All the lines have been crossed.
Advisors of Ariel Sharon have let it become known that Sharon is prepared to make concessions (retreat) to the "Palestinians" on Jerusalem (courtesy of Yediot Achronot): "American magazine Newsweek quoted pollster Kalman Gayer as saying that Sharon is willing to concede 90 percent of the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem for the establishment of a Palestinian state with a capital in Jerusalem."
Not only has Sharon crushed the dream of Greater Israel, but the dream of a United Jerusalem is about to be shattered, as well.
The logic behind the willingness to abandon certain parts of Jerusalem was summed up by Labor-defector, and new Kadima member, Haim Ramon: "I do not know one moderate man who wants to keep Arab areas like a-Ram as parts of Jerusalem. That's a mistake."
So, what it boils down to is this: everything is negotiable. The State of Israel has no red lines. Gush Katif is no different from Hebron, and Hebron is no different from Shechem, Bethlehem, Samaria or Jerusalem. Our right to a Jewish State in the Land of Israel is no longer a given - not in the eyes of the world, and, increasingly, not within the hearts and minds of the Jewish People.
If our right to a Jewish State in the Land of Israel is based solely on demographic and security considerations, then the founding fathers of Zionism would have been better off settling for Uganda or Argentina. When the early Zionists began settling Israel, the Jews were hardly a majority, and if not for the fact that hundreds of thousands of Arabs fled during the War of Independence in 1948, the State of Israel would not have sustained a Jewish majority by the time the Six-Day War rolled around in 1967.
If, today, Jerusalem is just another piece of land, as was Gush Katif, as is Shechem, Bethelehem, Jericho and Hebron, then why not give it away? Why should Jewish history and Jewish destiny stand in the way of "peace", so long as we can sit in our cafes in Tel Aviv sipping lattes.
If, today, Jewish sovereignty over the Temple Mount is viewed as more of a burden than a blessing, if we are willing to sit idly by while our enemies systematically destroy any Jewish connection to the site, and we are silent as the "Palestinians" openly claim that the Western Wall (the Kotel) is the property of the Muslims, then why not give Jerusalem away to the Muslims who clearly recognize her significance and sanctity more than we do?
If, today, Zionism is all about being a nation like all others, then it can be accomplished without a United Jerusalem. If, however, we aspire to be a Jewish State, with all that implies, then a United Jerusalem is a central component to all that the Jewish State of Israel will represent.
The fate of Jerusalem is in our hands. In the upcoming elections, we can choose to have a hand in destroying United Jerusalem or to take part in strengthening it, along with our right to the rest of our homeland - and to a Jewish State.
If we waste this opportunity ? a chance to act for the sake of Zion and Jerusalem ? we will only have ourselves to blame.
Advisors of Ariel Sharon have let it become known that Sharon is prepared to make concessions (retreat) to the "Palestinians" on Jerusalem (courtesy of Yediot Achronot): "American magazine Newsweek quoted pollster Kalman Gayer as saying that Sharon is willing to concede 90 percent of the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem for the establishment of a Palestinian state with a capital in Jerusalem."
Not only has Sharon crushed the dream of Greater Israel, but the dream of a United Jerusalem is about to be shattered, as well.
The logic behind the willingness to abandon certain parts of Jerusalem was summed up by Labor-defector, and new Kadima member, Haim Ramon: "I do not know one moderate man who wants to keep Arab areas like a-Ram as parts of Jerusalem. That's a mistake."
So, what it boils down to is this: everything is negotiable. The State of Israel has no red lines. Gush Katif is no different from Hebron, and Hebron is no different from Shechem, Bethlehem, Samaria or Jerusalem. Our right to a Jewish State in the Land of Israel is no longer a given - not in the eyes of the world, and, increasingly, not within the hearts and minds of the Jewish People.
If our right to a Jewish State in the Land of Israel is based solely on demographic and security considerations, then the founding fathers of Zionism would have been better off settling for Uganda or Argentina. When the early Zionists began settling Israel, the Jews were hardly a majority, and if not for the fact that hundreds of thousands of Arabs fled during the War of Independence in 1948, the State of Israel would not have sustained a Jewish majority by the time the Six-Day War rolled around in 1967.
If, today, Jerusalem is just another piece of land, as was Gush Katif, as is Shechem, Bethelehem, Jericho and Hebron, then why not give it away? Why should Jewish history and Jewish destiny stand in the way of "peace", so long as we can sit in our cafes in Tel Aviv sipping lattes.
If, today, Jewish sovereignty over the Temple Mount is viewed as more of a burden than a blessing, if we are willing to sit idly by while our enemies systematically destroy any Jewish connection to the site, and we are silent as the "Palestinians" openly claim that the Western Wall (the Kotel) is the property of the Muslims, then why not give Jerusalem away to the Muslims who clearly recognize her significance and sanctity more than we do?
If, today, Zionism is all about being a nation like all others, then it can be accomplished without a United Jerusalem. If, however, we aspire to be a Jewish State, with all that implies, then a United Jerusalem is a central component to all that the Jewish State of Israel will represent.
The fate of Jerusalem is in our hands. In the upcoming elections, we can choose to have a hand in destroying United Jerusalem or to take part in strengthening it, along with our right to the rest of our homeland - and to a Jewish State.
If we waste this opportunity ? a chance to act for the sake of Zion and Jerusalem ? we will only have ourselves to blame.