thoughtmechanics

Every few years, every Israeli Prime Minister since Yitzhak Rabin will come out and say that he is willing to trade land for peace and grant Palestinians a state.

The difference between Rabin and all those who came after him, from butchers like Ariel Sharon to clowns like Bibi Netaniahu, is that Rabin did not lack the nerve or the vision to understand that Israeli society is better off with a nationalist, Palestinian state next to it, rather than a radicalized Islamic territory that must be contained and ‘pacified’ by Israeli means.

Since Rabin’s assassination, all the Israeli Prime Ministers have failed to convince the Palestinians that they are indeed interested in peace, and that they are willing to continue from where things broke off with Rabin’s death.

The ensuing violence has cost both sides thousands of casualties, and untold economic destruction. Israel’s reputation and standing in the international community has suffered greatly, as have its long standing relations with friendly Arab states such as Jordan and Egypt.

At the core of the problem rests the Arab section of Jerusalem that has been annexed and the Palestinian ‘right of return’. It is instructive to note that Prime Minister Olmert is offering Palestinians peace as long as they are willing to give up their claim to the ‘right of return’.

There are many reasons why the Palestinians will not agree to this. First and foremost they have the ‘right’ to claim their lands and homes from those who evicted them. This is an internationally recognized right and the Israelis know this.

Secondly, the Palestinians have time on their side. They are not as taken in by the modern view of time and can easily wait a hundred or two hundred years until people in Israel simply pick up and go because it’s just not worth it anymore. Besides, nuclear weapons or not, Israel is made feasible by the assent of the international community. If alliances shift in the US for example, and Israel finds itself truly isolated from where it gets its bread, butter and guns, then Israel may easily become an non-viable state. The Arabs know this and do not need to be in a hurry to reach a peace deal with Israel if Israel is not ready to negotiate on vital Palestinian and Arab concerns.

Thirdly, the Israeli myth of invincibility has been shattered. During the summer war in Lebanon, Israel barely managed to inch into Lebanon and that at a great cost. In Gaza, after five months of constant offensives, all it has manage to do is see the average rate of rockets fired into Israel rise. In other words, Israel cannot win the current wars it is fighting. Instead, it is suffering considerable political losses.

Perhaps the most serious political loss is that of its political leaders. Long gone are the giants of Israeli myth. The founding fathers and mothers are dead. What’s more, the founders were not gullible enough to believe in their own mythology and propaganda. They recognized that it was a tool to use against the Arabs and the West in order to get what they needed. They also knew that the state of Israel owed its existence to the good will of ‘friends’ such as the US, France and the UK. If this good-will were to be withdrawn, then Israel would be in big trouble.

The younger generation, people like Olmert and Peretz who are currently in power, have fallen victim to their own myths. That is why they are even more astounded than their enemies to see that after 40 days of war Hezbollah was still standing strong and is now fully rearmed and at the ready. That is also why they are astounded that after five months of war in Gaza, Qassams are still falling at a rate of 5 or more a day on Israel.

These Arab ‘victories’, even if they are symbolic, as the Israelis well recognize, are exactly the kind of myth ‘builders’ that will lead to the tide, and time, turning against Israel. I repeat, the Palestinians can afford to wait another 20, 30 or 50 years. Can Israel afford that? Most decidedly not.

Even in 10 years, the balance of power will have shifted. Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon will be powerful allies in a vastly different Middle East. Jordan and Egypt may or may not continue to be the good friends of Israel that they are today. Their populations may not accept that as long as Israel continues to disregard legitimate issues with the Palestinians and the Syrians (Golan Heights).

Further, ten years from now the US will not be what it is today. The US is a giant that is slowly beginning to decay. Along with its decay, its influence around the globe has already begun to waiver. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle East, where Iran and Syria have begun to wield that influence even as US influence wanes. Where will Israel be without the goodwill of the US? Where will it be without the influx of US dollars?

Israel is faced with a serious demographic problem. It is still capable of showing a net increase in Jewish population because of the influx of Jews from around the world. But this myth upon which many Jews ride back to Israel is beginning to wear thin. Just as there are Jews still coming in, there are also many Jews who are flowing out, unable to live under the conditions of insecurity that prevail there, and especially since the promised land is running short of land. Part of that problem is owing to the fact that Israel just can’t grab Palestinian land anymore to give to the settlers…bummer.

In any case, five more years of intifada and the balance will have turned. The number of Jews in the Jewish state will begin to dwindle. This is the whole root of the problem and why there is no peace in Israel or the Palestinian territories.

Israel wants to be a Jewish state first, a democratic one secondly. The problem, of course, is that one cannot have a democratic Jewish state, anymore than one can have a democratic Christian state or Muslim state.

The problem for the Zionists is that democracy means being blind to one’s religion. The problem with the Palestinian ‘right of return’ is that Israel would soon not be a ‘Jewish’ state. So here is the question: Does Israel abide by international democratic standards and grant legitimate refugees the right to return (a right enshrined in the UN charter), or does it act as a ’special case’, and claim that it has a ‘god given’ promise to the land and others are not welcome there, even if they’ve lived there for millennia?

So far, Israel has taken the second option, and of course it just hasn’t worked out for them. Will it look seriously at the first option? Probably not until conditions in Israel deteriorate to such a degree that people start to vacate in search of safety back in New Jersey or Moscow. Will the Palestinians give up on their right to return to their homes and lands? Of course not, they have time on their side…