THE REAL ATROCITY IN THIS CONFLICT
(…comes only from its midget-minds mired in mutual tit-for-tat insanity)
A month ago Hamas launched another of its periodic assaults against Israel, this time with a hail storm of blindly fired rockets…to which the Israelis responded in kind with their usual ferocity…leaving the non-combatants of Gaza caught in the crossfire to bear the brunt of the resulting mayhem and slaughter, almost 2000 of them, from the apparent total indifference and disregard by both combatant parties to that fact.
Meanwhile, as usual, the international community has stood by groaning and moaning, and impotently wringing its hands, while calling out…truce….truce…truce…but there is no “truce” because neither party believes in, or wants such a thing, since as quickly as one is actually set, one or the other of them blows it away (sometimes within only minutes of having one going into effect).
And because of this continuing slaughter of innocents, especially children, some are now calling for indicting both of them for war crime atrocities. Frankly, the real “atrocity” in this conflict comes only from its midget-minds mired in mutual tit-for-tat insanity.
Since Hamas has clearly shown that it is not now, nor ever will be, prepared to abandon its death-to-Israel fixations, or to face and accept the reality of the State of Israel’s existence (which is not about to disappear no matter how much Hamas might want it to), it thus falls upon the Israelis to show the rest of the world that it is not only prepared to give up this insanity, but to also demonstrate a greater rationality instead. That is to say, as a nation of a rational people it is now prepared to face making a bold, and probably extremely difficult, display of statesmanship rather than continuing with its absolute policy of counter-violence against any Palestinian violence thrown at it.
So the question then becomes: does Israel have the moral courage to take such a risk to do so? That’s a good question because, if it does, it may find that this time – statesmanship – might accomplish what overwhelming military might has never been able to accomplish for over sixty years. That is, to secure a permanent peace accord with the Palestinians, ending this constant back and forth violence and counter-violence. An even bigger question, however, is how bold of a statesmanship move can Israeli political leadership afford to make in the face of such never-ending conflict?
We don’t know. But it would have to be as extremely radical a move, much like the one the late Anwar Sadat pulled off as president of Egypt, a move which ultimately became the basis for a permanent peace between Egypt and Israel. A peace that has held up all these years despite the many stresses and strains put upon their relations right until today.
What would such a bold statesmanship move by Israel require? The following are some of the key elements that would be needed to produce a successful outcome:
- Unilaterally declare a cease-fire for Gaza, while further expanding its “Iron Dome” capabilities to protect itself, and, applying its technologies to detect the exits of any further Hamas tunnels into its territory.
- Offer safe-conduct to all Gaza civilians willing to leave it, for re-settlement in a new extension of the Palestinian West Bank territory, with temporary housing/shelter there while final arrangements are being made with the Palestinian Authority, for their permanent settlement.
- Making a formal offer through the Israeli Knesset to the Palestinian Parliament of a territorial exchange as a firm basis for making the two-state solution a reality. That exchange to be…the Gaza strip…in exchange for a much larger area as part of a contiguous northern extension of the West Bank (see Annex I Graphic).
- Propose simultaneous formal declarations by the Israeli Knesset and the Palestinian Parliament of each other’s right to exist as nation-states, with the offer to have a permanent peace accord between them, the details of which to be negotiated and finalized by a joint commission tasked with that purpose. The commission’s results to then be submitted in referendum to both peoples for ratification.
Making such a move while it has the military upper hand would revitalize Israel’s international position. Offering safe-conduct to all Gaza civilians wanting to leave it and relocate would undermine the authority of Hamas there. Such a territorial swap would eliminate the Gaza, leaving both the State of Israel and the new State of Palestine with authority over undivided territories, with no problematic enclaves as potential sources of conflict. Lastly, by making such an offer at this point, Israel would force all Palestinian factions either to accept the reality of its existence, in exchange for permanent peace and mutually beneficial co-existence, or, face never-ending misery if they refused.
Granted, making such a move would be extremely difficult for the Israelis, and many of its people would have to accept having to leave places where they’ve lived and worked for the past sixty odd years, and relocate to exchanged territory to start anew from scratch…but compared to living with constant uncertainties, and being in a perpetual state of “qui-vive”, as they have now, the potentials for a better and secure future…might make it palatable enough to accept.
Thus for both Israelis and Palestinians…this may be the tipping moment that decides whether both have a future…or not (see Annex II Graphic).
One can only hope both can seize the moment.
CENTURION
ANNEX II GRAPHI
