Posted by: "Ami Isseroff" email@example.com ami_iss
Sun Feb 4, 2007 1:02 am (PST)Christian Science Monitor: Israel's Right to Exist is an obstacle to peace
Original content copyright by the author
Zionism & Israel Center http://zionism-israel.com
The powers that be across the ocean need to have "peace" talks and to "resolve" the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict at all costs, because of the problem with Iraq, and the problem with
Iran. We are told that Arab states are anxious to reach a peaceful Israeli-Palestinian solution, so
that they can support US policy and let the US deal with Iran for them. It doesn't occur to anyone
that if Arabs want the US and Israel to take care of Iran, then they should be the ones to make
concessions regarding Israel, and not the other way round.
To show "movement" toward peace, direction, it is necessary, according to the conventional wisdom,
to have a peace partner. Alas, the Palestinian Authority is controlled by the Hamas. The Hamas
repeat day and night that they will abide by their charter, and never make peace with Israel. In
return for Israel withdrawing to the borders of 1949, they will grant a Hudna like the one just
concluded between Fatah and Hamas that lasted less than a day, or the other one concluded today.
Common sense would dictate that as long as there are not two partners willing to make peace, there
cannot be peace negotiations. Yet on the other hand, the powers that be, require such negotiations.
Writing from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, a metropolis famous for championing human rights and logic, John
V. Whitbeck offers the solution
Those who recognize the critical importance of Israeli-Palestinian peace and truly seek a decent
future for both peoples must recognize that the demand that Hamas recognize "Israel's right to
exist" is unreasonable, immoral, and impossible to meet. Then, they must insist that this roadblock
to peace be removed, the economic siege of the Palestinian territories be lifted, and the pursuit of
peace with some measure of justice be resumed with the urgency it deserves.
Source: www. csmonitor.com/2007/0202/p09s02-coop.htm
That's right, Israel's right to exist is a roadblock to peace according to Whitbeck and the CSM. The
article was of course timed to coincide with the meeting of the quartet.
Whitbeck arrives at his conclusion by a tortuous path of "reasoning" and euphemisms about
Palestinian self-respect and the usual canards about Israeli expansionism (look at Israel on the map
to see what expansionism we are talking about). He pours the best vintage Middle East establishment
bumph that petrodollars can buy.
It is a grand performance in the best tradition, intended to make you lose sight of the basics. The
reason the Hamas government is being boycotted by the West at present is that they announce that
they are not willing to make peace with Israel. No matter how much wishful thinking is applied to
the problem, the Hamas opposition to peace does not change, and is reiterated at every opportunity.
Western aid to the Palestinian Authority was supposed to promote peace process, not Jihad.
It is important to go back to the sources, and see exactly what Mr. Whitbeck and the CSM are
promoting. What is this peace-loving and self-respecting Palestinian Hamas movement? The Hamas
"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it
obliterated others before it."
"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf
consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be
squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "
Whitbeck is talking about a movement that advocates genocide and will not relinquish any part of the
land. This is the movement that he wants to recognize. This is the movement that Christian Science
Monitor wants to legitimize. Here is the Hamas peace plan, embodied in their charter, which
Christian Science Monitor and Mr. Whitbeck want the West to adopt:
"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals
and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."
And the following, also taken from the Hamas Charter, is probably the origin of Mr. Whitbeck's
views, and those of his Arab hosts, about Israeli expansionism and Palestinian 'self-respect':
"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will
have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan
is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of
what we are saying."
Mr. Whitbeck no doubt believes in the validity of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a document
forged by the Tsarist police, which is sold all over the Arab world.
Incredible as it seems, what it amounts to, stripped of sophistry and cant about Zionist
expansionism, is that Christian Science Monitor has come out in favor of genocide and Jihad.
Israel's right to exist is therefore an obstacle to "peace."
The enthusiasm of CSM and of Whitbeck's Saudi masters for making a deal with the Hamas is really
strange if the purpose is really to allow action against Iran, since Iran is actively supporting the
The real danger to Israeli interests and the interests of peace in the Middle East has never been
from the fringe radical leftists and extreme reactionaries like Rabbi David Weiss of the Netureh
Karteh, who make so much noise, and who are characterized by the New York Times as "Liberals". They
attract a lot of attention from worriers over the "new anti-semitism," but they have no political
clout in the United States.
With the virtual collapse of US policy in Iraq looming ahead, the neo-conservative pro-Israel line
that was popular in Washington is in jeopardy. The replacement for the neo-conservative strategy may
well be a "rescue" operation by the "old hands" of the State Department and stalwarts of Republican
Middle East policy. These are people like James Baker III and the representatives of Arab petroleum
interests, the pillars of conservativism and "realistic" approaches to the Middle East.
This group have always had the same line: U.S. backing of Israel jeopardizes American interests in
the Middle East. Interestingly, declassified materials reveal that on the eve of the Six Day war in
1967, this line was pushed by the Aramco company and by US Ambassador to Syria, Hugh Smythe. Smythe
claimed to represent the considered opinions of the US diplomatic corps. They urged the US to
abandon Israel, as they always do. Whitbeck's article no doubt represents the public expression of a
campaign that is going on behind the scenes. The same line is apparent in Arab world journals. When
it appears in the US, it could be an alarming harbinger of what is coming.
>From my perspective, relating not only to my self-respect as an Israeli, but also to my physical
integrity, it appears that Mr. Whitbeck and the Christian Science Monitor are much worse than an
obstacle to peace. They are hazardous to my health, and the health of my loved ones. They are
hazardous to the decency and self-respect of the Western nations. And remember, when they are done
making "peace" by eliminating my right to exist, you may be next.
Updates and comments - Since I wrote the above, the Middle East Quartet (sounds like a Jazz group)
met, and announced the continuation of sanctions against the Hamas. That is what articles like
Whitbeck's are really about. Zvi Bar'el in Ha'aretz explains the Arab position, which is that Hamas
is a fact of life that has to be dealt with, and the best way to deal with them is to get them to
accept the Arab peace plan, which includes recognition of Israel. The only fly in the ointment is
that Hamas refuses to agree. However, only pedants worry about such details.
At least one person took me to task (by e-mail) for taking Whitbeck literally, but Whitbeck must be
taken literally. He tries to make it seem as though "recognizing Israel's right to exist" is just a
slogan -- some sort of Zionist plot cooked up by Henry Kissinger. But the fact is, that recognizing
Hamas is tantamount to giving the go ahead for the liquidation of Israel. The position was put quite
eloquently by Peter H., who commented at http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000343.html :
How exactly does Meshal's interview contradict what Whitbeck wrote? Actually, it seems like Meehal
and Whitbeck are saying the same thing: that Israel's existence is a fact of life, but that Hamas
cannot recognize the morality of its creation, since that would be tantamount to morally justifying
the dispossesion of Palestinians.
That was my point. There is no contradiction. Both Meshal and Whitbeck, along with racist advocate
of genocide and ethnic cleansing Peter H., want to destroy Israel. Except for the fact that the
"dispossesion of the Palestinians" was not the result of the creation of Israel, Peter has it right.
Whitbeck and Meshal are saying the same thing. It is like saying that the Czech republic has to be
wiped out, because recognizing it would be tantamount to recongizing the morality of "dispossesion"
of World War II Nazi sympathizers from the Sudetensland.