Ever since the Prime Minister?s speech at Latrun (September 23, 2001), in which he expressed his willingness to see the creation of a Palestinian State, voices from the United States have repeatedly joined him in expressing such a willingness. President Bush and Secretary of State Powell have again and again brought up the ?vision? of a Palestinian state living in peace beside Israel. They call for an end to ?the Israeli occupation? of the territories and the freezing of the settlements, which are ?obstacles to peace? in their lingo.

There is no doubt that the serious erosion in the American position, as reflected in the foregoing statements, was made possible to a large degree by the unsolicited comments of Mr. Sharon himself. It will be recalled that Sharon?s statements were made independently, without the benefit of advance consultations with the members of his Knesset faction and without a cabinet meeting. His statements were in direct contradiction to the Likud political platform.

Mr. Sharon is reluctant to take back his statements (if he had only wanted to, he could have zigzagged on the issue of the Palestinian state, as well) and the absence of any appropriate reaction from the rest of official Israel is understood to be silent agreement. The topic has almost entirely left the public debate and one gets the impression that the political system, including the right-wing parties, has accepted the idea of a Palestinian state as a foregone conclusion. This passive attitude is intolerable and must be immediately revised from the ground up.

Leaders of the national camp must condemn the (voluntary) concession regarding the creation of a totally unnecessary Palestinian state. The creation of a Palestinian state in western Eretz Yisrael is not an historical imperative. There already is an Arab state (Jordan) spread out over approximately 80% of Mandatory Palestine ? and it exists without the benefit of the Oslo Accords. Furthermore, the creation of an independent Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Jerusalem means ripping out parts of the motherland, the cradle of Jewish civilization and tradition, and having a hand in the expulsion or abandonment of hundreds of thousands of Jewish settlers. Such a thing would seriously damage our Jewish, Zionist identity and precipitate an unprecedented moral crisis among our people.

In addition, the creation of a Palestinian state is without any strategic logic. The collapse of the Oslo process at Camp David in 2000 (where the Palestinians rejected a phenomenal offer for the creation of a state on 97% of Judea, Samaria and Gaza and the division of Jerusalem, and instead insisted on the implementation of a ?right of return?), the terrorist offensive that we suffered as a result (more than 450 people killed and thousands injured during the 19 months of the intifada) and the discoveries made during Operation Defensive Shield (regarding the intensity of anti-Israel incitement, the extent of the terrorist infrastructure and the direct involvement of the Palestinian Authority in anti-Israel attacks) are all more than enough to persuade one that the struggle is, in fact, for the entire land of Israel. Recent events must also be seen as irrefutable evidence that the strategy of the Palestinians in this conflict remains based on the absolute principles of a zero-sum game.

If the options are either continued control over Judea, Samaria and Gaza, while initiating ongoing operations to severely limit and prevent terrorism, or withdrawal from those territories and resolute acceptance of murderous terrorism in our city streets, then our preference should be clear. Present circumstances demand absolute rejection of the concepts behind Oslo and firm objection to the establishment of a Palestinian state (in even a small part of Judea, Samaria or Gaza). In light of the extensive terrorist infrastructure that was created in the areas under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority, it is possible to forecast to what monstrous proportions it would grow in an independent state. The establishment of such a state will not only be a reward and incentive for terrorism, but it will lead to instability and a constant strategic threat to the existence of the State of Israel.

One hopes that today?s expected Likud Central Committee resolution against the creation of a Palestinian state will encourage silent Likud ministers to check the Prime Minister on this critical issue that has been, until recently, removed from the public agenda. Even if the Prime Minister acceded to the creation of a Palestinian state before the President of the United States, it is still not too late to correct his terrible mistake. The sooner the better!
----------------------------------
Dr. Nathan Netanyahu is a computer science lecturer and researcher, and a member of Professors for a Strong Israel.