Israel and an Irrational Enemy
Many Israelis are concerned that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) could become even more radical. The fear is that Hamas, Al Jihad, and other extremist terrorist organizations may come under the umbrella of the PLO. From Israel’s standpoint, if this happens, future peace talks are out of the question. The Hamas Constitution contains a plan to completely annihilate Israel. There will be no Jewish State, not even in the smallest part of the land of Israel. This represents the position of Al Jihad and most other extreme terrorist organizations. Israel cannot even consider a “peace” agreement with people committed to her annihilation.

PLO Emblem

The fact of the matter is that both Fatah, which is at present “the” representative of the PLO, is as radical as Hamas. Even the logo of the PLO has eliminated the entire Jewish state. The only difference between Fatah and the others is the time allowed for Israel’s destruction. Fatah believes in a 40-year, 50-year, 70-year time span, in which, little by little, it will chip away at Israel, until Israel is demoralized and fades away. This was the strategy of Fatah’s leader Mahmoud Abbas, and the strategy adopted by the PLO as its official policy. The more openly “terrorist” organizations, led by Hamas, believe in a “one-blow” strategy to get rid of Israel immediately, the sooner the better.

The irrationality of expecting Israel to engage in talks with those determined to annihilate her is matched by the irrationality of the preconditions placed on Israel in recent “talks.” I’m referring to the issue of Israel’s supposed “settlements.” The semantics are significant since “settlement” sound much more temporary, insignificant, and disposable than “village.” The term “settlement” has been adopted and placed beside “Israeli occupation” as hallmarks of the Palestinians’ grievance claims. One could easily say that Tel Aviv was once a “settlement,” as were Afula, Hadera, and Netanya. They began as villages and could be said to have become huge settlements. The question is whether these and all the other “settlements” were established legally.

If you look at the League of Nations, it is absolutely clear from the San Remo Conference, that Israel had a totally legitimate, legal groundwork for the settlement of these villages as well as the entire regions of Judea and Samaria. Furthermore, the United Nations, with all its weaknesses, took over the legal agreements that the League of Nations had made concerning the land of Israel.

Do you see a problem here? Israel’s actions are legally sound, but they constantly endure charges of “occupation.” Israel’s United Nations Ambassador Ron Prosor, at a United Nations’ debate on the Middle East and the Palestinian situation pointed out that from 1948 until 1967, the West Bank was part of Jordan. Gaza was part of Egypt. The Arab world did not lift a finger to create a Palestinian state, and it sought Israel’s annihilation, when not a single settlement stood anywhere in the West Bank or Gaza. He rebuked Palestinian Authority Chairman, Abbas for not mentioning Judaism when he told the United Nations last September, “I come before you today from the Holy Land, the land of Palestine, the land of divine messages, the ascension of the Prophet Mohammad, and the birthplace of Jesus Christ.” Not even once did he even mention the word “Israel” or referring to a Jewish state.

Late in 2011, on the anniversary of the United Nations’ 1947 recognition of the State of Israel, which now is observed at the United Nations as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people, and in the face of a tidal wave of pro-Palestinian Authority speeches, Prosor declared, “UN Resolution 181 in 1947, mentions the Jewish State no less than 25 times, but for 64 years the Palestinian leaders have not dared to use the term “Israel” once.

How is Israel to deal with such consistent irrationality, intransigence, and hostility? She is facing more opposition than at any time in her history, and her current enemies are no less brutal than the Assyrians or the Babylonians. What will you do to help her?


If you can’t be kind, at least have the decency to be vague.