There are varying views across the political spectrum with how Israel should handle it's interminable struggle against the Palestinian Arabs.
On the far right, you have a figure like Meir Kahane, who advocated expelling the Palestinians from the west bank and forcing those Arabs wanting to
stay in Israel proper to accept his new terms of government: full personal rights, no political rights (no voting).
This is a solution that may have worked when he suggested it, and it could in fact work if considered in the future. But for valid reasons, many
Towards the middle of the spectrum are those willing to accede territory in the west bank for the creation of a Palestinian state. These people
subscribe to the doctrine that Israel (and Jews) can gain peace by giving lands gained in wars for a pledge for peace. However, in hindsight, such
pledges might in fact be worth nothing. As we can see in Egypt, with the very likely case of an Islamic government coming to power, Israels peace
treaty made with the Sadat government (during Egypts "post colonialist colonialism") could be annulled, and if that happens, it would show that peace
is NOT made with land exchanges, but with changing the climate and attitude of the people in the country towards the country held in disdain.
Unfortunately, through the period of Egypts "peace" (or cold peace, would be a better term), Egyptian press daily vilified the Jews and Israel, so
much so that Egypt is one of the most antisemitic countries in the world.
Between these two positions lies a more moderate, though less concessionist, approach towards making peace with the Palestinian Arabs.
I believe Israel MUST defend it's territorial obligations in the west bank. The West bank is a mountainous region that overlooks Israels economic
heartland - the Tel Aviv - Haifa - Jaffah region.
I do NOT believe, unlike most other political pundits, that either Hamas or Fatah ever plan on making peace with Israel, at least not in the
foreseeable future, not when Israel and Jews are vilified in the Palestinian (and overall Arab) media, and not when these two companions - hamas and
fatah - are following the radical revolutionary handbook.
The following is from Robert Taber's classic study of guerrilla warfare, "the war of the flea"
Usually, the revolutionary political organization will have two branches: one subterranean and illegal, the other visible and quasi-legitimate.
On the one hand, there will be activists – saboteurs, terrorists, arms runners, fabricators of explosive devices, operators of a clandestine press,
distributors of political pamphlets, and couriers to carry messages from one guerrilla sector to another, using the towns as communications centers.
On the other hand, there will be sympathizers and fellow travelers, those not really of the underground, operating for the most part within the law,
but sustaining the efforts of the activists, and, of themselves, accomplishing far more important tasks. The visible organization will, of course,
have invisible links with the revolutionary underground, and, through it, with the guerrilla's in the countryside. But it’s real work will be to
serve as a respectable façade for the revolution, a civilian front, or, as the Cubans called it, resistencia civica, made up of intellectuals,
tradesman, clerks, students, professionals, and the like – above all, of women – capable of promoting funds, circulating petitions, organizing
boycotts, raising popular demonstrations, informing friendly journalists, spreading rumors, and in every way imaginable waging a massive propaganda
campaign aimed at two objectives: the strengthening and brightening of the rebel “image”, and the discrediting of the regime.
- Robert Taber, The War of the Flea, pg. 23-24
Could this be anymore redolent of Hamas - the bad 'cop', and Fatah 'the respectable' opposition seeking political legitimacy?
This is clearly what Israel is up against. It is not dealing with an honest and sincere opposition that seeks to make peace with Israel, but rather an
implacable enemy.. And might i add that since Israels founding Arabs everywhere, from Egypt to Syria to Lebanon have vowed to see Israel's
destruction. Hamas and Fatah is sustained by outside elements - from Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
Israels struggle for sovereignty that will be respected by Arabs nations ultimately lies in how Arab nations view Israel, in other words, in how it's
elites view Israel. A solution exists, but it is not Israels to find, since every concession Israel makes leads to a reduction in Israel's territorial
size. And still, given the trend in the last 70 or so years, this approach that Israel is taking diplomatically, although 'holding off' the
inevitable, will ultimately lead to a stand off of some sort.
edit on 15-1-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)