by Isi Leibler
U.S. Secretary of State
John Kerry no longer pretends to be evenhanded in overseeing the
negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
His most recent move
was to indirectly threaten Israel with boycotts if it refuses to accede
to additional demands on issues of borders and security. Despite the
fact that he represents our closest ally, Kerry is demanding compromises
from us that could impact on our very survival. Defense Minister Moshe
Ya'alon rightly responded that a European boycott is preferable to
rocket attacks on Ben-Gurion International Airport.
Kerry has put no
comparable pressure on the Palestinians. He has not insisted that they
deviate from positions that he knows are unacceptable to any Israeli
government. He has failed even to publicly condemn their ongoing
incitement. By selectively pointing the gun at Israel's head, Kerry has
reinforced the belief that the Palestinians can only benefit by
remaining intransigent.
Although Kerry is aware
that Congress and the American public would vigorously oppose any
initiative that threatens Israel with sanctions, this has not prevented
him from encouraging European countries, including Germany, to do so.
Kerry is capitalizing on European anti-Israelism, which is proliferating
at an alarming rate, as demonstrated by a recent opinion poll
indicating that nearly half the citizens of the EU believe that Israel
is engaged in a genocidal campaign against the Palestinians. Incredibly,
in a recent communique about International Holocaust Remembrance Day,
EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton could not even bring herself to
mention the Jews.
Israel's political
leaders are contributing to this situation. President Shimon Peres told
the Americans that the Palestinians need not concede to Israel's central
demand for recognition as a Jewish state -- one of the government's
crucial demands which the Obama administration had already taken on
board. Such behavior by a president does not merely represent a major
breach of his constitutional limitations but under the circumstances can
only be considered unconscionable.
Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu and Minister Naftali Bennett provided a bonanza for global
anti-Israel entities seeking to portray Israel as the obstacle to peace
by publicly bickering over whether Israelis could live under Palestinian
jurisdiction -- a currently utterly unrealistic scenario.
Ministers Yair Lapid
and Tzipi Livni have both made histrionic remarks about the potential
economic impact of a European boycott should the peace talks fail,
providing grist for the mills of the global boycott, divestment and
sanctions movement's propaganda.
A group of leading
Israeli businessmen, purporting to promote a nonpartisan two-state
policy together with Palestinian counterparts via a body called
"Breaking the Impasse," also engaged in actions to weaken Israel's
negotiating position. While attending the Davos World Economic Forum,
they distributed a petition calling for one-sided demands on Netanyahu
to be flexible and accommodating to the Palestinians and warning of
devastating repercussions to the Israeli economy if peace negotiations
fail. Like the panic-stricken politicians, these businesspeople are
chanting empty mantras about the value of peace that cynically imply
government warmongering and contribute nothing to the real challenge of
negotiating a peace accord: how to come to an understanding with
duplicitous partners who rule over a criminal society and are committed
to the elimination of Jewish sovereignty.
Critics are entitled to
differ with Netanyahu's negotiating position. But what do they mean by
"flexibility?" Does flexibility mean that Israel should agree to freeze
all construction in the major settlement blocs, including Jerusalem
until an (unlikely) settlement is reached? Does flexibility mean we
should accept the right of return of 6 million descendants of Arab
refugees as a basis for negotiations?
How should we interpret
the Palestinians' vicious incitement, sanctification of released
murderers, and over recent weeks, the ghoulish depiction on Palestinian
state TV of the released murderers' detailed accounts of their monstrous
acts? Is this what is expected of a genuine peace partner?
Do the prime minister's
critics want Israel to be flexible in terms of security knowing that
Hamas, which has resumed missile launches against us, could either merge
with or assume control of the PA?
Would the businessmen
who pressure Netanyahu to be more accommodating encourage him to entrust
the security of our children and grandchildren to Kerry's electronic
fences or NATO forces rather than the Israel Defense Forces?
Thankfully, the prime
minister is fully aware of the risks that such flexibility represents.
He therefore directs his negotiations toward the creation of a
Palestinian state that provides for Israel's security. He is juggling in
this mad hatter's game, seeking interim progress and working to retain
American support and to demonstrate to a hostile world our absolute
commitment to peace -- all while resisting the enormous pressure to
capitulate on long-term security issues.
The results will not
bring us closer to peace. Netanyahu's government is poised to accept the
forthcoming, nonbinding U.S. framework agreement with sufficient
reservations to make it meaningless but enabling Kerry to demonstrate a
"successful diplomatic coup." The Palestinians are likely to follow
suit. Both parties are likely to continue negotiations in the hope that
they will be the ultimate winners in the blame game.
Our ability to cope
with failed peace efforts, however, should not preclude us from
presenting our positions with strength, unity and dignity during these
negotiations. As Ya'alon has aptly stated, "I am not ready to talk about
[ceding] an inch of territory unless the PA accepts recognition of our
right to exist as a nation-state of the Jewish people, giving up the
right of return, and addressing our security needs. … I hope we achieve
this; if not, we will manage."
Netanyahu must refrain
from making independent statements that do not have cabinet approval,
curtail the counterproductive flow of ministers' inflammatory remarks,
and insist that ministers support or remain silent on established
positions. Discipline is essential.
The prime minister must
also remain committed to working against anti-Israel forces seeking to
delegitimize and demonize us by distorting our policies and objectives.
To achieve this will require the more intensive support of friends of
Israel throughout the world, especially in America, which Netanyahu has
yet to fully capitalize.
American Jewish leaders
will have to review their approach. Over the years, the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee, the Conference of Presidents of Major
American Jewish Organizations, the American Jewish Committee, the
Anti-Defamation League, the Zionist Organization of America and other
committed Jewish bodies have displayed consistent devotion, loyalty and
support for Israel. But today they face a dilemma. Their hitherto fully
justified determination to maintain bipartisanship becomes
counterproductive if it precludes them from standing up and confronting
an administration that is clearly bullying Israel and not acting
evenhandedly toward its only democratic ally in the region.
They can do so in a
respectful manner. But when a U.S. secretary of state indirectly
encourages Europeans and others to pressure Israel with sanctions unless
it makes further concessions, friends of Israel must protest publicly
or this could develop into a tsunami and we will be abandoned. Not
surprisingly, the traditionally outspoken ZOA immediately protested. But
it was significant that ADL head Abe Foxman, hardly a hawk, sent Kerry
an open letter bitterly criticizing his remarks, which he charged would
be construed as "an incentive by Palestinians not to reach an agreement"
and "as legitimizing boycott activity."
Israel's supporters
around the world should today unite and speak out. The government and
Diaspora leaders should initiate a Day of Global Solidarity with Israel
in which Israelis, Americans, and Israel supporters worldwide gather in
Jerusalem to express their support for Israel's commitment to peace, and
condemn those seeking to force Israel to compromise on its basic
security needs. We must demonstrate that a genuine peace can only be
attained when both sides are committed to peace and treated fairly.
Isi Leibler's website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com. He can be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com.
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=7273
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment