According to recent media reports, the new draft of the Democratic Party platform is in favor of the Palestinian Arabs “living in freedom and security in a viable state of their own” and is opposed to “any unilateral steps by either side,” which includes applying sovereignty.
If this draft becomes the platform of the Democratic Party, a Joe Biden presidency would advance the establishment of a full-fledged state whose final borders would require the consent of the PA pro-terror leadership.
This would pose a strategic threat to the State of Israel, for once again Israel would be given the choice of either living with the status quo or giving into unreasonable PA demands, with nothing more than the faint hope that maybe this time around it might lead to peace and not more terrorism.
By considering this problematic terminology in the Democratic Party’s platform, it appears that Biden and the other Democrats have not learned from the history of partitioning land.
India, Pakistan and Bagladesh
Let's look at another case where disputed lands were partitioned: Look at the Indian subcontinent, which was partitioned into three independent states: India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. Shipan Kumer Basu, who heads the World Hindu Struggle Committee, proclaimed:
“Before the partition of 1947, the Hindu population of the British Indian subcontinent was 70 percent and the Muslim population was 28 percent. The remaining 2 percent were Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, etc. In the British Indian subcontinent, Hindus were clearly the majority and Muslims were the minority. After the partition of Pakistan and India in 1947, Hindus were 24 percent of the population of West Pakistan. Now, the Hindu population of the country is 2 percent of the total population. In 1947, the Hindu population of East Pakistan was 30 per cent of the total population, while in the country now transformed into Bangladesh, the Hindu population is 8 percent.” How did that happen? The Hindus were forced out of the Muslim areas for the most part, even though 15% of the population in Hindu India is Muslim.
The partition of India was so bloody that it makes the Israeli-Palestinian conflict look not so bad. During the Partition of India, several hundred thousand people were estimated to have been killed, at least 75,000 women were raped, 83,000 women were abducted, many non-Muslims were forcibly converted to Islam, and 12 million people became refugees.
The reasoning for the partition of India rested on the premise that the Muslims of India constituted a separate nation and deserved a country of their own based on this fact. Sound familiar? The Indians, noting that most Muslims of India were descendants of local Indians who converted to Islam, did not buy into the notion that the Muslims of India constituted a separate nation. However, this Indian belief that the Muslims of India did not constitute a separate nation did not stop the partition of India because the British, who had the power, supported partition, thereby causing an enormous amount of humanitarian suffering.
However, despite the humanitarian trauma associated with it, the partition of India has failed to prevent conflict between Pakistanis and Indians. India and Pakistan have existed for about the same amount of
Since Pakistan is a fully functional state, it is not so easy for India to go over there and root out the terror. Furthermore, Hindu human rights activist Rubi Shain noted that Hindus who remained behind in Pakistan and Bangladesh suffered immensely: “We know that the Hindus are always tortured. Their level of torture is so high that it is unbearable. Nobody is talking about the Hindu people getting tortured. Hindus will become like dinosaurs if it continues for a long time. It will be a massacre.”
Partitioning the nation did not bring India any peace and caused so much humanitarian suffering that simply would not have happened if the British had not supported partition.
The Palestinian Authority
Since the beginning of the Palestinian national movement, its leadership has rejected the idea of obtaining “freedom and security in a viable state of their own” if it included recognizing Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. From the Peel Commission in 1939 to the UN Partition Plan to the Oslo Peace Process, the Gaza Withdrawal in 2005, the Olmert offer and now with the Deal of the Century, the Palestinian Authority leaders have demonstrated consistently that they do not desire to be an independent state but rather a nation built upon the ashes of the one and only Jewish state.
A leadership that cares more about the destruction of its neighbors rather than building a brighter future for its own children cannot be trusted to obtain full statehood, for they would use that privilege not to build more schools, hospitals and businesses but rather to harm the State of Israel. If the Democratic Party leaders do not want to believe me, they should merely follow what is said in the PA media. According to Palestinian Media Watch, Ahmed Erekat, a relative of PA leader Saeb Erekat, recently carried out a terror attack that was captured by an Israel security camera, where he rammed into an Israeli policewoman, throwing her into the wall. Erekat referred to the elimination of the terrorist as an “execution in cold blood.”
- Leaders who utilize the pandemic in order to spread hatred and encourage terrorism, rather than seeking to cooperate with Israel in an effort to jointly fight against the coronavirus together, cannot be trusted with the ability to purchase biological, chemical and other types of advanced weapons, nor can they be given the right to exercise full sovereignty.
- The second a sovereign Palestinian state exists in Judea and Samaria alongside Gaza, Israel will not be able to enter in there to defend itself.
- The areas would become another Lebanon, a thorn in Israel’s side and an existential threat to Israel, especially given that there are only nine miles between the Mediterranean Sea and some areas of Judea and Samaria.
- Without proper border adjustments, major cities such as Tel Aviv, Herzliya and Netanya will be exposed to an endless barrage of Palestinian rockets.
Considering this, how can the Jewish Democratic Council of America praise this draft of the Democratic Party platform? There is nothing pro-Israel about this draft.
The time has come for Alternate Prime Minister Benny Gantz to wise up and stop caring about what the international community thinks, especially people who are promoting this platform in the Democratic Party. If we listen to them, we will be like India, living still with terror and no peace, yet have no ability to really fight the terror for our enemies got a sovereign state. Already, the fact that we left Gaza makes it very hard on us to fight the qassam rocket attacks.
Why would we want another Gaza in Judea and Samaria? Gantz should support applying sovereignty in thirty percent of Judea and Samaria ASAP, so it will already be a fait accompli if Trump is voted out. Otherwise, we will have difficulty days ahead for us that got nothing to do with the pandemic.
Rachel Avraham is an Israel-based journalist and a political analyst working at the Safadi Center for International Diplomacy, Research, Public Relations and Human Rights. She is the author of “Women and Jihad: Debating Palestinian Female Suicide Bombings in the American, Israeli and Arab Media.”