Michael Freund is Founder and Chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which reaches out and assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to the Jewish people. He writes a syndicated column and feature stories for the Jerusalem Post. Previously, he served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Israeli Prime Minister´s Office under former premier Benjamin Netanyahu.
Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:08 pm The Right's Knuckleheaded Response
Within a few minutes of the conclusion of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's diplomatic address this past Sunday night, the Palestinian leadership took to the airwaves to denounce his remarks in the harshest of terms.
Given haste and hostility of the Palestinian reaction, one would assume that Israel's Right would have looked on this turn of events with glee, yet that has clearly not been the case.
As a card-carrying member of the Right, I am astonished at some of the knuckleheaded responses to Netanyahu's speech that have emerged from various right-wing leaders. For, as I argue in the column below from today's Jerusalem Post, the speech was essentially an intellectual frontal assault on the most cherished of the Left's beliefs.
Netanyahu has seized the reins of the argument, injected a healthy dose of realism into the debate, and brought about a subtle, yet seismic, shift in the country's stance, one that clearly places the burden on the Palestinian side to put up or shut up. Rather than condemning the prime minister, it is time for the Right to strengthen and defend him instead.
Even for a leadership well-versed in rejecting Israel's outstretched hand of peace, the Palestinians wasted little time Sunday night in denouncing Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's bold diplomatic address.
Just moments after the conclusion of the speech, in which Netanyahu offered conditional support for the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state, various Palestinian leaders made a mad dash for the microphones, seemingly competing with one another to scale new heights of vitriol and hyperbole.
Indeed, while it may have taken the premier 25 minutes to deliver his remarks, it took chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat barely five minutes to get on Al-Jazeera right afterward and declare that "in a thousand years no Palestinian leader will accept this." How nice to see that Israel's new proposals were given such careful and thoughtful consideration.
Shortly thereafter, PLO executive committee secretary Yasser Abed Rabbo decided to join the fray, maligning the prime minister as "a swindler, a fraud and a liar" and labeling his speech "a zero." Others, such as legislator Mustafa Barghouti and spokesman Nabil Abu Rudaineh, hammered away at the speech, insisting that it proved that Israel was not serious about peace.
Given the haste and harshness of the reaction, one would assume that Israel's Right would have looked on this turn of events with glee. After all, if Ramallah reacted with such wrath, then certainly the people in Ofra and Otniel should be overjoyed, don't you think? Yet that is clearly not the case, as a number of right-wing figures have come out solidly against the speech, invoking terms such as "betrayal."
WHICH IS WHY I cannot help but ask: How is it that some on the Right just don't seem to get it? Take, for example, National Union MK Arye Eldad, who made the rather obtuse accusation that Netanyahu's speech proved that he was "converting from his own religion."
"With the expression 'a demilitarized Palestinian state,' Netanyahu is trying to eat a pig butchered in a kosher way," Eldad helpfully added.
Putting aside this rather odd choice of culinary metaphors, Eldad seems to have missed the point entirely. The fact is that Netanyahu's speech was masterfully crafted, not only in terms of style and structure, but especially in terms of content. It was the perfect rejoinder to the pressure from Washington, essentially turning the tables on the Palestinians and immediately transforming them into the rejectionists.
ANY FAIR-MINDED OBSERVER who listened to the speech, or merely read it afterward, could not help but come away impressed by two main themes: A sincere desire for peace, alongside the undeniable historical rights which underpin the existence of the Jewish state.
Netanyahu made a compelling case against territorial withdrawals, wryly noting that the assertion they will bring peace "has up till now not stood the test of reality." Moreover, he offered his listeners a concise yet crucial historical survey of modern Arab opposition to the very existence of a Jewish presence in this region.
And when was the last time that a prime minister offered such a compelling defense of the Jewish people's right to be here? With regard to the issue of a Palestinian state, Netanyahu succeeded in outwitting US President Barack Obama at his own game, using his considerable rhetorical skills to marshal an unprecedented consensus among the public.
Think about it: Netanyahu's speech was essentially an intellectual frontal assault on the most cherished of the Left's beliefs. For years, it has been trying to convince the public of the wisdom of establishing an unchecked sovereign Palestinian entity, in the process blaming Israel for much of the conflict because of its failure to do just that.
And, unfortunately, it has had a great deal of success.
UNTIL NOW, that is. For what Netanyahu has done is to seize the reins of the argument, and inject a healthy dose of realism into the debate. By conditioning the creation of a Palestinian state on comprehensive demilitarization, he has shown just how utterly utopian, and unrealistic, the Left's dream truly is.
And by insisting on a set of entirely reasonable demands, such as Palestinian recognition of Israel as "the nation state of the Jewish people," and the negation of a Palestinian state's ability to forge military pacts or to control its airspace, he has recast the definition of "statehood" in such a way as to reduce the danger it would pose to our existence.
Only a knucklehead could fail to see this, but that is precisely what some on the Right so excel at doing. For all their ideological savvy, many seem to lack an equal level of political skill and sophistication.
I say this as a card-carrying member of the Right, and a proud proponent and firm believer in the divine promise of a Greater Israel.
As uncomfortable as they - and I - are with any talk of a possible Palestinian state, Netanyahu's critics need to recognize his speech as a great achievement, rather than view it as a source for concern. For the first time in a long time, the battle of ideas has been joined. So instead of attacking the prime minister, it is time for the Right to strengthen and defend him.
His speech on Sunday represents a subtle, yet seismic, shift in the country's stance, one that clearly places the burden on the Palestinian side to put up or shut up. And, as we know quite well from recent history, it won't be too hard to guess just which of those two paths it is likely to choose.
One must remember that the idea of 2 states is inherently not new
The first proponent was of course Ben Gurion who w/out any pandering accepted the ‘48 partition
Better something than nothing!
Netanyahu created another Abba Eban ‘opportunity’ option which he knew the Pallys would reject w/out thinking
He has proved once again the rejectionist motif of the Arabs which will maintain the status quo and, as a result, development and some expansion will continue
Obama has to learn that he can only OFFER his advice but cannot run our country
Of course the next unfortunate question is ‘when will the next round of severe violence/war occur’?
Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:17 pm Denying Israel's Right to Exist
Denying Israel's Right to Exist Is No Basis for a Settlement - Editorial (The Australian)
http://www.theaustralian.news......82,00.html
Not everybody got the message in Barack Obama's Cairo speech, that Middle East peace requires compromise. The Israelis did, demonstrated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech on Sunday proposing a new peace process. In return for accepting Israel as a Jewish nation, he offered the Palestinians a two-state solution.
But Israel's opponents are not having any of it. The Palestinian Authority says Netanyahu's speech "torpedoed" peace initiatives. This was a pointless, posturing response which reflects the mentality of those members of the Palestinian political elite who prefer nihilism to negotiation and are happier denouncing Israel than dealing with it. And it reflects the mindset of those who want Israel treated as a pariah and who attempt to intimidate any individual or organization that accepts the Jewish state's right to exist.
The sheer venom of Israel's enemies demonstrates how hard it will be for President Obama to broker a deal. Israel wants peace, albeit not at any price. Netanyahu will only accept a deal which acknowledges the country as a Jewish state and which ensures its security against terror attack, outright invasion or obliteration by Iran, where the re-elected Ahmadinejad regime makes no secret of its nuclear ambitions.
In rejecting Netanyahu's proposal, the Palestinian leadership is betraying its people who need a permanent peace and functioning economy.
On Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu delivered a detailed speech in which he hailed President Obama's "desire to bring about a new era of reconciliation in our region." He said he was "willing to meet" with Arab leaders "at any time, at any place, in Damascus, in Riyadh, in Beirut and in Jerusalem as well" to make peace. He invited Arab entrepreneurs to "assist the Palestinians and us to give the economy a jump-start." He committed his government to all of Israel's international agreements. He said "we have no intention to build new settlements or set aside land for new settlements." "In my vision of peace," he said, "there are two free peoples living side by side in this small land, with good neighborly relations and mutual respect, each with its flag, anthem and government, with neither one threatening its neighbor's security and existence."
To this, the Palestinian reaction was to say the speech was "worthless," "nothing but a hoax," that it had "destroyed all peace initiatives and [chances for] a solution," and that Mr. Netanyahu was "a liar and a crook." And that was the reaction among the Palestinian moderates.
The transformation of the Gaza Strip into an armed and hostile Hamas enclave is evidence enough of why any future Palestinian state would have to be demilitarized. Nor should the thought of Israel as a Jewish state be controversial: That's how it was conceived by the UN resolution that helped bring it into existence, and that's how it was recognized by Harry Truman minutes after it declared independence.
For too long the Palestinians have practiced a kind of fantasy politics, in which all right was on their side, concession was dishonor, and mistakes never had consequences. Mr. Netanyahu's speech now offers them the choice between fantasy and statehood. Judging from early reactions, they're choosing wrongly again.
********************************************
Great -- someone else agrees with me and Michael !! db
View previous topic • View next topic 
