One of the relatively unnoticed consequences of the thirty- five day war in Lebanon is that the Palestinian Arabs are among its biggest losers. This is, first of all, because an Israeli public that has seen twice now, both from Lebanon and from Gaza, the result of unilateral withdrawal is not about to permit another such withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. The "convergence plan" of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's Kadima party is, whether he will admit this or not, dead.
The Palestinians who have been exulting over the rockets landing in Israel, have been publicly asserting that their next stage in the war with Israel is acquiring such rockets for "the West Bank". They are not likely to be accommodated by the Israeli government, whether Olmert stays in power or not. The danger to Israel's heartland from Palestinian control of Judea and Samaria is an existential one.
So, the Palestinians have lost their chance at one-sided withdrawal. They have lost something else through the war in Lebanon - the basic propaganda tool they have used for many years. Their greatest propaganda success has been in convincing the world that their situation is the result of the "Israeli occupation" and not of their own intransigence and refusal to live in peace with Israel. Now, Hizbullah comes along and once again affirms the thesis that has been valid from the beginning of the Middle East conflict: what is really at issue is the refusal of the Arab and Islamic world to accept a Jewish state as a neighbor in the Middle East.
It is clear even to those on the Left in Israel that Israel was not after all 'occupying' Lebanese territory. The war came about because of Hizbullah aggression. And the situation with the Palestinians, however beaten back the Palestinians have been, is a result of their having attacked, and their ongoing attacks of, Israel.
Moreover, as the great patron of Hizbullah, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, simultaneously calls for and works for the destruction of Israel, it is most clear that Israel's survival, and not any "occupation" is the basic Middle Eastern conflict issue. The whole focus on the "Palestinian Arabs", who paint themselves as underdogs, can now be seen for the distortion it always was. In fact, the problem is regional and, in a sense, global. The Islamic world, or a good share of it, refuses to recognize and live with the Jewish state or, in fact, with anyone who is not Islamic.
This means that no Israeli land concessions are in order, and that the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria are not about to receive what they have not agreed to anyway - a state on ninety-percent of the territory of Judea and Samaria. Israel is going to have to remain in Judea and Samaria as the ruling military force for the foreseeable future and beyond.
This, in turn, raises the question of whether there should or should not be a vast effort now to settle hundreds of thousands of Jews in Judea and Samaria, for security reasons primarily, and out of the understanding that we will have to hold this territory long into the future.
The Palestinians who have been exulting over the rockets landing in Israel, have been publicly asserting that their next stage in the war with Israel is acquiring such rockets for "the West Bank". They are not likely to be accommodated by the Israeli government, whether Olmert stays in power or not. The danger to Israel's heartland from Palestinian control of Judea and Samaria is an existential one.
So, the Palestinians have lost their chance at one-sided withdrawal. They have lost something else through the war in Lebanon - the basic propaganda tool they have used for many years. Their greatest propaganda success has been in convincing the world that their situation is the result of the "Israeli occupation" and not of their own intransigence and refusal to live in peace with Israel. Now, Hizbullah comes along and once again affirms the thesis that has been valid from the beginning of the Middle East conflict: what is really at issue is the refusal of the Arab and Islamic world to accept a Jewish state as a neighbor in the Middle East.
It is clear even to those on the Left in Israel that Israel was not after all 'occupying' Lebanese territory. The war came about because of Hizbullah aggression. And the situation with the Palestinians, however beaten back the Palestinians have been, is a result of their having attacked, and their ongoing attacks of, Israel.
Moreover, as the great patron of Hizbullah, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, simultaneously calls for and works for the destruction of Israel, it is most clear that Israel's survival, and not any "occupation" is the basic Middle Eastern conflict issue. The whole focus on the "Palestinian Arabs", who paint themselves as underdogs, can now be seen for the distortion it always was. In fact, the problem is regional and, in a sense, global. The Islamic world, or a good share of it, refuses to recognize and live with the Jewish state or, in fact, with anyone who is not Islamic.
This means that no Israeli land concessions are in order, and that the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria are not about to receive what they have not agreed to anyway - a state on ninety-percent of the territory of Judea and Samaria. Israel is going to have to remain in Judea and Samaria as the ruling military force for the foreseeable future and beyond.
This, in turn, raises the question of whether there should or should not be a vast effort now to settle hundreds of thousands of Jews in Judea and Samaria, for security reasons primarily, and out of the understanding that we will have to hold this territory long into the future.