Land for peace is dead, please God
In the New York Post, Abby Wisse Schachter argues that the end of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty should mean the end of 'land for peace,' and the end of 'land for peace' would be a good thing. Consider how the agreement with Egypt worked out. Because of its military success in 1967 and 1973, Israel actually had the entire Sinai Peninsula with which to bargain and that piece of land represented a massive physical buffer between the two countries. Then, after having relinquished the territory and removed hundreds of Israelis from their homes in Yamit (no they were not crazy religious "settlers"), the Israelis got a cold, even belligerent, peace with Egypt that never prevented Egypt from remaining the greatest producer of anti-semitic literature in the world. The agreement did not require that Egypt stop teaching its children to hate Jews or to recognize Israel's right to exist. The agreement did not lead to trade, cultural exchanges, tourism of Egyptians into Israel or Israelis into Egypt proper. And finally, 30 years later, the agreement still rests in the hands of one man, the dictator of Egypt. If Mubarak had been assasinated as his predecessor Sadat was, the accord might have been cancelled years ago.Indeed.
The negotiations with the Palestinian also rest on this same flawed theory that if the Isaelis just give up land - and they have much less of it to give now -- there can be peace with the Palestinans. But that hasn't exactly worked out has it? Even when Israel gives up territory unilaterally it works out badly for the Jewish State.
One more point: There is a peace agreement with Jordan that seems to be holding, even in the face of political unrest there, and that agreement did include a land component to it. But the central tenet was suing for a cessation of hostilities. And the truth is that Jordan wanted very much to be rid of its Palestinian problem (the population of the kingdom is 70 percent Palestinian) by essentially making the Palestinians on the West Bank Israel's problem.
There is still hope that Egypt will not be taken over by the anti-Semitic, Islamist, murderous Muslim Brotherhood. While we wait and pray for Egypt's future, perhaps it is time for Israelis to rethink whether sticking to such a failed theory of peacemaking is really in the country's best interests. Land for peace is dead, please God.
Read it all.
Labels: Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, Land for peace
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 9:07 PM
1 Comments:
The point is the "land for peace" formula is a fraud.
Its a peace between governments and not a peace between peoples. If its not the latter, it can very easily disappear overnight.
Israel should not have to amputate itself to get the Arab World to accept it and to live in peace with it.
And without the cessation of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel incitement in the Arab World all that will happen is the next generation will be even more driven to see Israel as the enemy and wipe it out.
The last thing on earth Israel should do is give up territory in a dangerous and unsettled world. No one knows what the future of Egypt and the Arab World is going to look like but precedent and history warn against the emergence of liberal democracies there.
In short, Israel must hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
Post a Comment
<< Home