1. felix quigley said:

You write:
'Now we face that very unfortunate moment of truth. Palestinian demographics will bury not only the Jewish presence in Gaza, but in most of the Judea and Samaria, as well. And if we continue, we will become a bi-national state, and lose it all. No more Israel as a Jewish State, no more independence. Or we can hold on and find ourselves living as world pariahs and condemned as an apartheid state. But it will not last for long. World condemnation and economic sanctions will force our collapse '

This may seem at first glance practical, down to earth, facing realities. In my opinion it is none of these.

From my understanding and reading around this issue I feel sure that to retreat like this in front of demographics, or terror, or world opinion is to create suicide out of despair.

Let us take the latter, world opinion. It seems to me that the Zionist cause has never been fought for in world opinion and it needs to be. Moreover rather than being at the end of the struggle we are only at the beginning.

I feel that the existence of Israel as a Jewish state, its right to exist as a Jewish state, the right of Jews to set up home anywhere in this Jewish state, all this has to be explained and fought for.

I do not mean the tiny sliver of indefencible land that the anti-Semitic UN 'granted' in 1948. I do mean that land East and West of the Jordan which Britain was mandated to set up a Jewish Homeland and which betrayed that trust.

Look, the people of the world, including my own country Ireland, do NOT know this history. Believe me this struggle is only beginning and I firmly believe that the issue of the rightful Jewish Homeland will be an inspiration to all who think of freedom. Sharon is most dangerous, but he is a man at the fag end of his career, and furthermore he is a man in crisis, as is indeed the Likud Party which did not remove him immediately he proposed removing Jewish people from that British Mandated Homeland. Crisis, remember, and that means we have more time and power than we are given to believe.

2. BobW said:

The same demographic projections allow for the same conclusion to attach to green line Israel.

I'd commit myself to a reevaluation of the situation if I believe economic sanctions and antagonistic diplomatic rhetoric against Israel would cease. The experience record from prior Israeli concesions is an indicator and warning. A tangent indicator; Arab-Arab relations have not improved.

I must contest the Menachem Begin (Z"L) portrayal. The "catastrophe" can be traced to Ben Gurion and the socialists from eastern Europe. The most accurate description of events regarding Begin was presented by HaRav Menachem Porush, Former MK,in a 29 June 01 article in the JEWISH PRESS. It was titled "What Influences Mid-East Policy?"

The article absolves Begin from direct blame concerning events. Porush had an audience with the retired PM Begin in near isolation. Begin said in different words that the US oil access, coupled to the huge related contracts cause geometric US pressure to be placed on Israel. Begin explained that the WWII King Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia placed the same pressure on FDR. Begin is innocent re the catastrophic events.

Blame can be placed on the socialists who enjoy the US Congressional appropriations allowing for several deputy mayors in Jerusalem and bloated payrolls elsewhere.

Do not for a moment forget that the so-called two state solution provides for corridors connecting Gaza to the rest of Yesha. We are discussing a pending morgue.

Kol tuv,
BobW

3. Getzel said:

The Arabs insist "NO JEWS IN PALESTEIN"; it is clear that Arabs do not want peace; the Arabs want piece by piece by piece and this has been clear from their actions for 30 plus years. The Arabs continue to teach hate in their schools. PEACE can be brought to the mid-east in only one way: Simply announce a national initiative: Before this decade is out, all cars will run on ETHANOL, like in Brazil for the last 30 years. This would bring the U.S. full employment, Balanced trade deficits; The Saudis admitted: they, thru their charities, are funding Al Qaeda, and terror.ARABS WILL BEG FOR PEACE IF SOME LEADER WOULD MAKE A CREDIBLE STATEMENT:WE ARE MAKING GASOLINE OBSOLETE!IT isn't rocket science to KNOW this is the only path to peace.All other stategies=war/weapons sales. THE STUPID PEOPLE IN THE WEST ARE FINANCING THE WAR AGAINST THEMSELVES EVERY DAY AT THE GAS PUMPS, Israel is just a small and scapegoat part and pretext; The Arabs see us as "idol worshipers" drunk on oil. Moslems will beg: to recognize/trade w/Israel, End financing terror, JUST PLEASE, don’t make gasoline obsolete!

4. Tiburon said:

I agree with BobW and felix quigley. Beyond this, what strikes me is the lack of imagination evident in the article by Ne'eman. This 'Leftist Centrist-type' of thinking invariably views the Arabs among us as a monolithic force, or at best through the filter of the mainstream media which finds it possible to define men like 'abu mazen' as "moderate".

My understanding is that there are a number of well-organized, internationally funded, and trained (by US/CIA, IDF, etc) groups that drive the conflict with the Jews. Some are 'home grown' so-to-speak, others 'imports from Tunisia' post-Oslo. Together, these number perhaps 100,000 out of the general population of Arab Muslims in the area, while the cohesive management of this number are far less, perhaps a few thousand's of individuals. Irrespective of the expressions of support for these groups shown by numerous polls of Arab Muslim population, the overwhelming majority will not and cannot participate in the confrontation. Indeed, at numerous points in recent history (post '67), this majority has been quiescent, (albeit that the 'young turks' out of the 'camps' were always problematic - due principally their socio-political isolation from the 'indigenous' Arab townsfolk (those family groups that had established their residency in Yesha during the first half of the last century, and those few percentage - [5%? 7%?] resident continuously for generations)).

All this goes to say that neutering these 'redentist', Jihadii groups: - Hamas, the PA and it's educational/media elite, the various 'wings' - would effectively end the immediate conflict, the Al Aqsa/Oslo War (though not the long term conflict, of course).

How to do this? This needs not be a purely military undertaking, though that could be achieved rapidly and with relatively light 'collateral damage', at 'fallback' need.

The case can rather be forcibly and volubly made for immediate unilateral Abrogation of the Oslo Agreement by Israel, and after a suitable (brief) period of debate, this must be done. This is an EASY SELL to world opinion, at least to those that matter, those populations and countries that have support, and begrudging support, for the Jewish State. Legally, and morally, it is patently defensible, and can be 'sold' with concerted effort by the Administration.

This act alone, with no attendant 'increase' in military response (barring G-d Forbid a terrorist act out of scale with 'the usual' during this period) would provoke two things.

1) It would FOCUS the debate and world opinion firmly on the two sides of the issue - Can the palis EVER achieve a peaceful cohesive polity ("you are with us, or you are with the terrorists");

and

2) In reaction, the most virulent of the above mentioned terrorist groups would quickly self-identify, while being in an intense and critical spotlight in the international media. They would self-identify through attacks and attempts at attack, and would 'paint' themselves as targets, to be handled by the IDF.

Note that so far in this scenario, there has been NO increase or overt Israeli military 'change of stance' - only a more effectively targeted response.

This 'radical' move, "Abrogation of Oslo due Serial Violations by the PA", would change however, the entire terms of the conflict and debate. At this point while Israel can posture that we remain "open to discussion" there will remain no vehicle for this.
There is already a steady out-migration of Arab (Muslims, - the Christian Arab exodus already largely accomplished due attacks by the PA - ) population from Yesha. This would swell - the Arabs are not 'stupid' and will recognize what Abrogation portends. Further, Israel can encourage this by expediting 'travel documents' and 'exit permits' for the population, which it has not, for a variety of reasons, done till now.

This state of affairs can go on for years, in fact - while 'close settlement' by the Jews of Yesha, as mandated by the last internationally recognized document in place for the areas in question, proceeds apace. During this period, also - The Administration can relocate major government Ministries and industrial efforts into Yesha. This will again reinforce to the Arab Muslims the fact we are NOT LEAVING, and again, encourage out-migration.

Israel can remain open to overtures for various forms of limited 'autonomy' for the elements of the PA that remain on the ground, while 'incitement' and/or 'violence' is dealt with directly, forcibly. (closing and replacing media outlets, sorry ACLU,; continuing isolation and defeat of terrorist cells)

The next steps are more complex, as they deal squarely with Jewish issues, but entirely within our control: - a Jewish Constitution, ground level reform of the electoral and judicial systems, major free-market economic reforms (which would 'skyrocket' international investment, financial sector and industrial/hitech, in Israel. Remember, the "true" money worldwide doesn't give a damn about politics except as it affects the 'bottom line'). These challenges don't 'involve' the Arabs, they are strictly an internal, - and World Jewish - issue.

Eventually, with a Jewish State constitutionally enshrined, Yesha will be Annexed and Arab populations willing to be subject to Jewish Rule, and to pledge loyalty thereto, will be enfranchised (for representation in the Lower House only, of course - as described in detail repeatedly by Prof Eidelberg) and given passports. Again, at this juncture, even more Arabs will voluntarily out-migrate. Private Jewish organizations can participate by offering to 'buy out' Arab landowners at this time, and the Administration can mount a concerted campaign to recover the multiple billions (one trillion?) of dollars of compensation due to the Sephardi Jews expelled from the Arab confrontation states, as a counterweight to claims issuing from pali groups in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan, etc....

In sum, this strategy, would effectively reduce the Yesha Arab population by 2/3rds over a period of a decade, while near certainly encouraging a major N. American Aliya - perhaps a million American Jews over this period, especially if coupled with a "Homestead Act" in Yesha, Negev, Galilee and Golan.

This strategy would accomplish resolution of the demographic issue with NO TRANSFER, forcibly or otherwise, and with little variation in military action, again barring (G-d Forbid) a successful 'mega-attack' of 9/11 scale, which in Israeli context would lead immediately to Gazan Arabs walking to Cairo, and Judean and Samarian Arabs swimming to Jordan and Syria.

I don't see the 'downside'.

Abrogate Oslo.

5. Ted said:

Tiburon

I can't agree with you on a number of counts. If Israel were to abrogate the peace processit would be a good thing as the process is a means by which Israel is forced tomake concessions that favour the Arabs even without negotiations. But where I differ is the world reaction to same. If by "administration" you mean the US administration then obviously Israel can do anything that the US agrees with. But the US is far from ready to do that. If the EU gets nasty and imposes sanctions that would cost Israel dearly. If the US ends our financial support then the ability of Israel to fight a major war would be greatly reduced. So far from being able to sell our abrogation of the peace process I believe we would find ourselves under greater pressure. With the increase in pressure will come an increase in terrorism.

As for cleaning out the terrorists, Israel is far from ready to do that. They have had two years to do so and so far have opted for containment. Even if Israel decided to do it, the problem remains how to get them with our limited knowledge of who they are and with our reluctance to cause civilian casualties. You quote a number of 100,000. The logistics would be enormous and what would we do with them. Nobody would take them.

Last time Israel did this they rounded up under 1000 and took them to Lebanon and left them. The world screamed and Israel capitulated. So how can this be done.

Perhaps Israel could deny the Palestinians services like electricity but this too they cannot do as it is an obligation of occupation that the occupier provide for them.

Perhaps the peace process will go no where because the PA won't control the terrorists as Bush is now demanding. If this went on long enough perhaps the US would then decide it is a more feasible option to move the Palestinians out of Yesha and let Israel annex it. That solution has the best hope for peace.

6. Tiburon said:

Ted: -
These are good points you make, and I'll apologize I wasn't clearer. I'm refering exclusively to the Israeli Administration. Let me try to address your points in sequence.

1) I'm far from advocating 'ending the Peace Process'. This WOULD be very inadvisable, diplomatically. But as you well know, the "Oslo process" has already been supplanted by the "Road Map", and soon another promising scheme will be tendered by the PTB (Powers-That-Be). You agree that these are all chaemera to force concessions from us. Oslo, however, is based on recognizing the terrorist infrastructure as the correspondent - not the Arab population, and this is why it must be Abrogated. I would strongly advocate that Israel simultaneously present to the world 'absolute willingness' to negotiate with anyone disassociated with terror, at any time - with no preconditions. As we both know no such group can conceivably emerge in Yesha, this defacto ends the process, but leaves the focus clearly on the palis. A courageous PM would have no problem making repeated speeches and policy announcements to world press, relentlessly, even - emphasizing this 'willingness to negotiate' but NOT AT THE POINT OF THE GUN. Clear statement of this simple concept will bypass any possible 'spin' by the anti-Jewish media and reach world populations, who will accept it's clarity and justice.

2) I'm certainly also not suggesting trying to 'remove' these 100,000 active terrorists or immediate practical support structure. As I've pointed out and I believe to be true, the actual number of "control figures" are some 5000-odd, absolute maximum. Removal with extreme prejudice of even 500 of these figures will totally destablize the PA, Hamas, and the other groups. And Ted, THE IDF KNOWS EXACTLY WHO THEY ARE! Trust this. I would advocate concentrating, (post-Abrogation) on closing outlets of incitement, university departments that are thinly masked fronts for terror recruitment centers, the children's terror camps, the worst of the primary grade school systems (i.e. Ramallah, Shechem, Tulkarm, Hebron) and reconstituting them with Israeli implants or a combo of 'international educational watchdogs' and locals courageous enough to attempt reforms (few, admittedly - but in concert with aggressive pursuit of the 'collaborator lynching groups' - possible, - it HAS worked before, before the 1st 'intifada'..). This is also very saleable IMO, Ted: - There is, as you and I well know, an unbelievable amount of data and proofs of the horrid murder cult promoted through media and schools under the PA. This can be disseminated in dozens of world forums.

The 'balance' of these core terrorists, and the 95,000 willing to participate, dispersed and basically leaderless over the 30-odd Arab population centers in Yesha can be controlled with basic military and police interdiction. This is a very do-able task, Ted. It would be advisable of course for the IDF and Mishmar Gvul to prepare for sophisticated non-lethal crowd control technologies. - in advance. Remember, that 'psychologically' it is very many of exactly this crowd that will be choosing to vacate - towards Syria, Iran, Chechnya and, of course, Iraq...where they'll have more 'freedom of action', and be able to fulfill their 'jihadi' fever dreams, (till, in time, they get their 72 raisins).

So no media pictures of 1000 Hamas types in tents on the borders...only pictures of burning cars and car swarms, rubble of their homes and headquarters. Given the comically short media 'attention span', these actions can be timed when the maniacs get through for the next Madrid, or Bali...etc. etc. (and as should have been done instantly, post 9/11 - to cry over lost opportunity). Eventually, and naturally - further along in this scenario, post-Annexation (determined on ISRAELI JEWISH schedule, not America's!), those of this group that remain will be shown the Border. There's no 'rush', though.

3) US Financial and Military Support: -

Ted, I've been following this issue for a number of years and can with confidence state: - We Don't Need It! In any case, this money in largest part simply funnels to the Labour party and their surrogates in media, government and industry, supporting and perpetuating the "Israeli" faction - that 20% of "anti-Jewish" and "anti-Traditional" PTB that are the driving engineers of the Oslo Death Train.

But more pertinent - It is a miniscule percentage of the Israeli economy (but not zero - some 3% or so, as I recall). The military component must be spent nearly 100% in the US military industries, in outright purchase and co-ventures. Merely 'cleaning up' a couple of insane economic policies, such as 'allowances for large families' which encourage an Arab exponential birthrate (and letting the Jewish Agency handle support for large Jewish families...Arabs can source their family support from Saddam ;-)), would replace this lost economic 'charity/bribe' and further quell the resentment it garners at the extreme right of isolationist US politics, the Pat Buchanan types.

Finally, Israel, freed of US apron strings, would be free to make strategic military tech allegiances with whom it will - Remember the b-llshit Chinese Phalcon deal? The US will then be moved to a position of needing to 'court' Israeli favour to maintain their global strategy, rather than the converse. (the US has enough problems, and cannot politically attack Israel from the Right - and risk alienating their electoral Christian base, when Israel is 'standing on it's own', economically. That gives us 4 years, anyway - as political attacks from the Left, the Democrats, is another matter entirely.)

Again, I don't see the 'downside'.

BTW, PE has examined this scenario in some depth, and I'd bow to his far more sophisticated understanding of the social and political psychology of the Enemy, and the predictable cascade of events that would follow Abrogation. I'll perhaps eventually find time to ferret out one of these articles and post it up top - pretty sure there are a few in archives here from a couple of years ago...

7. Ted said:

To Tiburon

At the heart of your first point is that Israel should say it is willing to negotiate with anyone dissociated from terror rather then throught the Oslo created PA. The rationality for creating the PA was that there would be an elected body to sign on the dotted line for all. Now that Bush is on record of requiring the PA to abandon terror, Israel should support that initiative and not waiver from it. Unfortunately Sharon is making noises of a less stringent nature and this troubles me. But there is no need to abandon Oslo. Israel just have to insist that it won't negotiate with anyone associated with terror. Oslo did not freeze settlements nor did it declare its purpose was to create a Palestinian state. In this regard it was no different from Res 242. They both enshrined land for peace. If Israel were to abandon anything, it should abandon this resolution and insist on land for land. If said resolution is not abandoned Israel can still demand land for security.

So to my mind nothing as dramatic as you suggest is required. Israel should insist on receiving what they want under the existing peace process. Afterall Bush and the Roadmap is on record of not prejudging the outcome and having all issues decided by negotiations. This gives Israel another colour of right to holdout for what it wants.

On the second point of shutting down the incitement I agree fully. If the PA is violating the Oslo Accords which it is, Israel should enforce compliance just as it enforces compliance with security. I fully support the destruction of any entity that incites. Israel could also arrest Palestinians who participate in incitement. Inciters and terrorists are both outlawed by Oslo and are both enemies of Israel. Israel should insist on compliance with Oslo.

I would even support a programme whereby Israel arrested the 5000 activists and dropped thed them in Lebanon or Egypt which ever is easiest. It would take 100 buses. But this time not let them back.

As for the third point I agree. When Netanyahu was PM such idea was mooted. He argued that Israel should phase out its dependence on the US aid. were Israel to start building all the things it buys from the US under the aid programme, it could produce the armaments cheaper than in the US and would have a ready market for them worldwide. It would constitute a huge growth industry for Israel.

All the things that Eidelberg recommends to fix government in Israel, I am in favour of.

8. Tiburon said:

Boker Tov, TED!

You said: - "At the heart of your first point is that Israel should say it is willing to negotiate with anyone dissociated from terror rather than through the Oslo created PA"
(and)
"But there is no need to abandon Oslo. Israel just has to insist that it won't negotiate with anyone associated with terror. Oslo did not freeze settlements nor did it declare its purpose was to create a Palestinian state."

You're right, that's how I put it, but it seems that even I get pulled into the terms of debate of the Oslovians - "...willing to negotiate with anyone...". I said this, but really the emphasis should be on "...Israel should SAY..". At heart I don't think Israel has to do/should to, anything of the sort. Perhaps if the Arabs "Repent" (Ha!)

Your point is well taken, however, and has given me pause. Quite possibly, if Israel (our Leaders) showed courage and held positions under Olso absolutely, it could theoretically constitute a workable 'status quo' for the interim, on route to eventual Annexation, and that as you say "...nothing so dramatic..is required."

But such courage is not 'evident' just yet in our Leadership, and there remain, niggling at me, the basic questions of Justice, and Damages in a legal sense. Jericho, Hebron...all that has been 'ceded' to the proto-state PA was obtained under grossly false pretence - and hundreds are dead, thousands wounded as a result. While I don't propose "immediate" 're-conquest' of Tulkarm and Ramallah - (to me, this should be accomplished by legal fiat, or yes, "negotiation" if practical), I'm drawn to the idea that the PA, post Abrogation - would be put on notice that their ruse is revealed and all is now at risk for them, their jihadiist "statehood" a rapidly vanishing fever dream...
This might go a little way towards Justice, anyway - while Annexation would partially deal with 'Damages'.

Added to this, there is the question of 'momentum'. In the Oslovian atmosphere, Israel is constantly 'reacting' to events, international pressures, and the like. [Eidelberg has pointed out that (historically and practically) small states must INITIATE events to be effective in defending their interests] To the World, "Oslo" means "Palestinian State", whatever the subtleties of it's contractual wording. At an earlier point, "settlement activity" proceeded apace, briefly - but now even that's curtailed as the Israeli Administration has come to accept the US State Department's 'definition' of the 'spirit of the Agreements' - "freezing settlement growth" and the works. (while Arab building proceeds, sans permitting, and unquestioned by Jerusalem, at roughly twice the pace).

And finally, there is the question of Dignity, Honour and National Pride. At what point, and admittedly it's a subject for debate, are these worth Fighting For? Israel's deterrent posture has been severely damaged post-Oslo - Abrogation would remind the world of the verities of Israel's Strength (and strength of National Will?)

These are some of the 'counter arguments' I see, Ted - and I suspect I'm missing the 'elephant in the room', too. Your subtle analysis has though, as I've said, given me pause: - I'll have to examine the issue at greater depth. Your point about UN 242...very well taken. Of course withdrawing from this (or attempting 'redefinition' would involve pretty well 'withdrawing from the UN'. Better to wait on that, till the US pulls out, one day. And it IS attractive to think about Israel insisting on "Land for Security"! ;-)! Sinai?

Evidently we concur generally on most of the picture.

Now, What's happening in Shechem!!

9. Yoel Ben-Avraham said:

"Now we face that very unfortunate moment of truth. Palestinian demographics will bury not only the Jewish presence in Gaza, but in most of the Judea and Samaria, as well. And if we continue, we will become a bi-national state, and lose it all. No more Israel as a Jewish State, no more independence. Or we can hold on and find ourselves living as world pariahs and condemned as an apartheid state. But it will not last for long. World condemnation and economic sanctions will force our collapse"

Dear Mr. Ne'eman,

It never ceases to amaze me how confused everyone is. I have no illusion of the land of Yehuda and Samaria being unilaterally annexed to the State of Israel. I live here because I believe that if the 1.3 million Arabs that are citizens of the State of Israel have a right to live within the "Green Line", I have just as much right to live here in Shilo, Beit El or any other place within the Biblical Land of Israel.

The truth is much different, as I see it. I and my "Palestinian" neighbours are going to be separated from the "Real Israel" by a security fence. Here they will either succeed to build an economy or leave to find a better life someplace else. You, on the other hand, live in a country (Israel) that has 1.3 million Arabs living in its midst; A country where 24% of the citizens under the age of 18 are Arab. With a secular Jewish birth rate of 1.2 (and marriage becoming unfashionable like our American friends), just where is the greater demographic threat to the future of Jewish life?

If you were to suggest (G-d forbid!) that in exchange for uprooting 240,000 Jews in Judea and Samaria, you'll uproot at least an equal number of Arabs from the Galil or the Negev ... then maybe your words would have some logic. As it is, the question of the right of Jews to live in the Land of Israel is one question, the problem of a "demographic threat" to a Jewish majority within the existing borders of the State of Israel is another separate issue, totally independent of the first!

Yoel Ben-Avraham Shilo, Benyamin