The Hundred Years War

For the first time in years, probably since Israel invited Yasser Arafat and his minions back into the West Bank in a march of folly that resulted in the death of thousands of Israelis and Palestinians including my 13-year-old son Koby Mandell, the sanctity of the "two states for two peoples" concept is being challenged. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu [Bibi] so far has refused to utter the phrase and his Likud backers are begging him to resist the temptation. Conjecture about his Bar Ilan University policy speech touted as a response to Obama's Cairo address centers almost completely on whether he will utter the two state formula.  

Not that anybody really thinks the idea is a good one.  

Since the Olso agreement every Israel concession has resulted in accelerated and more brutal attacks on both sides. Beginning with Oslo and the second Intifada to the withdrawal from Lebanon, and the second Lebanon War, to the Gaza withdrawal and its aftermath, the Arabs have responded to each proposed compromise with escalating violence to which the Israelis have responded with ever more firepower and destruction. There is no evidence that giving Palestinians a state will lead to less loss of life and plenty that indicates it will increase it.

Yet those in favor of continuing down the two state path have a devastating response to all of their critics. What, they want to know, is your alternative? What is your solution to the "Palestinian problem"?  

I first read the uncomfortable, unpopular yet correct response to this question in a speech given by current Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe 'Boogie' Ya'alon. When still IDF Chief of Staff he told his charges that Israel is in the middle of a hundred years war. Of course we've already been fighting for a hundred years, from the time in 1909 when the first settlers set up HaShomer, a self-defense group to protect Jewish farms and kibbutzim, so 100 years is actually an optimistic estimate. But the point is the same. The war continues and will continue for a long time and in all probability in the short term nothing less than total capitulation, the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state will bring it to an end. 

We in the Western world believe that all problems are solvable. Waiting another fifty or a hundred years for peace is, of course, a horrifying thought. Tens of years more of death and destruction seems inconceivable. In World War II, the US Army Corps of Engineers coined the slogan that depicts the American attitude toward virtually any obstacle, "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible takes a little longer." As a Western-oriented people who look for our inspiration to the American experiment, we Israelis are an impatient, can-do people. In sixty years we have built a modern economic and military powerhouse. We are at the forefront of hi-tech and biotechnology. It cannot be that we cannot find our way to a just peace. 

The Arabs on the other hand have no such illusions about themselves and their ability to solve their problems. They believe in history and that history is on their side. For approximately 140 years, a series of European Crusaders fought for, conquered and lost control of Jerusalem and much of the holy land. Eventually they were defeated and returned to Europe. In the eyes of some in the Arab world, we are no different, non-Muslim interlopers who, if the pressure is kept up will eventually pack up and go back to Europe or America. That's why Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian intelligentsia systematically deny any historical Jewish claims on the holy land. Except for a significant minority, the Arabs have fought against the modern Jewish settlement here from its very inception. For 100 years, more than half of it before there was a recognizable entity called the Palestinians, the Arab world has been clear and implacable in its position that the Jews are European interlopers who have no right to be in Israel. The only time they have modified this stance is when the strength of the Israeli military makes it seem temporarily impossible to resist. 

But it is our desire for an instant peace based on the belief that, as Obama said in Cairo "if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward" that will lead to our demise as a nation. A rejection of the past of the Jewish nation bound by history to this land will lead to our destruction. 

So if giving the Palestinians a state will not lead to peace what indeed is the alternative?   

Imagine for a moment that the Jews of Israel can hang on for another 40 years. On Israel's 100th birthday the era of oil and hence Arab power will in all likelihood be over. Between advances in Green technology and the depletion of oil reserves, the monetary fuel that powers Arab confidence in victory will be exhausted. As the technological world advances Israel advances with it and becomes stronger. At the same time the Arab world, mired in its obsession with tradition remains the same and falls even further behind the West.  Persuaded by Western aid and with no choice the Arab countries agree to absorb the Palestinian refugees. Gaza integrates into Egypt and the Arabs of the West Bank affiliate with Jordan while, buttressed by Western aid and connected to the Israelis, they run their own daily affairs. 

Gradually you have a sea change in attitude and actuality until there is no Palestinian refugee problem, no demographic problem, and no Palestinian problem. 

Our leaders, including Bibi have failed to articulate this vision. The West's' Macdonald's culture makes it politically untenable to promise more war before there will be peace. But it is this steadfastness in the face of adversity that will eventually lead to peace. 

If you will it it is no dream.