“All the time we are giving up and get nothing in return!”
Indeed, we are giving up a lot. The next war. New graveyards. Hundreds and perhaps thousands ofbereaved families, theirs and ours.
Apart from those, we are not giving up anything. If I am taking by force somebody’s property,and then agree to give him back part of it, I am not “giving up” anything. It’s the other sidethat’s giving up part of the property I’ve taken.
“We must not release prisoners with blood on their hands!”
On the eve of Camp David, Barak could have released a great number of Palestinian prisoners, atleast those that were sent to prison for things done before Oslo. Barak did not releaseanybody, and thus poisoned the atmosphere even before the start of the talks. Why did he misssuch an important opportunity? He was afraid of the public outcry that would follow, becauseof the four words: “Blood on their hands”.
Mendacious words. I have blood on my hands. Nearly all of the (male) Israeli readers of thisarticle have blood on their hands. We fought for our people. They fought for their people. Theyare prisoners-of-war. They should have been released immediately after Oslo (as Gush Shalomdemanded at the time.) Rabin was afraid. Barak is afraid. Four words have turned into deadlylandmines on the road to peace.
“Barak does not budge from his Red Lines.”
If you declare “Red Lines” and take pride in not budging from them in the negotiations, you donot negotiate in good faith. Peace means compromise between the red lines of the two sides.Otherwise it’s a diktat , an ultimatum delivered by the strong side to the weaker one.
The advertising expert Reuven Wimmer has coined a new geometric law: “Two red lines nevermeet.” The recent uproar about the “Chinese spy plane” has led to another dictum: “The only redlines of Israel are in the American flag”. And, indeed, until we achieve peace, Israel’srelations with the US are of existential importance. All other red lines are mobile.
“Jerusalem is the soul of the Jewish people.”
Empty words. The Torah was given in Sinai, the “Jerusalem Talmud” was written in Galilee, the”Shulchan Aruch” was written in Safed. Herzl detested Jerusalem, and so did all the foundingfathers of the modern Hebrew society. The Jews in the Diaspora prayed for Jerusalem, butprayer does not create rights. Jerusalem of the prayers is an abstract idea. Yasser Arafat maybe ready to cede to us the “Heavenly Jerusalem”, if we give him his part of the earthly one.
“United Jerusalem, eternal Capital of Israel, will remain forever under the sovereignty of Israel.”
There is not one word of truth in this mantra. Jerusalem is not united. The Eastern part wasconquered by force, and since then it is being governed by a mayor elected by the Western part,who serves as a military governor of the Eastern town. Since 1967, every Israeli knows thatwhen he crosses the invisible border, he enters another town. During the Intifada, very fewIsraelis dared to do that.
Certainly, in public opinion polls a big majority votes against a compromise in Jerusalem.But if I would be allowed to phrase the question, the answer would be quiet different. Forexample: “Do you want your son to die for Ras-al-Amud, Silwan, Sheikh-Jarakh and other Arabquarters of Jerusalem?” 85% will answer with a clear No. In the end, that’s what counts.
“We shall be here and they shall be there.”
Barak’s favorite slogan. But how does that rhyme with the annexation of “settlement bloc” and”by-pass roads” that cut deep into the territory of the Palestinian state, so that almost noPalestinian will be able to visit his cousin without coming across an Israeli army post? Whereis “here” and where is “there”? Not to mention the 200 thousand Palestinians in EastJerusalem, who, according to Barak. will not be “there” but “here”?
“We shall not give Arafat anything if he will not declare that this is the end of the conflict.”
We have no conflict with Arafat, but with nine million Palestinians. If most of them willconsider the agreement an unjust diktat , it will not endure. The existential interests ofIsrael demand a peace agreement that will lead to a real reconciliation, one that the majorityof Israelis and Palestinians will wholeheartedly accept as a fair and just compromise.
“Barak will bring us an agreement that will not impose on us any significant withdrawal.”
Every housewife knows that it is not worthwhile to buy goods that are too cheap. In the fleamarket things may be cheap, but they will disintegrate within a short time. It’s better to buymore expensive goods in a good shop. A cheap peace bought in the flea market – how much will it beworth? How long will it last?
“Barak will achieve peace and security.”
Peace and Security are not two different, or even contradictory things.
Peace is security.