Op-Ed: Will Democracy Finish Off Israel?

Transfer has occurred in Jewish history, but Jews were then defenseless.
Published: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 11:56 PM




The Jewish version of ethnic cleansing is unique and self imposed. It has no name. In 2005 it was called "disengagement".
 

Israel's public opinion and government are now debating about imposing another freeze on construction in Judea and Samaria and eventually the forced removal of hundreds of Jews from their homes.
 

Everybody knows that to reach the suicidal "two states solution" Israel will have to remove a group of “settlers” - between 60.000 to 120.000 people. This would be an illegal decision. An American government, attempting to clear out thousands of its own citizens in the name of "peace", would surely face a civil war.
 

The Israeli government may have the authority to cede territories. But they have no authority to destroy Jewish homes and towns. Governments come and go, and so do generations: it is Israel's great privilege to hold its sacred, Jewish possessions in trust for future generations. Israel has no right to transfer them to alien hands. To deliver more land to the Palestinian Arabs following years of non-compliance is a mind-boggling act. To term this act as "an important step toward peace and security" is an insult to the intelligence of Israel's people.
 

Jewish title to the Land of Israel - to Jericho and Gaza, Bethlehem and Shechem - is morally absolute, not contingent on a Jewish majority, undiminished by millennia of exile or competing claims. An Israeli State which perpetrates "disengagement" to its people, its most loyal people, doesn't deserve to be defended.
 

Everybody knew before Oslo that if the IDF would quit Kalkilya, life would be no longer normal in Kfar Sava and Petah Tikva. And if it would leave Tulkarm, terror would  strike sevenfold in Hadera, Kfar Yona and Netanya. And that is what happened.

A state that "disengages" has ceased to look like the victorious state that defeated the armies of seven Arab nations in the War of Independence and liberated the Temple Mount in the Six Day War; one that turned defeat into victory as its forces crossed the Suez Canal and threw PLO headquarters and terrorists out of Beirut in Operation Peace for Galilee.
 

Historically, the transfer of Jews either from their homeland or from various lands has occurred several times, like the large-scale deportation of Jews from the Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians, those exiled from the Kingdom of Judah to Babylonia, the Jews expelled from England by Edward I (1290) and from Spain (1492) by Ferdinand and Isabella, and the Jews removed by the Nazis from their homes and sent on trains to concentration camps.
 

And the way many Jews compliantly went to the camps and innocently boarded those trains, now they might decide to commit unwitting suicide on the altar of "peace". The only difference between then and now is that Jews can decide to resist to such betrayal.
 

If the IDF withdraws again from areas on government orders, the "settlers" should stay on, and they won't be alone. Hundreds, even thousands, of volunteers will come to their aid - to join in their self-defense.
 

Judaism, uncompromisingly monotheistic, teaching that right and wrong are absolutes, not recognizing other conflicting creeds as equal truths, has always been the primary antagonist of the relativist world view that lies at the root of the Israeli-Terror entente and the planned repartition of the Land of Israel. But meanwhile, day by day the Jewish grip on the land is weakening.
 

There are 5 who sail in a ship. Food runs out. A clear majority of 4 of those present votes to eat the fifth. Does "democracy" oblige him to respect that vote? Doesn't protection of life come before "democracy" and permit him to resist? Will such "democracy" liquidate Israel?