Friday, December 4, 2009

Regime Change of the PA Via Annexation.

 

by Alan Friedlander

 

Were I a member of the Netanyahu Administration I would have voted against the building freeze in the territories. They are sending a confusing message of negotiating against their own position even before the PA regime returns to the negotiation table with them. This was only to placate a foreign power, not in pursuance of good policy for their people. The destructively self effacing courtship of friendship from the anti Jewish PA must cease so that Israel's penchant for kindness and patience no longer be used against it by anyone. Fair play begins with being willing to play by the rules.

The Israeli government's blunder, however, has a silver lining that is found in their special treatment of East Jerusalem in the face of Western linkage of East Jerusalem with Judea and Samaria. It illustrates that they believe that the State of Israel, at least potentially, has absolute authority over the lands conquered in the defensive Six Day War, otherwise how could they assume that their annexation of East Jerusalem is valid? Thus the silver lining in the dark cloud that the Netanyahu Administration performed is that they have incidentally taken a real step in disputing those who erroneously say that U.N. resolutions 242 and 338 make lands conquered in defensive wars barred from annexation by the defensive conquerors. One of the leading foundations in the conflict over the territories is this very dispute.

To briefly explain the basics of that dispute in International Law, those who argued that defensive conquest is illegal since the passage of Resolution 242 are standing upon the implicit but not explicit gist of the resolution's wording and matters of current political expediency alone, whereas those who say defensive wars are legal means of territorial annexation cite actual historic precedents. As even an explicit law forbidding defensive conquest would only be a "customary law", while returning strategic land to a belligerent regime would be aiding and abetting the self destruction of the innocent nation(s) who heed the implicit command of resolutions like 242, which would violate the most profound of International Norms in existence (Jus Cogens) toward their own populace. Humanity, if it is to continue to morally and ethically progress in its great journey through time, cannot bear such crimes against it.

Allow me to ask you this: A man that loves his wife does not mind if she makes a few mistakes here and there. A man that hates his wife does not tolerate any wrong that she does unless he depends on her for something, whether that is for his continued prestige, care of his children, avoiding the loss of his fortune to divorce expense or the like. So what does Abbas have that makes the Netanyahu Administration desire to put up with him?

If Abbas leaves, there is fear that Hamas would take over? How can they not if every time there is an election Hamas gains more and more strength? But that is not Israel's concern. The Arab people subjugated by the PA voted for their terrorist leaders rather than less offensive third party candidates like Hanan Ashrawi's party. Now third party alternatives will likely never again gain the attention of the Palestinian press thus solidifying the hold of the current terroristic PA configuration in perpetuity for as long as the PA will exist. You owe such voters nothing from a foreign policy aspect. Thus when forming your policy towards Palestinian Arabs only humanitarian concerns should be considered in relation to their dire political plight and bleak future if the PA should remain their masters, God forbid.

Standard regime change cannot fix this problem. The regime once removed would likely be replaced by a worse regime. So what you have then is essentially an entire national entity lost to the prospect of achieving true peace through negotiation. Therefore negotiation itself has been made a mockery and even an impediment toward the pursuit of actual regional peace by the will of the Palestinian voters themselves as interpreted by their petty and corrupt leaders. Acknowledge that as long as you hope for the PA to change, there is no hope.

Consider that if you annex only small portions of the West Bank, you abandon thousands of good Arab people within the PA to an endless reign of despotic rulers. It would not be compassionate to ignore their plight. Abraham asked God to spare an entire evil city if only ten good people could be found in it. Many thousands of Arabs voted against Hamas. Do they all deserve abandonment?

Let's put the answer out there plainly. Do not replace Abbas, remove him and his whole regime entirely. Annex the territories and bring democracy and peace simultaneously to the Israelis and Arabs living there. If demographic concerns still haunt, then a plan like the
Everyone Wins Peace Plan can treat that even in the context of such a massive annexation by way of a staggered naturalization process. Either way, you could then have true peace and liberty for all, by the grace of God.

 

 

Prof. Alan Friedlander

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

 

1 comment:

Salubrius said...

The Fictitious "Palestinian People" and "The Peace Process" Charade

The revelations of the highest ranking Soviet bloc defector during the Cold War, Major General Ion Mihai Pacepa,in his biography "Red Horizons, etc" and in comments to Front Page Magazine, lead me to believe that the peace process is, and has been from the outset, nothing but a charade. According to Pacepa, the "Palestinian People" who demand political self determination is a fictitious concept invented by the Soviet disinformation masters in 1964 when they created the PLO. The term "Palestinian People" appears for the first time in the preamble of the 1964 PLO Charter, drafted in Moscow, and affirmed by the first 422 members of the Palestinian National Council handpicked by the KGB. They used it three times. The exact phrase they used was "Palestinian Arab People" to exclude the Jews. Why did they have to do that? Because there has been a continuous Jewish presence in Palestine for the last 2000 years, since before the invention of Islam. Humpty Dumpty, in Alice in Wonderland said, "What I tell you three times is true." By that Alice in Wonderland logic I guess there really is a "Palestinian People".

Why do this? It reframes the conflict between the Arabs and the Jews. Instead of the vicious attacks on the Jews since 1929 (after the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood) by the "fedayeen" and the "mujahideen" being caused by religious jihad, it changes their image to a struggle of secular nationalism in a quest for political self determination. It was the Romanian dictator Ceausescu, Pacepa's boss, at the urging of the Soviets, who persuaded Arafat to abandon his claim of wanting to annihilate the Jews in Israel in favor of declaiming his desire to "liberate the Arabs in Israel".

The 1960s and 1970s were the years the Soviets were in the business of creating "liberation organizations", Bolivia 1964 also, Columbia 1965. and in the 70s, The Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia that bombed US airline offices in Europe, and The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine that bombed Israelis. But without doubt the PLO, the Palestine Liberation Organization, has been the Soviets most successful effort.

Brezhnev, according to Pacepa, carried it one step farther when Carter came into office. He suggested to Pacepa that Carter might fall for Yassir Arafat PRETENDING to renounce violence and seek peace negotiations. He persuaded Arafat to do this by telling him that the West would shower him with gold and glory. It did. Billions of dollars and a Nobel prize. Ceausescu warned Arafat that he would have to pretend over and over again.

James Woolsey, former CIA director has been reported as stating that Pacepa is credible. Pacepa's account is also supported by the account of Zahir Muhsein, a member of the PLO executive board in 1977 in an interview by the Dutch newspaper Trouw. He also has stated that there is no such thing as the "Palestinian People", that the term's use is a political ploy, and there is no quest for political self-determination -- that as soon as the Jews have been wiped out, sovereignty would be turned over to Jordan. Hafez Assad also has stated there was no "Palestinian People"; that prior to 1964 the Arabs in Palestine called themselves "citizens of Greater Syria".

I can't understand why Pacepa's revelations have not received wider attention.

But if the Arab quest for political self determination was conceived by the Soviet Union and not the local Arabs, then Professor Friedlander's plan seems to be just what is needed.,

Post a Comment

Share It