The entire world has bought into the idea that peace depends on Israel making concessions. This is based on two notions; namely, that Israel is usurping Palestinian rights to the territories, to Jerusalem and even to the refugee "homes" in Israel itself; and, secondly, that it is in the self-interest of each nation to curry favour with the Arabs (protexia, if you will).
Even the US, while fully understanding that settlements are not illegal, has maintained that they are an obstacle to peace. What drives this is the belief that it is harder to achieve peace if Israel asserts its rights to the lands in question; the Arabs will never agree. In essence, the US and the rest of the world are saying that the territories are yours to give back and not to keep. They have also said that Jerusalem is not yours to annex, but theirs to be doled out and administered. Hence, the claim that it should be an international city. Even the US, whose Congress voted many times to move its embassy to Jerusalem, does not recognize the annexation of any part of Jerusalem to Israel.
And finally, the US refused to make the "right of return" a non-starter in negotiations. True, Israel was thrown a bone by President Bush, when he acknowledged that Israel is a Jewish state, whatever one can draw from that, but it does not suffice.
So we have the Roadmap. The US does not even bother anymore to blame it on pressure from Prime Minister Blair or the Arabs. Bush, we are told, and can see, is personally committed. Notwithstanding that final issues are to be "freely negotiated", the US is leading the world in the demand that settlements must go and Palestine must come, and these demands are non-negotiable. In fact, they are pre-conditions to the negotiations. The outcome comes before negotiations; the cart comes before the horse.
This is taken to absurd lengths in the demand that settlements be uprooted even before terrorism ends. I used to complain that the US is equating settlement activity with terrorism, in order to insist that both must end. Foolish me. They are now insisting that settlement activity end, even before terrorism begins to end or even if it never ends. The cart before the horse.
Israel has the ability to militarily crush the resistance before negotiations. Many conflicts, which can?t be solved by negotiations, are solved by first defeating the other side totally and then imposing a solution or negotiating a solution. In resistance to such an idea, we hear a chorus of voices arguing that "there is no military solution" (why not?) or that Israel should restrain itself in its self-defence. After all, aggressive self-defence, like the settlements, is an obstacle to peace. In fact, many consider Israel itself to be an obstacle to peace. Once again, the cart before the horse.
It seems to me that Israel hasn't begun to flex its political muscles in the US. President Bush's recent reversal regarding Israel's right to self defense, shows just how potent those muscles are. Instead, Ariel Sharon, the warrior and the pragmatist, is going along with hardly a whimper. The only way that I can make sense of this is to conclude that Sharon has an agreement with the US that Palestine, with provisional borders on 50% of the territories, will be set up with Israel's agreement and after that the US will not pressure Israel on the final status issues.
But this conclusion may well be wishful thinking, and the reality may well be that the Saudi "Peace Plan" is driving down the Road on the Map, like a juggernaut.
--------------------------------------------------------
Ted Belman runs the pro-Israel IsraPundit website.
Even the US, while fully understanding that settlements are not illegal, has maintained that they are an obstacle to peace. What drives this is the belief that it is harder to achieve peace if Israel asserts its rights to the lands in question; the Arabs will never agree. In essence, the US and the rest of the world are saying that the territories are yours to give back and not to keep. They have also said that Jerusalem is not yours to annex, but theirs to be doled out and administered. Hence, the claim that it should be an international city. Even the US, whose Congress voted many times to move its embassy to Jerusalem, does not recognize the annexation of any part of Jerusalem to Israel.
And finally, the US refused to make the "right of return" a non-starter in negotiations. True, Israel was thrown a bone by President Bush, when he acknowledged that Israel is a Jewish state, whatever one can draw from that, but it does not suffice.
So we have the Roadmap. The US does not even bother anymore to blame it on pressure from Prime Minister Blair or the Arabs. Bush, we are told, and can see, is personally committed. Notwithstanding that final issues are to be "freely negotiated", the US is leading the world in the demand that settlements must go and Palestine must come, and these demands are non-negotiable. In fact, they are pre-conditions to the negotiations. The outcome comes before negotiations; the cart comes before the horse.
This is taken to absurd lengths in the demand that settlements be uprooted even before terrorism ends. I used to complain that the US is equating settlement activity with terrorism, in order to insist that both must end. Foolish me. They are now insisting that settlement activity end, even before terrorism begins to end or even if it never ends. The cart before the horse.
Israel has the ability to militarily crush the resistance before negotiations. Many conflicts, which can?t be solved by negotiations, are solved by first defeating the other side totally and then imposing a solution or negotiating a solution. In resistance to such an idea, we hear a chorus of voices arguing that "there is no military solution" (why not?) or that Israel should restrain itself in its self-defence. After all, aggressive self-defence, like the settlements, is an obstacle to peace. In fact, many consider Israel itself to be an obstacle to peace. Once again, the cart before the horse.
It seems to me that Israel hasn't begun to flex its political muscles in the US. President Bush's recent reversal regarding Israel's right to self defense, shows just how potent those muscles are. Instead, Ariel Sharon, the warrior and the pragmatist, is going along with hardly a whimper. The only way that I can make sense of this is to conclude that Sharon has an agreement with the US that Palestine, with provisional borders on 50% of the territories, will be set up with Israel's agreement and after that the US will not pressure Israel on the final status issues.
But this conclusion may well be wishful thinking, and the reality may well be that the Saudi "Peace Plan" is driving down the Road on the Map, like a juggernaut.
--------------------------------------------------------
Ted Belman runs the pro-Israel IsraPundit website.