What moves advocates of Israeli withdrawal?

November 6, 9:18 AMNY Israel Conflict ExaminerRichard Shulman

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the NY Israel Conflict Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

A.P. photo/ Edyad Baba -- Gaza: Israel withdrew, 12,000 rockets fired

Some Israeli leftists advocate Israeli withdrawal under various guises.  The guises are dressed up in rational-sounding clothes.  It is not a rational tenet.  It is an emotional one, practically religious.

A foremost advocate of full Israeli withdrawal, Yossi Beilin, explained the basis for his advocacy of withdrawal.  He attributed it to a belief that “he couldn't see living in a world in which peace couldn't be reached with the Arabs.”

That belief is a matter of faith.  To true believers, it is not subject to analysis or discussion.   If these leftists acknowledged their messianic zeal for Israeli withdrawal, more people would recognized their irrationality and discount their statements.   

Whereas snake-oil salesman knew their wares were fake, these leftists don’t think theirs are fake.  Their arguments, however, are fake.  They manipulate debate. 

For example they ignore or deny security consequences of withdrawal.  After all, they think that withdrawal would bring peace and therefore security.  They condemn non-believers in withdrawal as enemies of peace  (Dr. Aaron Lerner, (www.imra.org.il, 10/22). 

Their name-calling is harsh.  They would seem more idealistic if they called non-believers enablers of war.  But who is an enabler of war requires a rational, historical analysis.  I have made that analysis.  I find that in general, those who attempt to appease totalitarian imperialists, including jihadists, enabled wars.  Those who appeased the U.S. by removing checkpoints enabled terrorism.  Those who made Israel withdraw enabled terrorism and even war. 

Nevertheless, leftist withdrawal advocates persist in their disproved dogma beyond the point of sanity, like hard-core Communist fellow travelers who stuck with the Soviet Union through purges, gulag, aggression, and anti-Zionism.

For another example, trying to manipulate discussion, some of the leftists misstate history, to whitewash Muslim Arab wrongdoing and blacken the doings of Zionist leaders.  Some even support verbally and in the street terrorism against innocent Jews in their own country.  Those far leftists have carried their ideology to a psychotic extreme.

For another example, they offer unwarranted assurances.  They suggest withdrawal in return for better arms technology (that soon becomes obsolete), for international “guarantees” (that the State Dept. fails to enforce or even forgets), for an ability to send forces back in that turns out not to be easy, for signed pacts that don’t include measurable standards and enforcement, for theories that history doesn’t matter, that borders are not important, that the conflict is territorial when it is religious, that most of the Palestinian Arabs (who are only part of the Arab-Israel conflict) want peace, that a better standard of living would bring the Arabs to want peace, and so on.  Any assumption will do, because they don’t evaluate it.

The land-for-peace dogma persists despite its failures and the other evidence against it, because those leftists don’t question dogma and Israel’s enemies won’t question it.  I think that every policy should be reviewed.  

When our Presidents proclaim their goal is another Arab Palestinian state, they put it as a matter of faith.  They take it for granted, as the prevailing wisdom of the day.  I ask, why that goal?  What would happen if it were attained?   

So much for leftist Jewish advocates of Israeli withdrawal.  Now ask yourselves what motivates the Arabs, the State Dept., the USSR, the EU, and most of the media to advocate the indefensible proposals for withdrawal.