September 15, 2004
Evelyn Gordon on Terror
In "The real 'root cause' of global terror" Evelyn Gordon gives a brief history of how the world has come to accept the Palestinian cause.
When the PLO was founded in 1964 – with the goal, incidentally, of a Palestinian state instead of Israel, which did not yet have the territories – no one was talking about such a state. Even after Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza from Jordan and Egypt, nobody advocated a Palestinian state in those territories; the world expected Israel to keep part of this land (that is why, according to its drafters, UN Resolution 242 demands the return of "territories" rather than "the territories") and return the rest to Jordan and Egypt.Forty years later, a Palestinian state in every inch of the West Bank and Gaza has become an international consensus. And this achievement was not in spite of Palestinian terror but because of it: Many peoples with equal or better claims to statehood, from Tibetans to Iraqi Kurds, have sought independence without resorting to terror; yet their aspirations at best elicit lip-service support from the world, and often outright opposition. The Palestinians' success lay in persuading the international community that peace depends on meeting their demands.
Not only did the world adopt the terrorists' cause, but it also adopted the terrorists themselves. The PLO has official observer status at the UN and diplomatic legations worldwide. And Hamas, which does not even pretend to aspire to peaceful coexistence with Israel, is banned by only a handful of states.
Gordon does an excellent job of showing how what was unthinkable became reality as time went on. My only quibble is with her criticism of President Bush. Yes, I am against a Palestinian state. However, President Bush, attached significant qualifications to the creation of that state. If President Bush remains president, I can't see a state without the Palestinian really changing. That's a welcome change from the previous eight years when further accomodations to Arafat were forthcoming at no price at all. If there will be a Palestinian state now, it will have to be earned.
Gordon's article is an excellent recounting of the changes of attitudes we have seen over the past 40 years.
A very good companion article would be one that I've previously recommended: "How the PLO Was Legitimized" by Jeane Kirkpatrick. This shows the mechanics of how the PLO gained legitimacy using international organizations.
Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad. Posted by SoccerDad at September 15, 2004 01:34 AM | TrackBack
Zocher Ha-bris
Idiots
Abbas's job
Pop music trivia answers
Where I've been mentioned
This just in
Counterproductive
The half blood prince
Haveil Havalim #30 is up
Perceptions of Israel
I agree completely with the article by Evelyn Gordon, including the criticisms of Bush. The USA and the world have accepted a fiction as fact; that the Palestinians are a people who have been displaced from their homeland. True, there were Arab refugees from these lands, just as their were Jewish refugees who fled the Arab lands. But the blame for their "homelessness" lies with those who waged the war; the Arab countries. They tried to kill us, they lost. Take whatever marbles remain and go home.
But the world as the article states, chose to accept their sob story. And every President, every head of government, who accepts their arguement is accepting a false premise. The logic may be sound but the premise is false, and so the arguement is false.
There is real fear in the air that the disengagment may go forward.
Please world, wake up. Accepting the PLO means accepting the tactics of the PLO. Maybe most the world couldn't care how little Israel becomes, or what happens to the settlers who gave their lifes blood to the land. But will they not care when Paris cites its celtic origins and demands to be its own country? When Utah states their uniqueness and uses bombs and guns to attack the surrounding states?
When violence is not condemned it is agreed to. There is no middle road.
Posted by: Rachel Ann at September 18, 2004 06:38 PMTHe article was excellent and I agree with her on all parts (in this case I disagree with you regarding Bush) I do think that everytime we simply don't say NO to the terrorist they grow stronger. By endorsing a two state solution, and demanding the dismantling of settlements, Bush gives in to the demands of the terrorist. Not saying that Kerry would be better, but this is a fault I have with Bush.
Posted by: Rachel Ann at September 20, 2004 12:59 PM