By Alan Hart,
www.opinion-maker.org,
www.opinion-maker.org,
Zionism has remained constant in its determination to take for keeping the maximum amount of Arab land (and water) with the minimum number of Arabs on it. Arguably from 1897 and definitely from 1967, Zionism’s strategy has been to break the will of the Palestinians to remain steadfast and continue their struggle for an acceptable amount of justice and force them to accept crumbs from Zionism’s table.
Good examples of the extent to which many (most?) Israeli Jews have
been brainwashed by Zionist propaganda and are as a consequence beyond
reason and only capable of seeing themselves as the victims instead of
what they actually are, the oppressors, were on display in all their
naked glory in BBC Radio’s documentary of the week first broadcast last
Saturday with the title The State of Israel (meaning, as the programme made clear, the state of things in Israel).
Some 18 months after the end of his posting as the BBC’s Middle East
correspondent, Tim Franks returned to Israel to discover how much things
had changed there. As he noted on the flight in, “There was the same
right-leaning government, the same absence of peace talks with the
Palestinians. But all around, the region had transformed, as the winds
of the Arab Spring had blown.” On the subject of this summer’s social
protests in Israel, he said this (my emphasis added): “They appeared to
share, with many western countries, the rage at capitalism's
inequalities. And yet Israel's economy is growing apace – 5% a year –
thanks to its world-beating hi-tech sector. And the protestors took a vow of silence on the most contentious issue of all – the conflict with the Palestinians.”
One of the major figures Franks interviewed was Naftali Bennett, the
CEO of the Yesha Council. It is the umbrella organization of the
municipal councils of the illegal settlements on the occupied West Bank. It was founded in the 1970’s as the successor to Gush Emunin and its mandate is “to assist Jewish settlement
(for which read colonization) in every possible way.” Presumably every
possible way includes making sure that Prime Minister Netanyahu tells
President Obama to go to hell from time to time.
As Franks revealed, Mr. Bennett himself no longer lives with the
settlers on the West Bank. This young, hi-tech millionaire recently
moved into a large house on Israel’s expensive central plain. Apparently
he sees great symbolic significance in this. It signals that the
settlers are “moving into the mainstream in Israel.” In fact that’s an
understatement. As some Israeli commentators have noted over recent
months, the settlers are now calling the political shots in Israel and
the Netanyahu government is implementing their agenda.
One of Mr. Bennett’s first comments to Franks was, “There ain’t going
to be peace any time soon with the Arabs, so let’s fix Israel.” And he
predicted that the next Israeli election will be the first in which
domestic matters and internal issues rather than “the conflict” will be
what the parties scrap over.
At a point Franks said to him, “Are you not on the wrong side of history?”
Bennett replied, “What do you do when the overwhelming majority of countries in the world want you to commit suicide?” He went on to say that if a Palestinian state came into being “the missiles will fall on Israel.”
So here it is again. The assertion that a Palestinian mini would pose
a serious and unmanageable threat to Israel’s security and even its
existence.
I was disappointed but not surprised that the BBC’s man didn’t challenge Bennett’s assertion (what he said and what he implied).
As I have explained in previous posts and my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews
(it bears repeating again and again), the notion that a Palestinian
mini state would pose a threat to Israel’s security and existence is too
silly for words. It was Arafat who gave me the best and most honest
explanation of why.
He asked me to imagine two things. The first was that a Palestinian
mini state was in existence on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with
East Jerusalem its capital or, better still, with Jerusalem an
undivided, open city and the capital of two states. The second was that
rocket and other attacks were launched on Israel from inside the
Palestinian state. “How do you think Israel would respond?” he asked me.
I replied: “At a point their tanks would roll over the borders and
crush your little state out of existence. Then they’d say to the world
something like: ‘We presume you understand why we had to do this and
close the Palestine file for ever. We also presume that you will never
again ask us to do business with these terrorists.’”
“Exactly!”, Arafat said, almost shouting. Then, after a pause and
with controlled passion, he added: “After struggling for so long and
sacrificing so much to achieve a small measure of justice, do you really
think we Palestinians would be so stupid as to give Israel the pretext
to take everything from us and close the Palestine file for ever?”
I replied with just one word. “No.”
A rational Israeli mind would be open to and comforted by the logic
of that argument. Unfortunately most Israelis are not rational.
Franks also interviewed Amiad Cohen, the head of security at the West Bank settlement of Eli, 40km outside Jerusalem. As they talked, Cohen gestured to the hills around them and said: “This is our country. We will live here. The question is – Will it be with peace, or will they force us to fight?”
That begs another question which Franks did not ask. What is it that
could “force” Israel to fight the Palestinians, by obvious implication
from what Cohen said to the finish in an end-game scenario?
Zionism has remained constant in its determination to take for
keeping the maximum amount of Arab land (and water) with the minimum
number of Arabs on it. Arguably from 1897 and definitely from 1967,
Zionism’s strategy has been to break the will of the Palestinians to
remain steadfast and continue their struggle for an acceptable amount of
justice and force them to accept crumbs from Zionism’s table or, better
still from Zionism’s perspective, take leave of their homeland and
start a new life elsewhere. I’ve long thought and often said that when
Zionism’s leaders conclude that they can’t break the Palestinian will,
they’ll create a pretext to drive the Palestinians off the West Bank and
into the neighbouring Arab states and beyond. (The original Sharon plan
was to de-stabilize Jordan, get rid of the Hashemite monarchy and say
to the Palestinians, “There’s your state, take it.” King Hussein himself
told me he had absolutely no doubt that was and would remain a Zionist
option, quite possibly its preferred option in an end-game sacenario).
In my analysis
global concern from here on should be less about trying to start a real
peace process in which Israel’s present and likely future leaders have
no interest and more about stopping a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of
Palestine.
Footnote:
Some time ago I wrote that my sources were telling me that behind closed doors all European governments were fed up
with Israel in general and Netanyahu in particular. Sarkozy’s comment
to Obama about Netanyahu – “I can’t look at him anymore, he’s a liar” –
suggests that my sources were more right than wrong. And I think Obama’s
response – “You may be sick of him but I have to deal with him every
day” - adds weight to my own view that the private Obama loathes having
to do the bidding of the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress.
0 Comments