Beyond the Cusp

January 10, 2012

Land for Peace Should Read Land or Peace

The really big news is once again the Palestinian-Israeli peace talks are on, well, at least for one meeting this past week. The rumors of a scheduled meeting for this week actually did occur but, if past performances are any indication, we cannot count on these meetings continuing much further, especially with the threats from Hamas and Islamic Jihad to cancel their reunification with the Palestinian authority and joining the PLO. As usual the discussion in the press and political circles immediately went to the debate on how a land for peace deal could be worked out. There have been the debates about where the borders might be set, whether or not Jerusalem will be divided, how many Israelis will have to be dispossessed of their homes having their entire lives uprooted and thrown into chaos, and how many Palestinians might be granted the Right of Return by Israel all to reach the signing of a treaty and peace. The entire discussion is simply a lie. There is no such thing as peace no matter how much land Israel surrenders unless they surrender the totality of the land that is Israel and every Israeli Jew starts treading water in the Mediterranean Sea. The proof of this is in the history and recent issues have come to a point of proof that Land for Peace is a fallacy.

The original land for peace offering was made at the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 when the United Nations made their suggestion that there be an Arab and a Jewish state formed out of the lands between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. England had already taken over three quarters of the British Mandate lands which had been set aside for the Jewish State of Israel and formed the intended Palestinian Arab State of Jordan which was given to the Hashemites to rule as a reward for their support of the British in World War I. This was a sort of consolation prize for the Hashemites as they had lost their control and rule over the Holy Muslim Cities of Mecca and Medina to the Saud family. So, from the very start of the state of Israel the Jews had surrendered additional lands for the Arabs to have a nation just so they could have any part of their historic homelands. The Arab and Muslim worlds refused the offer and immediately waged an all-out war intended to result in the genocide of the Jews and the erasure of the nascent Jewish State. This was the first time Israel agreed to give up land for peace and instead received violence and war for their efforts.

Once again, in 1956 as a result of the military operations with France and England against the nationalization of the Suez Canal by then Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, Israel had gained land which they returned receiving guarantees of peace from Egypt backed by the promises of the United States, England, France, and the United Nations. This peace was enforced by United Nations forces which were placed in the Sinai Peninsula which were to prevent the concentration by Egypt of troops on the border with Israel. When in 1967 Egypt had decided the time was right for another military attempt to destroy the Jewish State President Nasser demanded the removal of the United Nations forces in order to allow his military free movement where he massed them on their border with Israel. During the ensuing war, it was rumored that there was a temporary cease fire called during the fighting in Gaza to allow a train full of United Nations peacekeeping troops from India to pass safely between the warring forces by train. By the end of the fighting, when the United Nations forced a stoppage of the fighting, Israel had once again taken full control of Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula on the Egyptian front, Judea and Samaria (West Bank) on the Jordanian front, and the Golan Heights on the Syrian front. Israel continued to control these lands through the surprise attack which initiated the Yom Kippur War which lasted from October 6 to 25, 1973. When Egypt and Israel signed their peace treaty on March 26, 1979, Israel once again returned the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt in a land for peace agreement though Egypt quit any claim to Gaza leaving it under Israeli control. Israel is now facing serious questions whether or not the coming Egyptian leadership resulting from the Arab Winter (Spring) revolutions as the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafists, and other Islamists appear to have won three quarters or more of the seats in the coming Egyptian Parliament. It is currently very likely that Israel giving land for peace will again result in Israel giving land without getting a permanent and lasting peace.

In another case, Israel interceded in the Lebanese civil war in 1982 and retained a buffer zone in southern Lebanon which also served as a safe zone for the Lebanese Christian Militias. Israel withdrew all their forces and people from southern Lebanon completing the movement on May 24, 2000. Almost immediately, the Hezballah terror organization took control over these areas. This return of land to Lebanon was intended to allow for peaceful relations on this border as the removal of Israeli presence from all of Lebanon removed the presumed cause of the hostilities. The United Nations even gave its approval and stated that Israel had removed their troops and personnel from every inch of Lebanese land which was supposed to satisfy all demands and result in peace along what is referred to as the Blue Line, the recognized border between Israel and Lebanon. This did not prevent Hezballah from claiming that Israel was still occupying Lebanese lands stating the Sheba Farms and Ghajar, a small town straddling the border, belonged to Lebanon and Israel needed to return these lands in order to end hostilities. The Sheba Farms were originally within the Syrian border and were taken and defended in the 1967 and 1973 wars with Syria. Syria has since both claimed the Sheba Farms as Syrian and as having ceded it to Lebanon making for more confusion on these lands. As far as the town of Ghajar is concerned, Israel has met the United Nations compromise agreement and withdrawn their troops, police, and all other personnel and equipment from the northern half of the town. Hezballah still claims that the entire town should be ceded to Lebanon and demands Israel surrender every inch of the claimed lands. Once again we see Israel surrendered land and got no peace.

Perhaps the most glaring example of the futility and nullification of the whole idea of land for peace has been Gaza. In August 2005 Israel disengaged entirely from Gaza completely. They removed all IDF presence, all police forces, over 9,000 Israeli Jews, and reburied every Jew buried in Gaza inside Israel while leaving the greenhouses various other structures to allow the Palestinians to use these items for their own economic gain. Everything left intact was destroyed within weeks, much within hours, and have fired somewhere around ten thousand rocket, mortars, and terror infiltrations since Israel gave the land for peace. Somehow, near daily attacks on civilian areas does not seem like much of a peace, actually it would instigate open warfare if perpetrated against any other nation. Of course, after almost every attack the world demands Israel show restraint and accuse Israel of perpetuating the cycle of violence and responding with unproportional or overwhelming force should Israel retaliate, which has become their policy, an inadequate policy, but policy just the same. Israel removed the Jewish presence from Gaza unilaterally stating their desire that the Palestinian people use their action as an opportunity to showcase the Palestinian ability for self-governing, building a functioning society, and to live peaceably with Israel as their neighbor. The answer is a nondebatable loud and clear “no”.

Thus far, in virtually every instance in which Israel has made compromises, returned lands, ceded control, or made any other offering of peace have been responded to with increased violence, terrorism, bombings, rockets, and mortar fire. History has indicated that when Israel agrees to a treaty based on land for peace they have actually made a land for no peace resulting in open and increased hostilities. Since every withdrawal from lands they held has resulted in attacks which are facilitated to reach deeper into the heart of pre-1967 Israel as the surrendered land allows Israel’s enemies to move their launchers and infiltrators forward into the lands given supposedly for peace. Since giving land for peace has resulted only in allowing attacks to cut deeper into Israel using those same lands, maybe Israel should take what appears as a purely logical step of keeping these same lands in order to keep the violence at greater distance from her people. Had Israel kept a presence in Gaza there would be far fewer rockets landing on Sederot and other populations within the increasing range of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other terrorist rockets and mortars. Had Israel not surrendered the Sinai Peninsula twice, she could probably have prevented the Six Day War and would not be facing a threat of Egyptian troops massed on her border once again after the incoming Egyptian government finds any remotely feasible reason to discard the Camp David Accords. Had Israel not allowed the return of Yasser Arafat and given degrees of autonomy to the Palestinian Authority in Samaria and Judea there would have been no successful intifada which claimed the lives of over a thousand innocent Israeli lives and no running international call for Israel to give the Palestinian authority more land from which to attack Israel. On the one border where Israel has not given any land for peace, the Syrian border where Israel has retained the Golan Heights, on this border Israel has peace. On the Syrian border the Golan Heights act as a sufficient buffer to prevent the return of Syrian snipers who, before Israel took the heights in a defensive war, used to practice their marksmanship by firing at Israeli farmers working their lands below the Golan Heights in the Galilee Valley. The Golan Heights and the relative lack of aggression from the Syrian border is proof that No Land for Peace works.

Beyond the Cusp

Advertisement

1 Comment »

  1. [...] Immelman for CongressVoices of September 11th Praises President Obama and U.S. Military In Bin Laden RaidPJ MediaVA LoansNavy SEAL team 6 rescues US aid worker from SomaliaSEAL Team 6: 5 Key FactsAre Europe’s Muslims America’s problemGerald Celente: Interview With The Daily Bell – The Crisis Of Western Civilization – (TCP)CHICAGOLand for Peace Should Read Land or Peace [...]

    Pingback by Tragedy Within A Bigger Tragedy, Children Of Fallen Tyrants | Living History — January 26, 2012 @ 8:49 PM | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.