Ron Breiman
Photo:Dor Garbash

Recipe for sacrifice

So-called proximity talks means to elicit one-sided Israeli concessions

Part 1 of article


It's still unclear how the blatant and exaggerated "insult" to the US over the intention to build more apartments in Jerusalem will affect the future of proximity talks between Israel and the seemingly moderate representatives of some of the Arabs living in the western Land of Israel.


It's clear to all that Mahmoud Abbas does not represent Gaza Arabs or those of the Negev or Galilee, while his government in Judea and Samaria depends on Israel's presence in these areas. Yet it is precisely his weakness that constitutes the basis of his strength and prompts everyone to enlist for his cause: Oslo proponents in Israel (Peres, Beilin et al and the media choir that reinforces them,) anti-Israel elements in Europe, and the Obama Administration in the US.


And so, those showing Chamberlain-style weakness vis-à-vis Iran while reconciling themselves to its nuclearization manage to show determination vis-à-vis Israel.


Under such circumstances, the proximity talks being discussed in fact become sacrificial talks – that is, sacrificing Israel (see Czechoslovakia's fate, determined in Munich 1938) for the sake of establishing a Palestinian state, first alongside Israel and later on its ruins.


The essence and objective of the talks is no more than a dictate for Israel, prompting it to agree to what amounts to rape and accept the negotiations' outcome in advance: One side is allowed to dictate terms and set facts on the ground (Arab construction in Judea and Samaria continues at full force,) while the Israeli side is prevented from presenting any terms or creating facts on the ground.


The implication of this, as noted above, is tantamount to dictating the negotiations' outcome in advance. The very little that is required of the Israeli government that agreed to freeze construction for Jews is to demand a parallel construction freeze for Arabs, something that regrettably had not been done.


Barack Hussein Obama's "greenness" and hostility again prompted Abbas to present inflated demands, which he cannot backtrack on now - in fact, he has no reason to do so. What is Obama's inexperience at best (and his anti-Israeli approach at worst) encourages the Arab side to make strict demands, with the knowledge that Obama is adopting these positions.


As was the case in respect to the Jewish construction freeze in Judea and Samaria, the same is true in respect to Jerusalem: The Muslim residents of Ramallah cannot be less extreme than their brethren in Washington. And so, the "insult" to America had turned into a means for boosting the price required of Israel in exchange for "peace," which increasingly looks like gang rape by "normative" states.


Indeed, Israelis already realize that someone "normative" is not necessarily a good person seeking noble goals.


Part 2 of article to appear Tuesday evening


פרסום ראשון: 04.13.10, 11:16
 new comment
This will delete your current comment