The fantasy of a ‘demilitarized’ Palestinian state - by Stephen M. Flatow

They don’t “support a Palestinian state.” They support a mythical state that can never come into being because it’s an impossibility.

Stephen M. Flatow..
JNS.org..
12 June '18..

The phrase “demilitarized Palestinian state” is the very definition of an oxymoron—“a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction.”

Proponents of Palestinian statehood use the term “demilitarized” as a propaganda weapon. They know that Palestinian Authority spokesmen have consistently rejected the idea that a state would be demilitarized. And they know that the idea of demilitarizing a dictatorship has never been successfully implemented in history. But they use the phrase because it’s the only way to sell their awful plan.

The creation of a Palestinian state in most or all of Judea-Samaria means that Israel would be nine miles wide at one point. The idea that a Palestinian state would have an army of its own is nothing less than terrifying. It means that Israel would be in mortal danger from the moment “Palestine” is created.

So, the only way for Palestinian advocates to push their cause is to pretend that somehow, it would be demilitarized. Look at the new poll carried out by the American Jewish Committee about attitudes among American Jews and Israelis.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

The Reality is that an Arab “Palestine” and a “Safe Israel” are Mutually Exclusive - by Dr. Martin Sherman

Israel would be exposed to grave perils if an Arab state were ever to be established on the commanding hills overlooking the country’s coastal megalopolis.

Dr. Martin Sherman..
MiDA..
11 March '18..

“If a Palestinian state is established, it will be armed to the teeth. Within it, there will be bases of the most extreme terrorist forces, equipped with anti-tank and anti-aircraft shoulder-launched rockets, which will endanger not only random passers-by, but every airplane and helicopter taking off in the skies of Israel and every vehicle traveling along the major traffic routes in the coastal plain”

The above warning was issued by none other than Nobel laureate, the late Shimon Peres, in his book “Tomorrow is Now” (pp. 232, 255.)

After all, “Palestinian” statehood and a secure Israel are mutually exclusive goals. Indeed, this was always the accepted wisdom in Israel – until the discourse was hijacked by the tyrannical diktats of politically correct dogma.

The above dour caveat was echoed by Israel Prize laureate, Prof. Amnon Rubinstein, who also served as Education Minister on behalf of the far-Left Meretz faction: “…Israel, small and exposed, will neither be able to exist nor prosper if its urban centers [and] its vulnerable airport…are shelled…this is the terrible danger involved in the establishment of a third independent sovereign state between us and the Jordan River. – ‘The Pitfall of a Third State’, Haaretz, Aug. 8, 1976.

These two citations convey, with chilling accuracy, the grave perils to which Israel would be exposed if an Arab state were ever established on the commanding hills overlooking the country’s coastal megalopolis, where about 80% of the country’s civilian population and commercial activity are located.

These dangers are dramatically illustrated by the following series of photographs, shot from locations inside the territory designated for any future Arab state.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

A deadly illusion - A demilitarized Palestinian state

David Kirshenbaum..
Op-Ed Contributor/JPost..
27 February '13..

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s elevation of Tzipi Livni to lead negotiations with the Palestinian Authority constitutes a serious setback to Israel’s efforts to keep its citizens safe, fend off the tide of regional violence and thwart the escalating efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state.

Israel’s Knesset elections took place in a week that featured the continued implosion of Syria and Egypt, the former already bogged down in a bloody civil war and the latter possibly on its way to one. The Israeli electorate utterly rejected Livni’s tired campaign slogans and her worn-out and failed prescription for a Middle East settlement: Israel withdraws from most or all of Judea and Samaria, uproots tens of thousands of people from their homes in the cradle of Jewish civilization and agrees to carve up Jerusalem. An Arab state, the 22nd, is created in the areas from which Israel withdraws, leaving Israel with a nine-mile wide border in its center.

The major upheavals in the Arab world have done nothing to bring about any fresh thinking on Livni’s part regarding this “twenty-second-state solution.”

In the years before Oslo, the widely held position in Israel was that a sovereign Arab state west of the Jordan River would represent a grave danger to the State of Israel.

Even the Oslo accords, which according to its architects were made with a leader that represented the entire so called Palestinian people and with an entity that had sworn off terror, didn’t guarantee the Arabs a state west of the Jordan.

Indeed, in prime minister

Three major working assumptions clouding the policy debate

Dr.Aaron Lerner
IMRA
Weekly Commentary
22 April '10

The first step towards effectively addressing dangerously faulty policy recommendations is to understand the underlying assumptions that drive them.

Here is a quick review of some of the major assumptions.

Assumption #1. If Israel withdraws to the ’67 line the Arabs will no longer have any claim against Israel and there will be peace for generations.

Ramifications: Israeli concerns regarding secure borders, enforcement of the demilitarization of the Palestinian state and pretty much any other security issue do not have to be seriously addressed since withdrawal will in and of itself insure Israel’s security.

Assumption #2. The utopian peace derived from withdrawal to the ’67 is an “all or nothing” proposition, with the resulting peace only observable after complete withdrawal.

Ramification: Arab attitudes and activities prior to the completion of Israel’s withdrawal to the ’67 lines are completely irrelevant for the purposes of analyzing post withdrawal scenarios.

Assumption #3. The entire world shares a set of universal values that coincides with “Western” values. All other value systems are no more than cultural window dressing.

(Read full post)

Please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Constructive or Destructive Ambiguity? Unspoken Requirements For “Demilitarized State”

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA Weekly Commentary
24 December 09

“Real demilitarization is not a piece of paper, it’s not an agreement, and it’s not some kind of Security Council resolution, because it is our problem. It is our problem when we evacuate territory, and the territory fills immediately with Iran or their agents or weapons from Iran and also Syria…It has been demonstrated that this is the problem. That almost all the weapons aren’t manufactured inside, they are imported, at least the effective weapons, and they are becoming ever more effective, and thus a true solution to demilitarization is required.

I know what the minimum conditions are for this demilitarization, and when the time comes we will also discuss it.” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressing the Knesset 23 December 2009

“This Palestinian state will be completely demilitarized. It will be allowed to maintain lightly armed police and interior forces to ensure civil order. Israel will continue to control all entries and exits to the Palestinian state, will command its airspace, and not allow it to form alliances with Israel's enemies.”
Speech by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at the Herzliya Conference, Institute of Policy and Strategy, December 4, 2002

Back in 2002 Prime Minister Sharon spelled out what he believed would be necessary in order to insure that a Palestinian state would indeed remain demilitarized.

Of course, Sharon’s last minute abandonment of the Philadelphi Corridor that separated Gaza from Egypt made a mockery of that critical condition. But Sharon’s notoriously short planning horizon isn’t the focus of this note.

If Ariel Sharon had no problem talking about the arrangements that would be required to guaranty demilitarization, why does Binyamin Netanyahu opt to leave us in the dark?

Here is a suggestion:

(Continue reading)
.