It's the same in any lingo

בַּת-בָּבֶל, הַשְּׁדוּדָה: אַשְׁרֵי שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם-לָךְ-- אֶת-גְּמוּלֵךְ, שֶׁגָּמַלְתּ לָנוּ
אַשְׁרֵי שֶׁיֹּאחֵז וְנִפֵּץ אֶת-עֹלָלַיִךְ-- אֶל-הַסָּלַע

How can one be compelled to accept slavery? I simply refuse to do the master's bidding. He may torture me, break my bones to atoms and even kill me. He will then have my dead body, not my obedience. Ultimately, therefore, it is I who am the victor and not he, for he has failed in getting me to do what he wanted done. ~ Mahatma Gandhi
If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? If not now, when? ~ Rav Hillel, Pirke Avot

This Red Sea Pedestrian Stands against Judeophobes

This Red Sea Pedestrian Stands against Judeophobes
Wear It With Pride

20 November 2009

This Is A Plan?

As I wrote a couple days ago, the PA's tack on the peace process farce changes every time a Falacstinian official cuts the cheese. It's a bi-national state one minute and a unilateral declaration of independence the next. It's not helping that, thanks to the ineptitude of Commander Waffles and his Cast of Idiots, no one in the region has a clue as to what anyone wants, requires, demands, thinks, etc. In fact, the only consistent policy from the White House is racism against Jews.

So what's the PA's game? Are they just completely stupid? Are they backed into a corner due to their tireless desire to enact a final solution to Israel and her Jews? Or, do they find themselves facing a situation of a growing Jewish population in Yehuda and Shomron, along with a rising tide of Jewish nationalism that, in the face of nearly 100 years of unrelenting Arab violence against them (long before there were "settlements" or a "green line"), is coming to no longer accept that coexistence is viable, or even desired?

I think we're dealing with a combination of all of these things. If the latest plan is unilateral independence, what's the reason? As I've written before, Abbas has threatened intifada. Arab/Muslim incitement over the Temple Mount is being used to fuel the violence. I believe this call for unilateral independence is part of the same strategy. It was tried in the late 90's and was flatly rejected. There doesn't seem to be much backing for it now. A unilateral move by the PA would be met by full annexation by Israel, and it would only be a matter of time before full scale violence broke out (I am not unconvinced that this is what the White House wants, as it would be a pretext to fulfill Samantha Power's blood lust vision of invading Israel and imposing a PA state at the green line). So, apart from the promise of maintaining the conflict, and the international flow of money into the PA's pockets that it generates, what is the point?

I think Zalman Shoval might be onto something in a letter he wrote to JPost. He posits that this move for unilateral independence is an attempt to undo UN Resolution 242 which was voted on in the wake of the Six Day War. As Shoval points out, 242 is the only basis for any and all negotiations with the Falacstinians and the surrounding Arab countries. More importantly, it stipulates that Israel need not surrender all the territory it gained in the conflict, and that final borders would be determined, based on Israel's security needs. Resolution 242 makes it plain that Israel need not accept the green line as its final borders, and can be used by Israel to flatly reject any negotiations where that border is a pre-condition. In fact, Israeli diplomats are more than happy to have 242 be the starting point for any future negotiations, as futile and ludicrous as those negotiations are, and have been in the past.

Shoval goes on to note that Fatah and PLO official Yassir abd Rabbo has confirmed that their intended strategy is to get the UN to pass a resolution making the green line the border on which negotiations would be based, nullifying 242 completely, putting all Jewish Yesha communities in jeopardy, as well as potentially leaving the entire nation of Israel in range of Arab rockets from every border, as well as having the effect of completely shutting down Israel's airspace. It is a recipe for a war of devastating consequence, particularly for the Arabs. It is an insanity that could only be accomplished with the support of the White House.

I have been saying since 2008 that it was Marack's desire to force Israel to accept the 1967 borders, leaving her vulnerable to Arab attack. If the PA moves forward with its plans to nullify 242, it will be interesting to see whether Little Lord Fraudleroy will back them. Of course, all of this would leave Oslo null and void, and force the government to decide whether it will finally realize the fallacy of coexistence.

Shabbat Shalom l'kulam.

No comments: