No Preconditions, Redux
First time tragedy, second time farce, fifth (sixth, etc.,) time, repetition compulsion. This morning on the radio, Israel's wake-up: Benny Begin, the son of Menachem, now high on the Likud list, is warning about Olmert's negotiations with Syria:
"There must be [I am remembering this without notes] no preconditions for talks," he said; the Syrians must understand that if "they change their behavior," we will be prepared to negotiate; but they cannot expect us to negotiate with them and, in effect, agree in advance to show what our final position will be. But would Begin--the interviewer, Yaacov Achimeir, asked--be open to the evacuation of Israeli settlements from the Golan? Stupid question. How could Israel consider "descending from the Golan"?, he answered. How could we agree to such things, and certainly not as a condition for face-to-face talks? "No, our government will insist on talks with no preconditions."
THE SAME CADENCES as his father, the same grand phrases suggesting prideful unbendingness, the same mocking tone, the same faux-diplomatic grandeur--you know, the kind of rhetoric a nervous Jewish kid in pre-war Poland, imagining great-power diplomacy, thinks he has to default to. There is even the same adversion to liturgical nuance, just to show-off to the Orthodox how entrenched in the tradition he is: What then, Achimeir asked, about restoring the "quiet" with Hamas in Gaza? What kind of quiet?, Begin rolled on, his voice rising and falling, as if on stage, and not on the telephone: "Birzono sheket, birzono himum; birzono...," which translates roughly as "By his will, quiet, by his will escalation; by his will, etc...," ostensibly referring to Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh, but first meant to rehearse that lovely prayer from the Yom Kippur liturgy, about God's ability to make of us what He wills. Who does Haniya think he is! God? (One can almost hear the heavenly reverberations: "President Carter: don't you know Jews don't kneel!")Funny, here they were, interviewer and interviewed, two sons of former leaders of the Yishuv's terrorist underground (Achimier's father was Abba Achimier), speaking about diplomatic signs as if they were the sons of Metternich, the latter telling the former how, if only the Syrians withdrew their preconditions, then it would be a sign for possible talks, for it would mean that they would not need Israelis to retreat from their preconditions. In other words, Jewish power has been recognized. Things can stay as they are. And all before coffee, for God's sake.
(Blog email subscription at: www.bernardavishai.com)
Dr Avishai says:
----------------------------------------------
As if a peace treaty with Syria would not transform the region, pulling Assad from Iran's orbit, and opening the door for Obama; as if it would not begin to relax Israel's trip-wire confrontation with Hezbollah, and launch negotiations with Syria over ending the funneling of Iranian arms to jihadists; as if it would not mean Israeli diplomats on the road to Damascus, the heart of the Arab nation, the city now harboring Hamas's Khaled Meshal, opening the possibility of bringing water from Turkey, and eventually even bringing Hamas, too, to open recognition of Israel; as if it would not mean giving new momentum and bite to the Arab League's peace initiative.
----------------------------------------------
Fantasy land. Hard to believe that someone as smart as Dr Avishai could really think this nonsense. This shows how deluded a person can be due to wishful thinking. We heard all these promises about the Garden of Eden that the Middle East would become once Israel made peace with Egypt. Israel doesn't even have a cold peace with Egypt, it has a cold war which is fought by proxies, in this case, HAMAS in Gaza which is armed to the teeth thanks to Egyptian connivance (arms to Gaza flow through the Egyptian Sinai, obviously with Egyptian knowledge, no country allows heavy weaponry to move around its territory without permission). Of course Dr Avishai doesn't care about the antisemitic propaganda prevalent in both Egyptian and Syria state-controlled media (might as well add the FATAH-controlled Palestinian Authority to the list). Israel heard all the lies by the "peace camp" in the early days of Oslo, how that agreement would bring a "new tomorrow" just like what Dr Avishai described above. Instead we got years of bloodshed, suicide bombers, international blame when we defend ourselves from it, and yet Dr Avishai is still trying to peddle this snake-oil medicine. No one is going to believe that Syria would do any of the things Avishai is promising. Does Dr Avishai really think an agreement would "transform the region"? This is mind-boggling. Assad's regime are a bunch of assassins, just ask the Hariri family among many others in Lebanon. If Iran gets the bomb in a few years, Assad figures he will get the Golan back for free because he thinks Israeli like Dr Avishai and his fellow "progressives" will be so scared that they will give it up for nothing. After, Sharon gave up Gush Katif for nothing and those who supported that insanity (like Dr Avishai) are telling us to give up more, in spite of the fact that Israel has rockets raining down on it every day, in spite of "tough" Sharon's promise that this wouldn't happen. Maybe Dr Avishai doesn't really believe what he wrote, he knows that Israel's situation would worsen further if the Golan is given up, but he is simply replaying the lies the Left told in the 1990's, thinking that we are all so stupid that we will fall for them once again.
Islamic extremism is perceived on the rise throughout the Middle East. Islamic extremists say that Israel is on its last legs (the US, too, for that matter) and so why should they make compromises that will expose them to charges they have betrayed the Arab/Islamic world? Prime Minister Olmert himself said "Israel is doomed if it doesn't create a Palestinian state now". So is it realistic to think that Assad wants to "help Israel" by making an agreement? Assad has no interest in peace, only in "peace talks" so he can cash in on American largesse now, while he waits for Israel to collapse. That is his game. He views someone like Dr Avishai (assuming Dr Avishai does really believe what he wrote here) as one of what Lenin called "useful idiots".
December 23, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bernard: At least Begin is honest. The agreement he wants from Syria is Syrian acceptance of Israeli possession of the Golan, the weakening of Syria's position in the ME (through the breaking of ties with Iran), and Syria's support in clamping down on Hamas and Islamic Jihad. And what does Syria get? Well, they can get some binoculars to watch Israelis sailing on Lake Tiberias. Who wouldn't take that deal?
YBD: What is so funny about your posts is the constant theme that the "Arabs" can't be trusted. Which is kinda convenient if your real goal is the colonization of the West Bank. Why have peace when you are already getting the land?
To show how bogus you are, I issue this challenge to you: What do you consider a fair outcome in the Israeli-Palestinian struggle? What do you envision a fair settlement to be? (This should be good.)
December 23, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course that is the case. It is probably also the case that the neocons pushed Bush to have free elections in the OT so with Hamas in power they could trust the Arabs even less. It is why it is useless to engage YBD in debate, because debate is part of the delaying process to keep what the Israelis have already won. However, I think it is educational that YBD does post here, it gives us an opportunity to see up close the political position that controls a pluarality if not a majority of Israeli opinion. Avishi documented this well in yesterday's post.
December 23, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
All good points. But YBD is not alone. Note the Gadsher dude below. Got to get in the obligatory Hama reference.
December 23, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have never said "the Arabs can't be trusted". I completely believe what they say and they say they will never accept Israel's presence in the the Dar-el-Islam (Realm of Islam). History has proven that they are willing to agree to partial or temporary cease-fires if it suits their interests. Any agreement they are offering is on that basis. But they make it clear to their own people that they will never accept a dhimmi-Jewish state in the Middle East.
Here is a good example, from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/world/middleeast/24jordan.html?_r=1&hp
This is describing the young intelligentsia of Jordan, which is typical of similar young people throughout the Arab Middle East. Do you think they want peace with Israel? (again, I am not talking about a temporary cease-fire, I am talking about really ending the state of conflict). The think about MJ Rosenberg and Bernard Avishai is that they have the attitude of an American soldier in Vietnam expressed in the movie IIRC "The Deer Hunter"..."scratch a gook and you will find an American underneath". MJ and Avishai assume that everybody in the world is like them, has the same values, the same aspirations. All the President of the US has to do is wave his magic wand and he can impose a peace agreeement on the two sides. WRONG. The Arabs are NOT Westerners and they are not Americans. Individualism is not as important to them as group, clan or tribal identity. They are inheritors of a proud history of a people that came out of the Arabian desert 1400 years ago and conquered a huge empire and brought a world religion to millions of people.
For a contrast, look at Avishai's web site
www.bernardavishai.com
Look at his proposals for a "Hebrew Republic" which he says will be secular, globalized, materialistic and consumerist. These are 180 degrees away from the traditional values of the Arab world (sure, many individual Arabs might like a lifestyle like this, but as a group they will be rejected) which respects tradition, family values, and religion. Such a "Hebrew Republic" would be a much bigger threat than a "Jewish State" since Judaism is not a missionary religion, whereas Avishai's "Hebrew Republic" carries the values which are insidious to the Arab/Muslim world....disrespect for elders, atheism, sexual permissiveness, etc.
Thus, I advocate Israel becoming a really "Jewish state" that will not threaten Muslim values as does the current secular Israeli state, (there is now a new political party that you would call "far Right" yet they advocate requiring Israeli school children to learn Arabic and study Islamic culture, which today is not done because secular Israelis worship American and European culture which the Arabs fear. Then after several generations of Israel hanging tough, showing the Arabs that on the one hand, it is not a threat to the Arab world in a cultural sense (thus showing claims that Israel wants to expel the Arabs to be ridiculous), but on the other hand not willing to compromise on Jewish rights in the country, including settlement in Judea/Samaria ) some sort of modus-vivendi (NOT necessarily formal, contractual peace agreements) will evolve. This will not happen, though, until the current radical, political Islamist movement is shown to be a dead-end. I am certain this will happen, but I don't how long it will take. It will go under just as radical pan-Arabism did.
This is my views on the way things are going to go.
December 24, 2008 3:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
YBD: Thanks for your response. Now I understand. Apartheid continues until the darkies learn never to challenge their second-class status.
December 24, 2008 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Funny, here they were, interviewer and interviewed, two sons of former leaders of the Yishuv's terrorist underground.."
Funnier yet, your guy Assad is the son of a mass murderer who slaughtered 40,000 of his own civilians in one day. In your continuing eagerness to bash Jews, you forgot to mention that the Syrian government killed more Arabs in twenty four hours than the Israeli government has killed in sixty years.
In which moral cesspool does Marshall find all these Jew-hating pseudo Hebrews?
December 23, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say blowing up the King David Hotel was an act of terrorism. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Begin
Is there a Jewish exception to the definition of terrorism? (Answer: [Insert Anti-Arab screed here.])
December 23, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I'd say blowing up the King David Hotel was an act of terrorism."
You say many dishonest things.
The King David Hotel was British military headquarters. Therefore, attacking it differs greatly from the form of terrorism preferred by craven anti-Semitic swine, which consists of murdering pre-schoolers and bombing pizzerias.
December 23, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I am a swine because I oppose the cowardly planting of a bomb that spilled precious British and Arab blood. Oink. Oink.
December 24, 2008 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, you are swine based upon substandard personal hygiene.
December 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
galdsher, you should be happy. Assad killed 20,000 muslim fundamentalists.
You might want to read this too
December 23, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
"galdsher, you should be happy. Assad killed 20,000 muslim fundamentalists."
You won't be happy until he kills six million Israeli Jews, an atrocity that would deprive TPM's beloved editor-in-chief of his favorite whipping boys.
Whom would ol' Josh libel if the evil Zionists were all dead? He would be like Alexander The Great, weeping uncontrollably because there were no more enemies to conquer.
Tragically, TPM would lose its raison d'etre and be reduced to publishing recipes (but worry not...nothing Kosher).
On the positive side, Avishai and Rosenberg could belatedly return to the asylum for much-needed intensive psychotherapy:
"Doctor, my descent into madness coincided with the prepubescent realization that I was...a...Jew!"
"But my child, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a Jew. You should be proud."
"Aha! Doctor, you must be a neocon! Or a Likudnik! An Islamophobe! Aaaaaaaaaaargh! Serenity now! SERENITY NOW!!"
Yes indeed, the staff of this website would have greatly benefited from the mental health component of Hillarycare.
December 23, 2008 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please be compassionate. He can't even get all the JEws to leave Iran. One of them even has the chutzpah to serve in the parliament.
December 24, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
FROM YNET NEWS -
Netanyahu: Likud will keep Golan Heights (12/22/08)
.....We don't know what Olmert is going to agree on behind closed doors," said Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu. "We are here to state unequivocally: A Likud-led government will stay on the Golan Heights and keep them as a strategic asset."........
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3642569,00.html
December 23, 2008 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew the Syrians did not have a peace partner.
December 24, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
deleted by me
December 24, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Iran doesn't funnel arms to jihadists. OTOH, some of the Saudis do provide support for those AQ-affiliated groups.
I'm among those who are skeptical that Assad will cut off ties to Iran and Hezbollah; after all, he has consistantly claimed that he will not do so.
However, the reconciliation between Lebanon and Syria combined with the ongoing dialogue about negotiations between Israel and Syria is spurring discussions within Lebanon's factions about the eventual possibility of opening talks with Israel.
A sucessful deal between Israel and Syria would provide the impetus for this scenario.
December 24, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink