IMRA'S
WEEKLY COMMENTARY ON ARUTZ 7 - 1 April, 1999
Aaron Lerner Date: 1
April, 1999
Broadcast in English on Thursday nights at 10:00 PM on 98.7 FM
and on 711 AM throughout Israel - recording available on
http://www.a7.org
Happy
Holidays.
Before I talk about the reliance of the program of the Left on
baseless assertions I want to say a word about Kosovo:
1. KOSOVO AND
THE MISSILE AGE
Here we are in the midst of the so-called 'missile age' where such considerations
as 'strategic depth are supposed to be a thing of the past and it turns out
that the NATO forces can't control the situation on the ground without actually
being there. That's right, without having land forces on the territory itself
you can do a lot of damage - but you can't rule. Strategic depth matters. It
did before. It does now. It will in the future. We need the Golan and the West
Bank today and we will need them in the future regardless of the gizmos we
have.
2. NATO IN KOSOVO SETS NO PRECEDENT FOR ISRAEL
We face terror and we deal with it. We don't line up innocent people against
the wall and open fire. Regardless of the circumstances others face we cannot
accept that they take such actions. Again - this has nothing to do with the records
of the parties. Nothing can justify such actions. And we, of all people, can
ill afford to leave this stand subject to question.
The intervention of NATO is poorly explained - perhaps even poorly thought out.
The slaughter reported in Kosovo certainly has drawn a stronger reaction than
slaughters elsewhere. But let one thing be clear - the logic - as fuzzy as it
may be - for acting in Kosovo is not a logic that in any way can apply to the
Arab-Israeli scene. It is driven by the actions against civilians. Actions that
have been taking place for a considerable period of time. The Jewish State will
never - never - take the kind of action against civilians that has served as
the underlying justification for NATO intervention in Kosovo. To repeat - the
NATO action in now way sets a precedent that
can be applied in the future against Israel.
3. BASELESS ASSUMPTIONS OF THE LEFT
How did the philosopher get out of the slippery pit? He asserted that there was
a ladder and climbed out.
These days such theoretical ladders abound.
The European Union justified its declaration reaffirming "the continuing
and unqualified Palestinian right to self-determination including the option of
a state" by asserting that the EU "is convinced that the creation of
a democratic, viable and peaceful sovereign Palestinian state would be the best
guarantee of Israel's security." But the EU has no grounds to assume that
such a state would be either democratic or peaceful.
As Yossi Sarid, an ardent supporter of a Palestinian state, declared (Ha'aretz
March 23, 1995) "We have to recognize that the elections in the region are
not democratic but I have not taken it upon myself to change the traditional
Arab society."
Palestinians also don't share the EU's illusions about democracy. In late
January, the Center for Palestine Research and Studies survey of Palestinian
adults found only 35.5% rating the status of democracy and human rights under
the Palestinian Authority (PA) as "good" or "better" (in
contrast, 64.2% gave Israel that score).
As for "peaceful?" The situation among PA security forces has gotten
so out of hand that LAW - the Palestinian Society for the Protection of Human
rights and the Environment, called last week for the PA to disarm its security
forces and issue weapons only to a "limited number of properly trained
personnel" and then only "on occasions where such force is warranted.
"The carriage and ownership of firearms," LAW notes, "should be
made illegal." Yes, many tens of thousands of weapons are out there. In
March of 1995, then US secretary of state Warren Christopher demanded that
Yasser Arafat immediately seize all private weapons inside the autonomy. At the
time, according to Arafat's own report to the US, there were some 26,000
illegal weapons in the Gaza Strip alone. Nothing happened then and nothing has
happened since.
The EU assertion that the Palestinian state would be "peaceful" also
assumes that the Arab-Israeli conflict would be resolved with the declaration
of the Palestinian state. But that is not in the cards.
Last Sunday, PA Minister of Planning and International Cooperation Nabil
Shaath's interview in Le Monde wheeled out a favorite ladder of Oslo
supporters, when he mentioned discussions he held with Yossi Beilin about
declaring a Palestinian state with a land swap of no more than 5% of the West
Bank which has Israeli settlements, for Israeli territory adjacent to the Gaza
Strip.
But as Shaath explained to Le Monde reporter Mouna Naim, the most difficult
issues - including Jerusalem - would be left unresolved.
With the February CPRS poll finding 91.3% of Palestinians rejecting Jerusalem
remaining Israel's unified capital and only 3.3% preferring the Israeli Left's
proposal of having the Old City under joint sovereignty and the remainder of
east Jerusalem under Palestinian sovereignty, the die is cast for conflict. So
much for Beilin's ladder.
Such theoretical ladders may play well with some of the Israeli electorate that
seeks simple solutions to difficult problems. But the State of Israel doesn't just
deserve - its long-term survival requires - a direction firmly grounded in
reality. Otherwise we will find ourselves stuck in an ever deepening pit
Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director
IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-9-7411645
INTERNET ADDRESS:
pager 03-6750750 subscriber 4811