Alice In Wonderland

by Dr. Alex Grobman

Statements by Arab and Israeli politicians sometimes have an Alice and Wonderland quality to them. Just as Alice had trouble in understanding adult behavior that seemed strange, comments by Shimon Peres often have the same quality. On July 24, 2005, IMRA reported that Peres said that the meaning of President Bush’s letter (that is frequently used to rationalize the expulsion of Jews from Gaza) is that "President Bush does not object to Israel retaining large settlement blocs - if the Palestinians agree.”

Peres believes the Arabs might agree to trade land to allow Israel to keep the Etzion Bloc, Maaleh Adumim and a "tightly defined Ariel bloc," but he is convinced that retaining Hebron and all of Jerusalem would not even be a consideration.

Anyone not knowing the history of the Israeli/Arab conflict might conclude that the Arabs won all of the wars in which they fought, and could therefore dictate the terms of the peace. A logical question might be asked: By what legal right are Arabs permitted to live in Gaza and the West Bank, but the Jews are restricted to only certain portions of these areas? The Mandate for Palestine conferred the right of the Jews to settle anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. This entitlement has not been changed in international law.

Does the government believe that leaving Gaza will ensure Israeli security? Shin Beit Director Yuval Diskin said that after Israel leaves Gaza, international Islamists will have the “opportunity to launch terror attacks inside Israel.” Some are reported to be already in Gaza. Other Arabs are moving the fight to the West Bank because “The withdrawal will not be complete without the West Bank and Jerusalem.”

As an added bonus, the Arabs see the retreat as a victory for terrorism. According to a joint Israeli-Palestinian Public Opinion Poll conducted in June 2005 by The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah and the Harry S. Truman Research Institute, 45% of the Israelis and 72% of the Palestinians believe that removing Israeli settlements from Gaza is a triumph for the Palestinian armed struggle against Israel.

Israel historian Jacob Talmon observed that at the end of the First and Second World Wars, the French were not concerned how the Germans might regard them. In both conflicts, the Germans attacked the French and each time the French defeated them. It would not have been surprising, therefore for the French to regard the Germans as an eternal threat. Under the circumstances, “Could anyone have imagined suggesting to the French that they surrender Alsace-Lorraine or make any security concessions so the Germans might accept them?” Talmon asked.

On June 5, 1967, Israeli prime minister Levi Eshkol warned King Hussein of Jordan not to join Egypt and Syria in attacking Israel. The Jordanians attacked Israel anyway, resulting in their loss of the West Bank of the Jordan River.

Because Israel was attacked, Talmon noted, one might have been assumed that the world
would not want to reward the aggressor for their unprovoked attack by asking Israel to give back the land Jordan lost in war. Yet on November 22, 1967 the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242 outlining the guidelines to achieve a "peaceful and accepted settlement." As Eugene V. Rostow pointed out, Israel is allowed to administer the territories it occupied in 1967 until “a just and lasting peace in the Middle East” is achieved. When such a peace is made, Israel is obligated to withdraw its armed forces “from territories” it occupied during the Six-Day War--not from ‘the’ territories nor from ‘all’ the territories, but from some of the territories, which included the Sinai Desert, the West Bank, the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.”

Talmon asked if there had ever been another case in history where, “the victor has been expected to withdraw from conquered territory before the defeated party agreed to discuss peace terms, where the vanquished had openly avowed he would never make peace under any circumstances, would never recognize the right of the victor to exist… but would continue to pursue his mission to destroy and annihilation the victor until he succeeded?"

For years the Israelis have been negotiating with themselves—something that no self-respecting politician or nation would do. Attempts to accommodate the Arabs by offering them one concession after the next are seen as signs of weakness-not sincere attempts at making peace. When the Arabs are willing to accept the existence of the Jewish state, when they are prepared to accommodate the Israelis instead of expecting the Israelis to accommodate them, then we will know that they are serious about peace. Transferring Jews from their legal residences, pitting one Jew against another will not bring peace-only aid and comfort to our enemies.

Dr. Grobman’s most recent book is Battling for Souls: The Vaad Hatzala Rescue Committee in Post War Europe [KTAV]. He is also co-author of Denying History: Who Says The Holocaust Never Happened? (University of California Press, 2000) His next book Zionism Equals Racism: The New War Against The Jews will be published in 2005.