The fact of the matter is that
there is now movement on the issue of conflict in the Middle
East . A combined Palestinian
authority is sorting itself out. It may
have the capacity to settle with Israel which not even Arafat ever properly
enjoyed. It will not have the capacity
to enforce its will on Israel
and must settle for a negotiated peace.
Failure to do so opens the door for outright annexation and expulsion of
all Palestinians.
The creation of a Palestinian
state in Jordan also allows
for the expulsion of those Palestinians in Southern Lebanon ,
thus ending the ongoing conflict there
My point in all this is that intransience
can be solved by outright expulsion.
This was done to the Jews two thousand years ago by the Romans and
extensively by Stalin during and after World War II.
It is clear also that the
surrounding states have educated their populations in an ideology of anti Semitism
and made normal human relationships between the two peoples difficult. This can not be changed quickly and would
need a complete reeducation program imposed from the outside.
A newly Palestinian controlled Jordan (which is really inevitable) will then
settle into sorting their society out and can actually ignore their western border
on the Jordan River as long as they like.
That leaves us with the real
concern which is Egypt . Egypt
has military capacity to make a war between Israel
and Egypt
a near run thing, at least in the minds of either side. Victory for either side must be the total
destruction of the opposing army. It really
could not be worse.
The expulsion of the Palestinians
from Gaza into Jordan would eliminate the purported
cause of conflict, while the established settlement agreement is certainly
suitable for the leadership of both sides.
The problem again is an indoctrinated population hungry for the glory of
victory against the Israelis who may make it way too easy for Islamicists to
tear up the treaty and to go to war.
The danger is real but could well
sort itself out in Israel ’s
favor.
The hard fact today on the ground
is that all Israel ’s
enemies are fully distracted by internal conflicts. Unilaterally annexing Judea, Samaria
and Gaza and any other scraps as needed is
doable and puts Israel in
the driver’s seat in terms of future negotiations with whatever successor
regimes emerge from Syria
and Jordan . The Palestinian government can be expelled
into Jordan .
In fact re education can even
begin on Palestinian populations in Israel
awaiting their opportunity to move to Jordan . The Palestinian population will feel a huge grievance,
but that is settled through both time and a fully functioning Palestinian State
in Jordan .
Thus a declaration of Palestinian
Statehood actually opens the door for outright annexation of all lands
presently controlled by Israel
as an option. The new Palestinian authority
would in fact be negotiating for alms from the new owners.
Time to Annex Judea and Samaria ?
Posted by John Hinderaker on Jul 6th, 2011
Reprinted from Powerlineblog.com.
I do not understand why Israel
has not already annexed Judea and Samaria .
These regions, the heart of ancient Israel ,
are generally known today as the “West Bank” of the Jordan
River . Three times, Arab states have attacked Israel in an
effort to carry out a second Holocaust. Three times, Israel has defeated them. No
principle of justice required Israel ,
having escaped annihilation by force of arms, to retreat back to the inadequate
borders of 1948.
When the United States
defeated Mexico
in the Mexican War, what did we do? We annexed the Southwest. When France defeated Germany in World War I (more or
less), what did it do? It annexed Alsace and Lorraine . After World
War II, how did the Dutch obtain compensation from Germany ? They annexed certain lands
that were later sold back to West
Germany for a large sum. Many such examples
could be offered.
If Israel had
annexed Judea and Samaria
decades ago, most of the subsequent tortured history of its relations with the
Palestinians would have been avoided. Most observers have assumed it is too
late for such a “radical” step. But the Palestinian Authority’s threat to
declare its own nationhood unilaterally, along with its rapprochement with
Hamas, has caused the possibility of annexation to surface once again.
Ideas about annexing parts of the West Bank that until recently were
considered extreme have been gaining traction in the Knesset in recent weeks as
the Palestinian Authority continues threatening to declare a state unilaterally
in September. …
“We’ll have to protect ourselves,” [National Infrastructures Minister
Uzi Landau] said. “If [the Palestinians declare a state], I’m going to suggest
to my government to extend our sovereignty over the Jordan
Valley and over the highly populated
blocs we have in Judea and Samaria ,
just to start with.” …
“A Palestinian declaration of statehood would officially bury the Oslo Accords, which state
that final borders will be decided via negotiations and that unilateral actions
constitute violation of the accords,” [Likud MK Danny] Danon said. “The
Palestinians declaring a state would free us of all the diplomatic, security,
and economic commitments we made in the Oslo
Accords.”
Danon favors responding to a Palestinian declaration of statehood by
annexing all of Area C, which includes all the West Bank’s Jewish settlements
and empty land. He said Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu should follow the
example of his predecessors Levi Eshkol, who annexed eastern Jerusalem ,
and Menachem Begin, who annexed the Golan Heights .
A source close to the prime minister said that Netanyahu has kept his
cards close to his chest as to how he would respond to Palestinian unilateral
action, but that he has said in the past that Israel has its own unilateral
options.
Danon said he hoped the threat of annexation could help Netanyahu
persuade European leaders to stop the United Nations from voting on Palestinian
statehood at the UN General Assembly in September.
My own inclination would be to aim higher–annex all of the West Bank,
not just portions, and entirely moot the idea of an independent Palestinian
state, not just deter the U.N. from supporting one for the moment.
Some will say that such annexation would violate international law.
But, except for certain limited areas where nations have agreed to cooperate to
advance specific mutual interests, there is no international law. When has
international law ever protected Israel from its enemies? Never.
When Arab states attacked Israel three times, did that
violate international law? Certainly. When Palestinians launch rockets into Israel from Gaza , does that violate international law? Of
course. When Iran and other
countries ship munitions into Gaza and the West Bank for use in terrorist
attacks against Israel ,
does that violate international law? Sure. When Arab terrorists blow up buses
and restaurants and slaughter Jewish families in their sleep in an effort to
destroy the state of Israel
and kill as many Jews as possible, does that violate international law? It
certainly violates any law, national or international, that may apply. Has the
world ever cared about these countless violations of international and domestic
law by Middle Eastern Arabs? Not much–with the single, honorable exception of
American Christians.
Before every boxing match, the referee meets in the center of the ring
with the boxers. He goes over the rules of the match–the three knockdown rule
does not apply, you can’t be saved by the bell, and so on. The referee always
concludes by telling the boxers to “defend yourselves at all times.” That
instruction is really rather profound: boxing has rules, more so than most
human activities, but at some level you can’t rely on them. The bell may ring;
the referee may break up a clinch or pause the action to instruct the boxers or
communicate with the judges. But in the ring you are never safe, and there is
really only one line of defense: you. The boxer never puts down his guard.
What would become of the Arabs now living on the West
Bank ? The answer depends in part on demographic analysis, but I
would propose a Right of Return: all Arabs now living in Judea and Samaria would be allowed, or if necessary required, to
return to their compatriots in Jordan ,
Gaza , Egypt
and Lebanon .
In my view, Israel
should have reclaimed Judea and Samaria
long ago. Most think it is now too late for such decisive action; but some will
say, better late than never.
This article and what it suggests is absolutely outrageous and a sure fire way to start Armageddon in the Middle East. Why anyone would consider such a politically and military disaster is quite beyond intelligent consideration. I can't believe there are individuals out there like the author so devoid of morals, ethics and plain common sense as to recommend another bloodletting.
ReplyDelete