Hebrew Press OpEd: Rabin Cliches

Year after year, as November 4th draws near, left-aligned spokesmen and media repeat the same old lies about PM Rabin’s murder. Their hidden agenda? Maligning those who are faithful to the Land of Israel so that expelling them from their homes doesn’t seem so untenable

Haggai Huberman,

Arutz 7

Inclement weather forced the postponement of the main Memorial Event for PM Yitschak Rabin from last weekend to next Saturday night. This afforded the Israeli left an unforeseen extra week to hold their annual “Rabin Festival”, a veritable media carnival entitled “The Incitement Preceding the Murder”.  Once again, we are subjected to trite, unverifiable
Leftist clichés have been accepted as absolute axioms because the media just keeps on parroting them.
leftist clichés that have been accepted as absolute axioms because the media just keeps on parroting them.

Several examples will suffice to make that clear:

1. “Rabin’s Murder Brought the Oslo Peace Process to a Halt”—absolute drivel. The Oslo Process didn’t come to a halt because of Rabin’s murder. It came to a halt because 1500 terrorist murders of other Israelis, not including Rabin’s, turned out to be its main achievement.  The Oslo Process remained alive and kicking after Rabin’s murder.  His successor, Shimon Peres, went on to carry out all the withdrawals in the second phase of the Oslo Accords. Netanyahu then contributed the Hebron and Wye Agreements. Still later, Ehud Barak gave us the Sharm Agreement and went on to Camp David with matchless offers for the Palestinians to consider.

2. “ Yigal Amir dealt a death blow to Democracy”—more drivel. Yigal Amir did not deal a death blow to democracy, he did so to Yitschak Rabin, z”l. Democracy was totally unaffected by the murder. There was, on the other hand, another Israeli leader who dealt democracy a lethal blow, but whom no one mentions:  Ariel Sharon.  Here we have someone elected on a succinct, clearly stated ideological platform, who then took his supporters’ votes and handed them over to the diametrically opposite ideology. He then
Ariel Sharon is the person who dealt a fatal blow to Israeli democracy.
brought this new policy before those very same voters, vowing all the while to accept the verdict of the majority, but completely ignored the results when it turned out that they were contrary to his plans.  This is a leader who brought his new policies to a vote in the cabinet but fired recalcitrant ministers beforehand so as to achieve an artificial majority. This is the person who dealt a fatal blow to Israeli democracy.

3.“Netanyahu has accepted Rabin’s legacy now that he agrees to ‘two countries for two nations’”—this couldn’t be more mistaken. When Netanyahu talks about a Palestinian state, he is light years away from Rabin’s legacy. Rabin was vehemently against a Palestinian state. In his last Knesset speech on October 5, 1995, during a debate over ratifying the Second Oslo Agreement, he said: The final solution will be within borders that include most of the borders that existed during the British Mandate. Alongside these borders, a Palestinian entity will arise that is less than a state, but that will be in charge of daily life autonomously for those Palestinians living within its borders. Israel’s borders at the final solution will be beyond those that existed prior to the Six Day War. We will not return to the June 1967 lines...First and foremost—a unified Jerusalem that includes both Maale Adumim and Givat Zeev, the capital of Israel under Israeli sovereignty…The security borders for defending Israel will be in the Jordan Valley, with the widest possible interpretation. These changes will also include the Etzion Bloc and other settlements that are in the area, east of what was once the Green Line prior to the Six Day War. We must establish blocs of settlements and hope they will be like another  Katif  Bloc
Rabin was vehemently against a Palestinian state.
(!!H.B.) but in Judea and Samaria."

Rabin’s murder was the result of the violent atmosphere that prevailed during that period, one that Rabin himself helped create. He paid with his life for the atmosphere that he himself encouraged by saying things that caused much antagonism towards him. He called the Golan residents “propellers”, compared the Right to Hamas terrorists—that is certainly incitement—and declared that he is responsible first and foremost—these are his exact words—for the security of 98% of Israel’s citizens.

In other words, he announced that  the security of the settlers didn’t concern him. That last sentence, besides being unconscionably despicable, was also incorrect: in the Second Oslo Agreement, the one Rabin fashioned himself  (as opposed to the first agreement which was drafted without him) he made sure to secure the security of the settlers and only after that the security of the rest of Israel’s citizens. In the Second Oslo agreement, which was a total disaster for Israel, Rabin made sure to put in all the elements that would ensure security for the settlers despite the creation of a new, independent Palestinian Authority with an army of its own in Judea and Samaria.

(translated from Arutz Sheva OpEd by Rochel Sylvetsky)