example, they are taught that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is an actual historical document. They are taught a false history of the last 50 year, which portrays Israel as a murderous colonialist power. From this perspective, support for the terrorists might seem like a reasonable way to respond to overwhelming opposition by a group of evil thugs. Second, the terrorist were leashed for years. Some of the leaders of the organization that are sending the suicide bombers were in jail for these years. Others were compelled to hold their actions. When the talks collapsed last year, after Arafat rejected terms that were better than what I would have hoped Israel would have offered, the leaders of these groups were released from prison, and they were no longer compelled to refrain from action. Now, we may never know the reasons that Arafat did this. My growing fear is that he did this because he had no choice. The propaganda campaign against Israel was so successful, it prevented Arafat from successfully negotiating any deal that did not include the destruction of Israel. Unlimited right of return, for example, would scuttle any future Israel might have. Now, if the CNN reports are correct, he was prevented from arresting suspected terrorists by mobs of Palestinians who support the terrorists over Arafat's government. One report indicates that the Palestinian authority security forces were told in Bethlehem to leave or be shot. This is clearly a mess, and one I do not pretend to fully understand it. But, even with the lack of clarity, several things can be noticed. The relationship between Arafat and Hamas et. al who are sending out the bombers is not the same as the relationship between the US and McVey or even between the Republic of Ireland and the IRA. Hamas is a group with political power with the Palestinians. Whether Arafat secretly approves of the attacks or is in such a weak political state that he cannot stop them is uncertain (I favor the latter), but they are not just a few isolated individuals. They are part of the framework of power in Palestine. I fear that, if the streets of Palestine were polled, you would find majority support for the terrorist actions. In some way, the point is moot, because political power in Palestine is not a matter of winning votes. Third, the response of Israel to this violence has been, for the most part, focused. They at least make an attempt to not kill or injure non-combatants. That is a point in their favor. Still, having said that, I get upset when spokesmen for the government of Israel compare their position to Sept. 11th and ask why they should negotiate when we don't. The answer is clear. They are an occupying power, and the United States is not. Even though they have legitimate security concerns, and even though it is reasonable for them to hold onto the land until they can withdraw from it without putting themselves at grave risk, they are an occupying power. Adding settlements to the West Bank and Gaza is the most unreasonable thing they have done. There is considerable evidence that they have expanded settlements in a manner that is inconsistent with the Oslo accord. The only real solution is returning the land in exchange for peace. Israel does not have a right to hold the West Bank and Gaza indefinitely. Thus, even though the Palestinians are unjustified in their use of terror to promote their interests, they still have legitimate interests that must be met. There is no parallel between the United States and AQ. Dan M.
