THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VI, Issue # 259, December 10, 2004
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT:
NO MORE COMPROMISES
By Alan Caruba
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT, THE DEATH OF YASSER ARAFAT, & PROSPECTS FOR SUCCESSFUL NEGOTIATION OF A
LASTING PEACE BETWEEN THE ISRAELI JEWS & THE PALESTINIAN ARABS -- AN ABSOLUTE, NON-NEGOTIABLE CONDITION FOR
SUCH A PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST: THE PALESTIANS MUST RID THEMSELVES OF THE CORRUPTION, OPPRESSION, &
TAINT OF TERRORISM REPRESENTED BY THE ERA OF ARAFAT & THE POLITICAL REGIME HE LEFT BEHIND
FULL STORY:
There can be no compromise with the Palestinians until they rid themselves of the corruption and oppression represented by the era
of Yasser Arafat and the “government” he left behind. The Israelis learned this the hard way. Now, the rest of the world is being
instructed in the demands of militant Islam -- an extremist and violent political movement that has no hesitancy to kill hundreds and
thousands of innocent people to achieve the movement's goals.
In his book, The Case for Democracy, Natan Sharansky, a leading member of the Israeli government and former prisoner of
the Soviet Union, points out:
“The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was formed in 1964. This was three years before
the Six Day War, during which Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan and the Gaza Strip
from Egypt. Obviously, then, the reason for the establishment of the PLO was not to ‘liberate’
these territories from Israeli rule. Rather, it was to destroy the State of Israel and, as its leader
frequently boasted, ‘push all the Jews into the sea.’”
There it is in a nutshell. There were no “Palestinians” when Israel became a nation in 1948. There were Arabs who lived within the
borders of the new nation and they were offered citizenship. Instead, they were urged by nations opposed to Israel to flee in
expectation of returning after Israel was invaded. Those nations, however, were defeated and those that fled became refugees.
They have remained refugees ever since, pawns in the hands of Arab nations that have refused to permit them to become citizens
to this day!
Everything that Yasser Arafat did since the founding of the PLO was directed at the destruction of Israel’s Jews. Despite ample
evidence of this, the world insisted on treating him as a great statesman. He was even awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. And,
following the Oslo Accords, he instituted the “intifada” that wreaked death on Israelis.
Several Israeli governments, led by Yitzak Rabin, Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak respectively, tried to negotiate their way to
some form of peace with Arafat, often offering vast tracts of land in exchange for a promise to desist from terrorism. They learned
slowly and painfully they could not expect anything but more terrorism.
A petition being circulated by the U.S. Committee for a Free Lebanon is seeking signatures to an “Open Letter to Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon” calling on him not to make the same mistake with Syria. The letter states:
“If Syria is serious about peace, it should start making peace at home first. It should pull out
of Lebanon immediately. The Syrian society today is full of hate and anger. Hate against Jews
and anger against the United States.”
Like Sharansky, the letter says:
“Moral clarity dictates that Israel help free Syrians so that both people can decide what future
they want as neighbors. Peace with a dictatorship can only perpetuate the misery of oppression
felt by 22 million Syrians and Lebanese.”
For a very long time, the Israeli people were sharply divided about how to achieve peace with the people that are now called
Palestinians. Half of the Israeli population longed for peace on any basis. Half saw the threat for what it was. The Israelis
suffered from a moral muddle.
Many Israelis failed to see that the PLO was not about the welfare of the Palestinians, that the PLO was not about building
schools and hospitals, tending to the infrastructure, encouraging businesses, and most certainly not about freedom for those
in its control.
As Sharansky points out,
“For the PLO, however, terrorism was a calling card. They murdered Olympic athletes, executed kindergarten schoolchildren,
hijacked airliners, set off bombs in public places, and committed a host of other acts of terror.”
Thus, moral clarity demands that one recognize that “There is no moral equivalence between Palestinian terror attacks and Israeli
counterterror operations.”
It is this lack of moral clarity that has clouded much of the United States government’s effort to mediate in order to secure peace
from the Palestinians. It is only the fence the Israelis ultimately decided to build that has dramatically thwarted the killings inflicted
on their people. Do Palestinians suffer as a result? Yes. Do they need to reject the authority of those who have brought about this
suffering? Yes. Can they, given the opportunity, embrace peace? Democracy? Yes.
Arafat and the PLO have had plenty of time to indoctrinate the Palestinians with a cult of hatred for the Jews of Israel. It is a hatred
that is widespread throughout the Middle East, and it is a hatred shared by many in the West. Simply stated, the demand that Israel
cease to exist is anti-Semitism. The demand that the Israelis not respond, i.e., not protect themselves against those seeking to kill
them is anti-Semitism. To suggest that the three thousand year old history of Jews in Israel has no merit in their right to a nation of
their own is anti-Semitism.
United States policy, as articulated by President George W. Bush, maintains that Palestinians must “elect new leaders, leaders not
compromised by terror.” Perhaps, President Bush was prompted to this policy statement by the image of Palestinians dancing in the
streets, celebrating 9-11? His demand is for a Palestineian society and state comprised of “entirely new political and economic
institutions based on democracy, market economics, and action against terrorism” and on a constitution that establishes a “system
of reliable justice to punish those who prey on the innocent.”
Now, the question is whether the new U.S. Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will pursue this goal. Neither Israel nor the
U.S.A. can negotiate peace until the Palestinian leadership demonstrates they can adopt constitutional democracy and protect the
universal rights of their citizens. Signing agreements or treaties with terrorists is a total waste of time.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Israeli-Arab Conflict
The Middle East & the Arabs
Radical Islam & Islamic Terrorism
War & Peace in the Real World
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, Communications Director of the American Policy Center,
and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly
column, "Warning Signs," posted on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center
(www.anxietycenter.com). A compilation of his past columns, entitled Warning Signs, is published by Merril Press. In addition
to Warning Signs, Caruba is the author of A Pocket Guide to Militant Islam and The United Nations vs. the United States,
both of which are available from the National Anxiety Center, 28 West Third Street, Apartment 1321, South Orange, New Jersey, 07079.
Copyright 2004 Alan Caruba
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VI, 2004
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy