World leaders are bracing themselves this week for a storm at the United Nations to be unleashed by the Palestinian Authority in its demand for a Palestinian state.
Visiting with community leaders in Toronto, Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister, Avigdor Lieberman stressed that Western nations need to understand that Israel is on the front lines defending Western democracy. "Our security problem is your security problem... if you want to survive, you must support us. The Jewish state is fighting for the entire western world" Lieberman said.
Surrounded by hostile Arab countries, Israel is indeed on the front lines of the fight to preserve fundamental Western values of democracy, freedom and human rights. Even with the Arab Spring now taking hold in parts of the Middle East, there are few emerging signs that rights and freedoms are taking hold -- particularly as they relate to women and homosexuals.
Some hoped the Arab Spring would liberate the Muslim world from its incessant hatred of Israel and true peace would take hold in the Middle East. But the situation looks grim especially after the last couple of weeks that saw a diplomatic tussle -- Turkey expelled the Israeli ambassador; the Israeli embassy in Cairo was torched and its diplomats airlifted home; and as a 'precautionary measure,' Israel recalled its ambassador to Jordan.
The Palestinian's ultimate vision, said Lieberman is to "destroy the Jewish state of Israel." The Palestinians have given Israel little reason to think otherwise. Surely, if they wanted a peaceful resolution comprised of a two-state solution they would embrace Israel rather than unapologetically refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
The Palestinians, Lieberman said, have rebuffed every offer given to them for an independent state, including the Camp David Summit in 2000 (where over 91 per cent of the West Bank and 100 per cent of Gaza was offered to Arafat) and recently, a more extensive offer by the Olmert/Livni government was rejected by current Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. Even Ariel Sharon tried a different approach in 2005 by painfully vacating Gaza and uprooting Israeli towns to help the Palestinians see their dream of a state.
Like many Israelis, Lieberman believes that everything has been tried and that Israel must "change its concept entirely." What that concept might be will depend on what happens at the UN this week.
But it is unclear what the Palestinians will gain. They have already refused every overture made to them for a Palestinian state, including the 1947 UN partition plan for a Jewish and a Palestinian state. Ironically, unable to take Israel by force, they are running back to the same world body they rejected 64 years ago.
What is clear however is that they still want the whole enchilada. Maybe one day they will learn what every three-year-old already knows -- how to share.
Follow Avi Benlolo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/avibenlolo
BBC News - Israel and Palestinian territories country profile
Netanyahu: Negotiations only way to achieve Israeli-Palestinian ...
Joel Rubin: Why Israel Should Vote for Palestinian Statehood
Peace initiatives Israel has rebuffed include: U.S. Secretary of State William Rogers’ The Rogers Plan (1969); The Scranton Mission on behalf of President Nixon (1970); Egyptian President Sadat’s land for peace and mutual recognition proposal (1971); U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s call for a Geneva international conference (1977); Saudi Arabian King Fahd’s peace offer (1981); U.S. President Ronald Reagan’s Reagan Plan (1982); U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz’s Schultz Plan (1988); U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s Baker Plan (1989); the 1993 Oslo accords signed by Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin that unravelled following the latter’s assassination and subsequent return to power of the Likud party from 1996-1999 under Benjamin Netanyahu; continuation of the Taba II negotiations (2001); the 2002 Arab League’s Beirut Summit Peace Initiative (which offers Israel recognition as a sovereign state, exchange of ambassadors, trade, tourism, etc., if Israel complies with international law and its previous commitments) and the unofficial Geneva Peace Initiative of November/December 2003.
http://harveyoberfeld.ca/blog/the-media-and-the-middle-east/
Nahum Goldman, former president of the World Jewish Congress: "Israel has never presented the Arabs with a single peace plan. She has rejected every settlement plan devised by her friends and by her enemies. She has seemingly no other object than to preserve the status quo while adding territory piece by piece."
Professor Avi Shlaim, renowned Israeli historian, as summarized by Ha'aretz (11 August 2005) in its review of his highly acclaimed book The Iron Wall (2000): “...based on facts, he surveys the history of Israel's contacts with the Arab world from 1948 and states decisively ('The job of the historian is to judge,' he says) that the Israeli story that Israel has always stretched out its hand to peace, but there was nobody to talk to - is groundless. The Arabs have repeatedly outstretched a hand to peace - says Shlaim – and Israel has always rejected it. Each time with a different excuse."
Re the 2000 Camp David Summit: Suffice to quote Shlomo Ben-Ami, then Israel’s foreign minister and lead negotiator at Camp David: "Camp David was not the missed opportunity for the Palestinians, and if I were a Palestinian I would have rejected Camp David, as well." (National Public Radio, 14 February 2006.)
The Pal/Arab people have been rendered pawns and really did not:
" . . . refused every overture made to them for a Palestinian state, including the 1947 UN partition plan for a Jewish and a Palestinian state."
Given the Artab's 1.400 year old power structure, this war has always been between the regional Arab leaders and potentates versus the people of Israel. The appearance is confusing because the Pal/Arab people have obviouely paid the brunt of the price for the mistakes of their leaders and such a situation is just difficult to process.
Funny, Gadahffi, Mubarek, and Assad said much the same thing.
Gadahffi said Al qeada was putting mind altering drugs into the nes cafe of the young people. Now, Lieberman is saying that Israel is fighting a battle on the front of democracy and that they are doing it for us (the US?)
Apparently, The best way to defend democracy and western values is to run the worlds only violently enforced, state sanctioned, colonial settler movement, in uhhh,...... the name of Democracy and western values?
OH NOOOOO!!!!!! Al queda is putting mind altering drugs into the Nes Cafe of Avigdor Lieberman!!!
But killing children and whining about a mostly benign occupation is a lot easier than running a country.
And a hundred Palestinian children have been killed by the IDF for each Israeli child killed by suicide bombers or rockets from Gaza.
One-sided views like yours are the cause of the continuing death-toll on both sides. Pray that your eyes be opened.
95% of the palestinians in the west bank are under palestinian administrative control. You can protest all you want with absolutely no fear of being harmed, as thousands of westerners and palestinians do every day. It is the epitome of a benign occupation.
Sure, there is, or rather was! Before the First Intifada, Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza had the freedom of all Israel, got jobs all over the place and made a pretty good living.
As the Arab saying goes: "First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people."
If Israel - God forbid! - should fall, Europe is next and then the America's.
But pray tell me what tedious connection links the Palestinian state to the fall of Israel and subsequently the rest of the western world? Will the formation of the Palestinian state suddenly and mysteriously swallow Israel? Of course, this is not about security. It is about denying legitimacy to a quasi-nation that has been providing land and resources for Israel's illegitimate settlements.
As the Canadian author implies, Canada is one of the superior cultures, or 'western' cultures, so to imply a non-western culture could do the same thing would upset his apple cart toot sweet.
He hasn't set foot in Gaza since 2007 (maybe 08). Yet he represents ALL the palestinians in the UN (Where is the outrage that he's a sell out, where are the shouts that he doesn't represent the palestinians and that only hamas does as they were elected democratically). It's like Mayor Bloomberg, who has not been able to, or refuses to go to Brooklyn!!!!
Someone please, explain this little conundrum to me.
Thank you kindly!
I often think about this myself.
Thank you for a great article.
No matter. With each passing day, you and your ilk are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Mr. Benlolo writes: “‘The Palestinian's ultimate vision, said Lieberman is to "destroy the Jewish state of Israel.’ The Palestinians have given Israel little reason to think otherwise. “
Just yesterday on CNN the chief Palestinian representative to the US said that the objective of the proposal for statehood is to have two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace. I am sure that President Abbas will express similar sentiments to the UN. Mr. Benlolo’s anti-Palestinian rhetoric is so loud he apparently can’t hear the Palestinian overture of peace and recognition he says he wants.
Mr. Benlolo writes: “Like many Israelis, Lieberman believes that everything has been tried . . . .”
Has Israel tried stopping the illegal settlements and displacement of Palestinians? Doesn’t seem like it since the Israelis living in the West Bank have more than doubled since the late 1990's. Just what the heck is the point of building those settlements anyway, if Israel really wants peace.
Finally, Mr. Benlolo castigates the Palestinians for not knowing “how to share.” Given the systematic seizure of Palestinian land by Israel for settlement for 40 odd years, the Israeli notion of “share” seems to be: “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine.”
Yes, that was tried from 1948 through 1967, and still the palestinians and their Arab allies rejected peace.
You'd think there would be universal agreement on that issue... but the US is still planning on using a Veto in the UNSC next week, handling Israel's 'problems' for it once again.
When "homeland" becomes synonymous with thievery furthered by violence it is time to rethink the concept, being based as it is on some pseudo-mystical, historically untenable DNA osmosis, whereby Eastern Europeans magically become Levantines and Levantines become displaced from their home in the Levant.
And... since when do Arabs object to conquering land by force? After all, that's exactly the way they got to have 22 Arab countries all the way through the Middle East and North Africa, instead of just the Arab peninsula, where they are the true original inhabitants.
...and relinquish the country all together to Palestinian extremists
They have nothing positive to gain from the UN bid and much to lose, although Idk if Israel and the US, not to mention the Euros will truly follow through on their threats to cud aid, etc. It truly depends on what happens after the UN bid...if nothing on the ground changes, the pals will lose nothing. On the other hand, that could lead to violence in which pals will lose a lot. I don't see how Israel stands to lose anything from the UN bid other than a diplomatic embarassment but given the UN has become a tool to poke Israel, I would think Israelis would be immune to that by now.
Exactly. Israel is now going to learn after 60+ years of occupation. This is why the Palestinians are going ahead to the United Nations.