Anthony Lewis, Thomas Friedman and the New York Times:
Jews in Need of a Panacea

Anthony Lewis and Thomas Friedman are two peas from the same pod. These two New York Times op-ed pundits take the extremist view that the Jews living in the territories conquered during the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973 (known in Israel as Yehuda, Shomron, and Aza, and in the media as the West Bank and Gaza) are the single most potent obstacle to a long and just peace between the Jewish State and the Palestinians.

Time and again, with a bitter angst, these two east coast Jews write about their peace loving Arab friends living in Ramallah who have been "strangled" by the oppressive settlement policy of both left and right-wing Israeli governments. In fact, it was a left-wing government headed by Peres and Rabin back in the seventies that launched the settlement policy in earnest, and it was Rabin who refused to remove the settlers post-Oslo until a final stage agreement was entered into.

But, Tony and Tom are not happy campers. Their argument is that if only Israel would remove the settlers and vacate the premises (meaning all of the West Bank, save one or two percentage points of strategic heights leading into Jerusalem), the Palestinian-Jewish problem would just about disappear.

To uncover the sources of this argument, one need not delve too deeply. To begin, Lewis is wrong when he writes in his November 3 op-ed that the settlements were intended to occupy "otherwise unused areas," implying that Israelis falsely claim that the settlements do not impose burdens on the Palestinians. The settlements were intended to do exactly what they are doing: create obstructive and dividing blocs on the Palestinian villages so that in times of future war, it will be more difficult for the enemies of the Jewish state to mobilize and form an army on the immediate perimeter. Indeed, even during this past year, the fact that the Israel army can maneuver in and around each urban Arab area allows greater intelligence gathering and provides a base for incursive actions.

In other words, the settlements were intended to be a hardship. That is what war is all about.  Making life easier and safer for your citizens at the expense of your enemies'.  Just ask the poor, downtrodden and otherwise innocent Afghanistanis.

But as to the claim that the settlements are the problem at the heart of the Arab-Palestinian conflict, one need only pose a few factual questions. When the Arabs of Jordan and Egypt occupied all of the West Bank and Gaza prior to June 1967 (let's be clear: from 1948 until June 1967), why didn't they create a Palestinian State? Or, asked slightly differently, why did the Arab countries amass on the "Old" pre-1967 borders to invade and attack Israel during the months leading up to June 1967 if the Arabs and Palestinians sought only to live in peace on the pre-1967 borders?

Now, Lewis and Friedman will respond that the Arabs have changed. No longer do they thirst for Jewish blood nor do they wish "to drive every last Jew into the sea."  Of course, the problem with this thesis is that the facts don't justify it.  Indeed, a visit to any Palestinian school will provide the visitor with a glance at text books teaching the young Palestinians that the Jews have stolen all of what is referred to as Israel proper from the Palestinians and that it is a solemn and holy duty (yes, a Jihad) to fight until all of the land is re-conquered.

Further, no where in Arabic or more specifically Palestinian literature does it state that the Arabs have accepted the idea that a pre-1967 Israel would be granted a peaceful existence in the post-Oslo period.  Arabs speak of a "JUST peace of the BRAVE" which is a well known if not over-used euphemism for a war of stages and attrition.

But to understand that Arabs and Islam have hardly changed relative to Jews and Israel, one might take a detour from the Palestinian schools to the heart of Egypt, where the peace process began.  There, rabid anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-American propaganda is spewed from every government publication that prints in Arabic.

But, Lewis and Friedman would rather ignore these facts and blame everything on the terrible settlements.  No need to discuss the mob that lynched two Israelis who accidentally ventured into peaceful Ramallah only to have Arab hands smeared in their blood and shown to the world.

No need to mention the thousands of Palestinians who danced in the streets when Iraq's Hussein attacked Kuwait and launched Scud missiles on Tel Aviv. Or, for that matter, the thousands who danced in the streets following September 11?

Notwithstanding there is hardly an Arab man in the street in any land (outside possibly the US) that doesn't proclaim bin Laden a hero, Lewis and Friedman have found the answer to peace in the Middle East: dismantle the settlements, expose Israel's heartland to an empowered Palestinian State, and trust that their liberal peace loving Arab friends in Ramallah will throw flowers at Israelis and not suicide bombers loaded with Anthrax or worse.

Printer-Friendly Version