FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

The Dry Bones Blog alternates new cartoons with old ones. Often one gets the feeling that nothing changes over the years except the faces.

Anyway, today’s cartoon is from 1994:

But for once I find myself disagreeing with Mr. Dry Bones. No, not in the sense that no leadership could be less competent than Israel’s — to disprove that, just look at the US.

What I do think is that — given its goals — the Palestinian leadership is quite competent.

What are these goals? One of them is to build up Palestinian military strength. Both Fatah and Hamas are wildly successful in this area, Fatah with American support and Hamas with help from Iran.

Another goal is to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state and economy in anything less than all of ‘Palestine’, for if this were to occur, there might be something to distract young Palestinian men from the struggle to destroy Israel.

To this end, Fatah refuses to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and insists of a right of return for descendants of Arab refugees. Hamas, always more direct, perpetrates suicide bombings and mortar attacks against border crossings just in case Gaza residents get any ideas about economic activity other than rocket science.

A third goal is to keep the pot of hatred and racism boiling so that any attempts at compromise which might lead to a peaceful two-state solution can’t get off the ground, and so that there will be a plentiful supply of martyrs, especially young ones. Both Fatah and Hamas keep up a campaign of vicious incitement against Jews and Israel, despite the fact that Fatah is supposedly a ‘partner’. Hamas’ indoctrination of children is particularly vile.

Just like the way the Arab nations have kept the Palestinian refugees miserable for 60 years, the Palestinian leadership does its best to keep its people miserable (except for their relatives), angry and full of hate.

This supports their true goal, the goal that all Palestinian leaders since Haj Amin al-Husseini have worked toward: the elimination of the Jewish presence in the Middle East.

Incompetent? Not at all.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Palestinians, Israeli-Arab conflict

I’ve written over and over about the way the US forces Israel to make concrete concessions to the Palestinian Authority (PA) which damage security, and in return get…nothing. Or get more terrorism. I’m not the only one that thinks this:

Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin has warned that continuing to ease restrictions on the Palestinians while the separation fence remains [incomplete] puts Israel at risk. According to Diskin, the completion of the eastern barrier must be considered before making any decisions on additional gestures.

Diskin made the remarks several days after Defense Minister Ehud Barak presented US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with a 35-page booklet containing gestures to the Palestinians. — YNet

“Gestures” include the removal of roadblocks, the transfer of armored cars (bought with US money) to the PA, reduced restrictions on Palestinian ‘policemen’ (often moonlighting as terrorists), an increase in the number of Palestinians allowed to work in Israel, etc. The gestures are supposed to smooth the way to a peace deal with the PA.

How many times do we need to note that

1. The Fatah-dominated PA cannot make an agreement that would be acceptable to Israel, because they cannot agree to give up the right of return for refugees or recognize Israel as a Jewish state;
2. Even if they could, they could not deliver an end to terrorism because they do not even control their own terrorists of the al-Aqsa brigades, never mind Hamas;
3. Arming and training their ‘security forces’ to ‘fight terrorism’ is absurd because these forces have no interest in fighting anybody but Israel;
4. Arming them is stupid because it’s likely the arms will end up in the hands of Hamas as they did in Gaza;
5. The only support that Fatah has from Palestinians today is from the ones that they pay, with American money, to support them.

The ‘gestures’ that are demanded by the US to support the pointless negotiations — which all sides know will go nowhere — weaken Israeli defenses against the terrorism that the PA is incapable of stopping. And there have already been terrorist penetrations in areas that roadblocks have been removed.

So why does the US demand that Israel remove roadblocks instead of demanding that the PA actually do something to fight terrorism (like disarming their own al-Aksa Brigades gunmen)?

One reason is that the US actually can force Israel to do something. The PA, since it has no influence and no real power, and because its security forces are ridden with terrorists, cannot be forced to do anything except make promises.

Another reason is that the Saudi-influenced ‘realist’ faction in the US government which is now dictating Middle east policy thinks that it is far more important to show that it is fulfilling Kissinger’s 1975 promise to the Arabs that Israel will go back to the pre-1967 borders than it is in reducing Palestinian terrorism.

Another way to put this is to say that the goal of US policy toward Israel and the Palestinians is not to end the conflict and bring peace — and we can see that the policy does not lead in this direction — but simply to get Israel out of the territories.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Palestinian Authority

Israeli Minister of Defense Ehud Barak:

“The northern front is especially sensitive, but Israel has no interest in deterioration,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Saturday night. “The other side knows this and according to our assessments they too have no interest in deterioration.” — Jerusalem Post

So who is “the other side” ?

If he means Syria, he’s probably correct. They have the most to lose. But what is Iran’s interest? My thinking about Hezbollah is that it is a creature of Iran and doesn’t have independent volition. In that case, Nasrallah’s recent threats are Iranian threats.

Therefore, in order to avoid war, Israel needs to have a deterrent that is credible against Iran.

In simple terms, the Iranian leadership must believe that an attack on Israel by Iranian proxies will result in a counterstrike against Iran that will do unacceptable damage.

It doesn’t help to strike the proxies alone. For example, if Hezbollah attacks Israel, and Israel thinks that Syria will support Hezbollah by missile strikes, Israel will bomb missile installations in Syria to prevent their use. So Syria will think carefully about the consequences of such a path, and will only take it if the probability of success is very high.

But what is the cost to Iran of unleashing the Hezbollah proxy that she has nurtured? In 2006, it was only money.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Syria, Hezbollah, Iran