It appears that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has the bright idea that an administrative containment of Arabs in a vassal "Palestinian State" would resolve the Israeli demographics problem. Not only that, it would make Sharon look like a man of peace to the world, perhaps enough to receive the next Nobel prize, which has become a racket for former militants like Nelson Mandela and Yasser Arafat.
The disengagement plan does absolutely nothing for peace, although it may appear to absolve Israel of the responsibility for the multiplying Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Sharon may possibly see it as a "soft transfer". Even the intended beneficiaries of the plan do not like it; so why the fuss?
Prime Minister Sharon is trying to solve a demographic problem by unilaterally relinquishing some land, thus isolating the "third world" in our midst and leaving an Israel that can move on without such a menace. Can it work? Facts on the ground show that the Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are disenfranchised, and they do have a case in the eyes of the world. But we all know that this disenfranchisement is directly the Arab states' doing. What the world does not understand is the land issue. In a world court that examines all the facts, a good case will be made for Israel. Arabs have a case for disenfranchisement and Jews have a case for the land. Sharon thinks that giving them a little land will make the disenfranchisement go away in the eyes of the world. It is for the most part a PR trick and will not work, even though world media are hailing disengagement as a major breakthrough. The land of Israel is unique real estate in all the world and it is governed by different rules.
Sharon's plan is not even "land for peace". It is "land for potential demographic containment". The Arabs can see this; I am amazed that our misguided brothers on the Left do not see it. Arabs do not want to be contained. They know that eventually they will outnumber us, and that's a suffrage problem for Jews. It need not be so, however, if we adopt a constitution that is consistent with Jewish law. In a Jewish state, non-Jews have the potential for complete civil rights as geyrim toshavim, but not political rights as Jewish citizens. At the same time, they have the opportunity for Jewish citizenship through giyur.
The problem that Sharon is trying solve was solved 3,500 years ago and is spelled out in the Torah. Prof Eidelberg and members of Sharon's own party like Moshe Feiglin have articulated civics constructs that address the issue of Arab suffrage without relinquishing an inch of the land. Every state in the world has its own rules for suffrage. In the US, for instance, people can be residents (with a Green Card) with all the civil rights, but attenuated political rights and no one thinks that is particularly evil. Politicians like Sharon need to understand that the civic mechanism of Israel will never work until we come back to Torah.
The disengagement plan does absolutely nothing for peace, although it may appear to absolve Israel of the responsibility for the multiplying Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Sharon may possibly see it as a "soft transfer". Even the intended beneficiaries of the plan do not like it; so why the fuss?
Prime Minister Sharon is trying to solve a demographic problem by unilaterally relinquishing some land, thus isolating the "third world" in our midst and leaving an Israel that can move on without such a menace. Can it work? Facts on the ground show that the Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are disenfranchised, and they do have a case in the eyes of the world. But we all know that this disenfranchisement is directly the Arab states' doing. What the world does not understand is the land issue. In a world court that examines all the facts, a good case will be made for Israel. Arabs have a case for disenfranchisement and Jews have a case for the land. Sharon thinks that giving them a little land will make the disenfranchisement go away in the eyes of the world. It is for the most part a PR trick and will not work, even though world media are hailing disengagement as a major breakthrough. The land of Israel is unique real estate in all the world and it is governed by different rules.
Sharon's plan is not even "land for peace". It is "land for potential demographic containment". The Arabs can see this; I am amazed that our misguided brothers on the Left do not see it. Arabs do not want to be contained. They know that eventually they will outnumber us, and that's a suffrage problem for Jews. It need not be so, however, if we adopt a constitution that is consistent with Jewish law. In a Jewish state, non-Jews have the potential for complete civil rights as geyrim toshavim, but not political rights as Jewish citizens. At the same time, they have the opportunity for Jewish citizenship through giyur.
The problem that Sharon is trying solve was solved 3,500 years ago and is spelled out in the Torah. Prof Eidelberg and members of Sharon's own party like Moshe Feiglin have articulated civics constructs that address the issue of Arab suffrage without relinquishing an inch of the land. Every state in the world has its own rules for suffrage. In the US, for instance, people can be residents (with a Green Card) with all the civil rights, but attenuated political rights and no one thinks that is particularly evil. Politicians like Sharon need to understand that the civic mechanism of Israel will never work until we come back to Torah.