For a secure Israel to regain legitimacy, the idea of a Palestinian state must be discredited as a possible means of resolving conflict.
How is it that after all the wrenching concessions it has made, Israel is far more reviled today than during the rigid “rejectionism” of Yitzhak Shamir? I believe we have to talk to each other and to listen to each other. I think bilateral engagement… is the only way. But confidence, trust, is not existing. — Jibril Rajoub, Fatah Central Committee, at the annual conference of the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv, April 23.
We the Palestinians are the enemies of Israel. There is no going back to negotiations. Listen. We as yet don’t have a nuke, but I swear that if we had a nuke, we’d have used it this very morning. — Jibril Rajoub, on the Lebanese-based TV station Al Mayadeen, April 30
I have been sitting in front of my computer screen with waves of despair and disbelief flowing over me, unable to write a sentence for hours.
As I meander through cyberspace, each proposal I encounter for resolving the Palestinian issue seems more detached from reality, more devoid of reason, more desperate, more delusional and more depressing than the one before.
Repeatedly disproven, never discarded
It would be one thing if these outlandish schemes were being promoted solely by Israel’s external adversaries. But what I find bewildering and debilitating is that these demonstrably unworkable proposals are being energetically pursued and promoted by influential Israelis themselves.
Almost inconceivably, policy prescriptions that not many years ago would have been condemned as almost treasonous, are being enthusiastically embraced and ardently advanced by individuals and organizations, deep within the mainstream Israeli establishment. Time after time, we see one public figure after another succumb to the pernicious pressures of political correctness and endorse political paradigms they had previously denounced as too dangerous to be adopted.
Failure, no matter how dramatic, disastrous or devastating, seems to have little effect. Regardless of results, reality or reason, they cling stubbornly to evermore radical variants of the same concept of political appeasement and territorial abandonment, which although repeatedly disproven, is somehow never discredited, and certainly, never discarded.
When negotiated withdrawal failed to bring peace, unilateral withdrawal was adopted. When that failed to bring the desired results, unrequited unilateral withdrawal — i.e. withdrawal for withdrawal’s sake — is now being touted as an objective in itself.
No matter how heinous…
It seems that no matter how heinous the deeds, or obnoxious the declarations, on the Palestinian side, this will never disqualify anyone to be welcomed as an honored interlocutor in the discourse on Israeli concessions.
The only criterion for invitation seems to be that there should be someone else who has perpetrated deeds more heinous, or made declarations more obnoxious.
Thus for example, less than a year ago, Jibril Rajoub, who also heads the Palestine Olympic Committee, commended the president of the International Olympic Committee, Jacques Rogge, for not permitting a minute …read more