As negotiations with the Palestinians wind down to their
inconclusive ending, panic-stricken voices are being ratcheted up to agree, or
not agree, a deal. The name of the game in Israel is the Fear Factor.
There are two competing teams in this game. Team A favors
accepting a geographically reduced Israel out of fear that, by not withdrawing,
Israel faces isolation and international sanctions that would be
diplomatically, commercially, and economically crippling. They also make the
case that agreeing to massive land, and even population, withdrawals would give
a major economic boost via new diplomatic and trade ties with Arab states that
have, so far, distanced themselves from Israel.
Team B points to the security menace of an Israeli
withdrawal to indefensible borders, what Abba Eban described as “Auschwitz
lines.” They cite the enormous economic and social damage of physically
removing “settlers,” people who have made Judea and Samaria their
home. They remind us of the national
trauma that came with the uprooting of thousands of Jews from Gaza that resulted
in Palestinian rockets, deaths, and kidnapping. The personal sacrifice made by the settlers in
Gaza on our behalf did not bring peace or added security. On the contrary, more
of us experienced the shock of Palestinian terror and missiles.
Team B point to the frightening possibility of rockets fired
on planes at Ben Gurion Airport, visible to the naked eye from the high ground
of a new Palestinian state. Israel, unable to intrude into the sovereign
Palestinian state, would have the effectiveness of obtaining human intelligence,
an essential element in our fight against terror, drastically reduced. Team A respond by claiming that such attacks
could happen in today’s environment, but haven’t.
Team B have convincing arguments based on Israel’s past
experiences when relinquishing territory to Palestinians. They ask why a
Palestinian state would be less a terror regime than Gaza? They have a valid
point with the news that Palestinian Authority figure, Jibril Rajoub, has just
returned from talks in Tehran with Iranian leaders. Iran would jump at the
opportunity of having a new Palestinian state become its new proxy in the area.
Perhaps the national security experts at Amos Yadlin’s INSS (Institute of
National Security Studies) should wrap their heads around the possibility that
Iran’s Republican Guards would be invited by a sovereign Palestine to help
train, arm, and supervise their domestic police and security forces. Such a
security apparatus would operate without infringing any agreement that
Palestine remain a demilitarized state. However, could Israel tolerate or trust
Iranian commanders looking down on Israel’s exposed low-lying coastal plain
that contains significant infrastructure and 70% of our population? Tolerate or not, there would be little that
Israel could do about it.
Iran could be the catalyst that would unite Fatah and Hamas
in a new Palestinian state under their patronage. This was confirmed by Rajoub’s
statement on his return from Tehran. “Hamas is part of the Islamic Arab
social, political, and national fabric in Palestine.”
Based on such a scenario, can Team A deny that Israel would
not be under close threat from a new Palestinian sovereignty with a capital in
the streets of Jerusalem?
The fear factor was on display at the recent INSS Conference
in Tel Aviv with Isaac Hertzog cajoling Benjamin Netanyahu to boldly overcome
his fears and agree to the Kerry parameters, and with Yair Lapid spelling out
the economic costs that non-compliance would bring. Naftali Bennett and Moshe
Ya’alon, on the other hand, warned of the consequences of living under
(strategically and geographically) a rogue state.
There is no doubt that both camps are trying to persuade us
of the damages of surrendering, or not surrendering, land to the Palestinians,
rather than extoling the benefits. The
public, it seems, is ambivalent. It would like to see peace, but it is not
convinced that huge territorial concessions, and a jeopardized security, will
lead to Arab states standing in line to open embassies and do business in
Israel. On the other hand, economic
disaster warnings of swathing sanctions, if Israel does not reach a deal with
the Palestinians, outweigh the financial benefits that may come with such a
peace deal. This muddles the mind of those who favor deep concessions to the
Palestinians.
Naftali Bennett, unlike Yair Lapid, a successful businessman
in an earlier life, downplays the harmful effects of settlement boycotts when
compared to the burgeoning global desire for Israeli technology and innovation.
Sectional damage, he claims, is more than offset by the success of Israel’s
Start Up nation. He may have a case. Europe may be leading the sanctions
campaign on Israeli products from the West Bank, but they find Israeli
ingenuity increasingly irresistible. Israel is putting greater emphasis in
opening up Asian markets that are impervious to BDS.
Politically, the fear factor of those calling for withdrawal
is to show us the South African consequences if we don’t accede. There,
internationally imposed sanctions brought about the collapse of the white
regime, though some would argue that it was the emergence of Mandela, the
peacemaker, meeting a receptive De Klerk, that brought about the Rainbow
Nation.
The unseemly sight of a thousand NGOs descending on Durban
to claim credit for a new South Africa while declaring “Zionism is racism”
was appalling. Like vultures looking for another carcass to feed on, they
targeted Israel. Like carrion, sustained by bloated budgets, they have attacked
the Jewish state for decades with a concentration that leaves them blinded to
the awful crimes and mayhem that surround us. The noises they make have
affected governments to squeak their mantras. This has drawn the attention of
our own politicians to take notice of the commotion.
Israeli government ministers would be better advised to
provide the necessary budget to fight delegitimization, rather than run around
making unseemly public noises out of fear.
Barry Shaw is the Special Consultant on Delegitimization
Issues to the Strategic Dialogue Center at Netanya Academic College. He is the
author of ‘Israel Reclaiming the Narrative.’ www.israelnarrative.com
No comments:
Post a Comment