Obstacles to peace: a politically-incorrect diagnosis – Canada Free Press

Will contemporary policy-makers avoid--or repeat--severe blunders?

Political-correctness suggests that the resolution of the Palestinian issue is predicated upon a dramatic Israeli land-concession and the establishment of a Palestinian state: the two state solution.

Moreover, political-correctness has subordinated Middle East reality and long term national security to the achievement of the holy grail of peaceful-coexistence between Jews and Arabs west of the Jordan River. In the process, the holy grailers have oversimplified the highly-complex, unpredictable, violent, intolerant, fragmented Middle East. This is the same school of thought, which applauded the 1993 (Oslo Accord) and 2005 (uprooting all Jews from Gaza) sweeping Israeli concessionswhich, in fact, escalated terror, war and hate educationand misperceived the Arab Tsunami, in 2011, as an Arab Spring, the Youth Revolution and the transition towards democracy.

Political-correctness has preferred talk and assessment-based subjective hope over centuries-old, well-documented, objective walk-based realism.

While political-correctness has failed to advance peaceful-coexistence, it has forced the Arabs to outflank Western pressure (on Israel) from the maximalist side, radicalizing their demands, and further intensifying the obstacles to peace.

Political-correctness resembles a surgeon, who focuses on the spot of the surgery, ignoring the complex medical history of the entire body and its bearing upon the surgery.

For instance, the sustained Arab war against the Jewish State has taken place in the Middle East, which has featured a systematic, regional state-of-war, terrorism, subversion, provisional one-bullet-regimes, tenuous policies and agreements, short-lived ceasefires and the lack of civil liberties since the seventh century appearance of Islam. These have been almost entirely intra-Islamic, intra-Arab wars, reflecting the (so far) unbridgeable ethnic, tribal, cultural, religious, historical, ideological battles, which has dominated the region, totally unrelated to Israel.

The Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian issue are not the Middle East conflict or the top priorities for Arab policy-makers, irrespective of the Arab talk, which has, historically, deviated from the Arab walk.

Contrary to political-correctness, the Palestinian issue has never been the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict, a crown-jewel of Arab policy-makers, nor a core-cause of regional turbulence; but for Arab talk, unsubstantiated by Arab walk.

Political-correctness has assumed that everyone wishes peace, prosperity and civil liberties, ignoring the fact that the dictatorial Arab regimes have systematically denied their people such prospects. While most Arabs may hope for regional peace, and are not preoccupied with Israel, the concept of the majority-rule is yet to assert itself in Middle East political reality.

Political-correctness has considered Islam to be another religion of peace, overlooking its fundamental tenets. For example, the constant battle between the Abode of Islam and the eventual subservience of the Abode of the Infidel; the determination to spread Islam, preferably peacefully, but via war if necessary; the duty to dedicate ones life to Jihad (Holy War) on behalf of Islam; the option to conclude provisional agreements - and to employ double-speak (Taqiyya), when negotiating - with the infidel; etc.

Arab attitudes toward Israel derive from the fourteen-century-old Islamic intolerance of Christian, Jewish, Buddhist and other infidels, who claim sovereignty in the abode of Islam. The key issue has never been the sizebut the existence - of the infidel Jewish State on land, which is, supposedly, divinely-ordained to be ruled by believers.

Political-correctness has ignored, or down-played, another chief-obstacle to peace: the Palestinian track record from the wave of terrorism of the 1920s, through their alliance with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Bloc, Irans Ayatollahs, Saddam Hussein, North Korea and Venezuela, their training of international terrorists in Lebanon, Sudan and Yemen, and their current hate-education, incitement and terrorism. Such a track record attests to the anti-US impact of the proposed Palestinian state.

Would it be reasonable to assume that Israels withdrawal from the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria (which would drastically erode its posture of deterrence, unlike Israels substantial land concession to Egyptthe Sinai Peninsula) would cause the Arabs to grant to the infidel Jewish State peaceful-coexistence, which they have denied fellow believers since the seventh century?!

Would it be reasonable to assume that the Arab Middle East, which has been merciless towards weak, vulnerable fellow-Arabs, would display compassion towards a highly vulnerable infidel Jewish State, if it is reduced to a 9-15 mile-wide sliver along the Mediterranean, over-towered by a mountainous Palestinian state?!

The unfathomed gap between Middle East reality and the two-state-solution was demonstrated in 1993 when Israeli Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, promoted the two-state-solution and his vision of peace in The New Middle East (Henry Holt publishing). Attempting to rationalize Israels dramatic concession of its most strategic mountain ridge to the PLO, Peres asserted: Arafat is a national symbol, a legend in his own time (p. 17).... The international political setting is no longer conducive to war (p. 80).... We must focus on this new Middle East reality wars that will never be fought again (p. 85).... We must strive for fewer weapons and more faith. You could almost hear the heavy tread of boots leaving the stage. You could have listened to the gentle tiptoeing of new steps making a debut in the awaiting world of peace (p.196)....

In 1994, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded jointly to Arafat, Peres and Rabin for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East. It was praised by the political, academic and media establishments, which chose to ignore Arafats track record, underlined by his 1959 and 1964 founding of Fatah and the PLO terror organizations, calling for the liberation of Palestine eight years and three years before the 1967 War, respectively.

In other words, the Palestinian focus has been the de-legitimization and destruction of the pre-1967 Israel, as highlighted by the 2017 Palestinian Authority K-12 school curriculum (established in 1993 by Mahmoud Abbas), Palestinian media and Friday sermons in Palestinian mosques.

The two-state-solution gospel is a miniaturized replica of the 1938 hope-driven Anglo-German peace-for-our-time initiative of the British Prime Minister Chamberlain, who sacrificed national security clarity on the altar of a peaceful holy grail. He appeased a rogue regime, yielded the most strategic Czechoslovakian land to Germany, reflected feebleness and whetted the aggressive appetite of Hitler; thus producing a robust tailwind for the Second World War.

Will contemporary policy-makers avoidor repeatsevere blunders?

Ambassador (Retired) Yoram Ettinger is an insider on US-Israel relations, Mideast politics and overseas investments in Israels high tech. He is a consultant to members of the Israeli Cabinet and Knesset, and regularly briefs US legislators and their staff. His OpEds have been published in Israel and the US he has been interviewed in both Australia and the U.S. A graduate of UCLA and undergraduate at UTEP, he served amongst other things, as Minister for Congressional Affairs at Israels Embassy in Washington. He is the editor of Straight from the Jerusalem Cloakroom and Boardroom newsletters on issues of national security and overseas investments in Israels high-tech.

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban. -- Follow these instructions on registering:

Visit link:
Obstacles to peace: a politically-incorrect diagnosis - Canada Free Press