As Israeli and PA negotiators struggle to square the circle and agree on how to implement the U.S. Roadmap, an analyst reminds that PA simply wishes to replace Israel.
In an article entitled The Reality of a Palestinian State, Joseph Puder writes in FrontPageMagazine.com that the Arab struggle against Israel is not about land - as evidenced by repeated Arab rejections of territory over the course of decades. Instead, he writes, "it is an armed struggle that aims to replace Israel with an Arab Islamic terrorist state that would undermine American and European interests in the region."
Puder notes that the Palestinian leadership rejected the 1937 Peel Commission offer of an Arab state, the UN Partition plan, the Camp David II Summit, and, most recently the Olmert-Livni offer of - reports say - 93% of Judea and Samaria. Each of these offers has "involved gradually shrinking landmasses," Puder writes.
The reasonable assumption is therefore simple, he concludes: The Arabs "did not settle for the favorable Peel Commission recommendations of 1937 because they rejected the idea of a sovereign Jewish homeland, however small and untenable, and continue to refuse to accept the idea of a permanent sovereign Jewish State today."
Puder calls upon both U.S. presidential candidates to totally reject further negotiations for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Succinctly summarizing the basic objections to a Palestinian state, he writes that such an entity would be "a base of operation to dismantle the Jewish State [and] a haven for assorted jihadist terror groups, including al-Qaeda, and would work closely with Hezbollah operatives" - as Hamas-run Gaza currently is today.
Any future Palestinian state would be unstable and violent, Puder writes, with rampant Fatah and Hamas clashes, and control sought by Shiite Iran and other Arab countries - leading to "regional wars, increased terrorism and possibly nuclear war." Jordan, too, would be threatened, with Iran using jihadist elements in Gaza and the West Bank to destabilize and replace King Abdullah's regime with a jihadist leadership.
The Palestinian Authority does not even have the potential to fulfill the international definition of a country, Puder writes:
"Under the 1933 Montevideo Treaty, a state must satisfy four specific requirements: It must have a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into peaceful relations with other states. The Palestinian Authority under Abbas does not satisfy any one of these requisites. While it has 'permanent residents, it has also a large portion of unsettled refugees. And it certainly does not have 'a defined territory' as evidenced by its official maps. Its display of all of Western Palestine is indicative of its intentions to undermine the Jewish State. As to a 'government,' Abbas is running a gang rather than an acceptable government; it lacks legitimacy, as large portions of the Palestinians do not accept him as the leader. The fourth criterion is absolutely clear: It lacks the capacity to live in peace with its neighbor - Israel."