The War on Zionism

Arabs want to replace Israel. They are not alone.

Ted Belman,

Ted Belman
Ted Belman
PR
Post-Annapolis, the Palestinian Authority made it crystal clear that it will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Furthermore, it made it crystal clear that it will not compromise on Jerusalem, making it a capital offense to do so. Yet, negotiations continue. Either Ehud Olmert doesn't believe the PA or, what is more likely, he will still cut a deal where Israel is denied that recognition and will divide Jerusalem according to Arab demands.

Do not think for a moment that these entrenched Arab positions are negotiable. They aren't and never have been.

Ever since Theodor Herzl wrote The Jewish State in 1896, the Arabs, with one exception, Faisal ibn-Hussein, have opposed it.

According to Bat Ye'or, the author of The Dhimmi, Islam demands that Palestine "must be reconquered from the infidel, regardless of the passage of time." In pursuit of this goal, the Arabs rejected the Partition Plan and the creation of Israel, they went to war
Olmert doesn't believe the PA or, what is more likely, he will still cut a deal.
numerous times to destroy Israel, they rejected Resolution 242, and shortly thereafter they decided at the Khartoum Conference to have "no recognition, no negotiations, no peace" with Israel.

In 1964, the Arab states founded the PLO, with a Charter that specifically calls for "the liquidation of the Zionist presence." Shortly thereafter, the PLO was taken over by Yasser Arafat's Nazi-trained Fatah, whose Charter was and is similar. Its goals:
Article (12) Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.

Article (13) Establishing an independent democratic state with complete sovereignty on all Palestinian lands, and Jerusalem is its capital city, and protecting the citizens' legal and equal rights without any racial or religious discrimination.

Nothing could be clearer. It refers to "all Palestinian lands" and was written before the "occupation" in 1967.

Then, in 1975, with Soviet support, the UN General Assembly passed the infamous resolution (3379) "Zionism is Racism" by a vote of 75 to 32 with 35 abstentions. The operative words are "that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination." Chaim Herzog, Israel's Ambassador to the UN at the time, made one of the great speeches of the Twentieth Century, arguing "Zionism is Not Racism". Though the US, lead by the late Patrick Moynihan, vehemently objected also, a month later it did not veto a proposal to seat the PLO as observers in the UN Security Council. No non-state had ever been accorded such recognition.

In 1991, with the fall of the Soviet Union, the UN General Assembly revoked resolution 3379, admitting it had been mistaken to label Zionism as racism. Nevertheless, this odious charge persists, like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

In the negotiations prior to the Oslo Accords in 1993, the Fatah Charter became an obstacle. Arafat agreed to amend it. This was a precondition. Yet, no such amendment was effected, necessitating this letter from Arafat to President Clinton in 1998:

In the mutual recognition letters between myself and the late Prime Minister Itzhaq Rabbin of September 9/10, 1993, the PLO committed to recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security, to accept UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides. The PLO also agreed to secure the necessary changes in the Palestinian Covenant to reflect these commitments.

Accordingly, the P.N.C. was held in Gaza city between 22-25 of April 1996, and in an extraordinary session decided that the "Palestine National Charter is hereby amended by cancelling the articles that are contrary to the letters exchanged between the P.L.O and the Government of Israel on 9/10 September 1993.

Still, the Charter is not amended.

More recently, Judea Pearl, father of Daniel Pearl, penned an essay, "Anti-Zionism is Racism," in which he wrote, "anti-Zionism is a form of racism more dangerous than classical anti-Semitism." Could be. Just prior to 9/11, the UN hosted a World Conference Against Racism at Durban. It became a hate-fest of anti-Zionism, as was intended. "Zionism is racism" was actively promoted to delegitimize Israel. Durban II in 2010 promises to be even more hateful, if that is possible.

In the run up to Annapolis, Roy Blunt (R-MO) introduced H. Res. 758 jointly with Shelley Berkley (D-NV). This resolution calls on Mahmoud Abbas to officially renounce ten articles in the Fatah Constitution that call for Israel's destruction and acts of terrorism against the Jews. While AIPAC supports the Blunt resolution, it also supports increasing aid to the PA, without regard to the Charter. Having it both ways, I guess. Doesn't it know that you can't suck and blow at the same time?

The Donor's Conference in Paris pledged $7.4 billion to the PA for the next three years. No one demanded that the Charter be amended, that terror stop or that there be
The two-state solution is a sham for Western consumption.
accountability for the funds. And everyone knows that Fatah is about to reconcile with Hamas on Hamas' terms.

And what are those terms?

First of all, the Hamas Charter is virulently anti-Semitic and uncompromising in its goal of ridding Palestine of the Jews. It declares that "all Palestine is Islamic trust land, can never be surrendered to non-Muslims and is an integral part of Muslim world." On December 7, Ismail Haniyeh, speaking for Hamas, said, "We will never recognise the usurper Zionist government and will continue our jihad-like movement until the liberation of Jerusalem."

Everyone is determined to ignore this, or worse, to live with it. This refusal on the part of the PA should be a deal breaker, but negotiations continue. The same goes for Jerusalem. This is very ominous.

The bottom line is that the Arabs want Palestine to replace Israel. This goal is reiterated by all boycott movements, by the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) and Muslim Student Association (MSA), by Iran when it calls for Israel to be "wiped off the map," by the PA that publishes books with maps showing Palestine in place of Israel, by Hamas, and by many UN agencies and NGO's.

And they are not alone. The idea of a Jewish state is considered by the Left as anachronistic, retrograde and even racist. Daniel Pipes commented on this in "Zionism's Bleak Future." In my article "Jewish Israel is the key to its survival, not its end," I reviewed the liberal-Left opposition and argued:

One of the icons of the left is affirmative action which obviously denies equality. Affirmative action is seen as making up for years of discrimination and therefore worthy. If anyone or people are entitled to affirmative action, the Jews are. [..] Jews are entitled to this assistance or favouritism or protection whatever you may call it. We paid for it in blood.

The endorsement of the two-state solution is a sham for Western consumption. The demand for a "just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194,″ otherwise known as the "right of return," vitiates any recognition of the two-state solution, because it effectively is intended to destroy the state of Israel.

The enemies of Israel recently coined two new terms, "Zion-Cons" and "Zionofascism." You can imagine why. The war on Zionism continues.


More Arutz Sheva videos:


top