Ask these three questions if you really want peace.
Salah Abu Miala, a Hebron businessman, traveled to Bahrain to attend the Bahrain peace conference. When he returned home, he was arrested by the Palestinian Authority.
A security official for the Islamic terror group admitted that there was no actual charge.
“It was a warning,” he said. “He must understand the implications of this sort of collaboration.”
Collaboration with the United States. The country that set up the PA and lavished billions in aid on it.
Another businessman managed to evade the crackdown on peace conference attendees.
The Palestinian Authority had not only boycotted the peace conference, but it arrested participants in the peace conference, and warned that participating in the peace conference was collaboration.
Collaboration, under Palestinian Authority law, can be punishable by death.
The message is that the Palestinian Authority really doesn’t want peace. It has sabotaged peace conferences under Clinton, Bush, Obama, and now Trump. Every approach running the same narrow gamut from pressuring Israel to bribing the Palestinian Authority has been tried. They all end the same.
Just ask Salah who was locked up for attending a peace conference.
The pattern here is so obvious that it would take a diplomat or a politician to miss it. That’s why we’ve been mired in it for so long. And the billions of dollars wasted and thousands of lives lost could have been saved if only our leaders had questioned their premises by asking three simple questions.
1. What if the Palestinians don’t want peace?
2. What if there are no Palestinians?
3. What if there’s no such thing as peace?
The three assumptions, that the Palestinians exist, that they want peace, and that enduring peace is an attainable condition in the region, are at the root of the senselessly Sisyphean peace process.
The peace process was launched under the assumption that the PLO really wanted peace. Or at least a deal. Surely, our best and brightest agreed, they couldn’t possibly want an endless war.
And so, the truth was dismissed out of hand. It was too horrible to believe.
Decades of failed negotiations, rafts of Israel concessions, personal involvement by five presidential administrations, billions of dollars, with nothing to show for it, and the truth is still dismissed.
Instead, the official story is that Israel doesn’t want peace. The media echo chamber resounds with a narrative in which Israel has moved sharply to the right and is run by ultra-orthodox religious fanatics.
And Netanyahu, who is hardly anyone’s idea of an ultra-religious fanatic.
Also, the most right-wing party in the last Israeli election ran on a platform of marijuana legalization.
But it’s easier to claim that Israel doesn’t want peace than that the Palestinian Authority doesn’t. If Israel doesn’t want peace, that just goes to show that it’s a bad actor and must forced for its own good. If the Palestinian Authority doesn’t want peace, then the whole political premise of the process dies.
Israeli misbehavior can always be met with economic and political pressure. If the PA doesn’t want peace on any terms, that means it was never really a government, just a front for a terror group.
And that terror group became vastly more powerful and dangerous because of the peace process.
Before the peace process, the idea that the PLO might not want peace seemed implausible. In the post-peace process, the idea is an explosive scandal whose culpability extends through the political establishments of dozens of countries, including America and Israel. And so, it can’t be talked about.
Why did so many experts come to believe, against all evidence, that the PLO wanted peace? The error came about because the establishment had accepted the PLO’s propaganda that it was leading a national struggle to set up a state on behalf of a population of displaced and oppressed people.
The truth was that Palestine, as an Arab cultural minority as opposed to a defunct Roman colony, was as much of a mythical invention as the Islamic State with its Caliph. Like ISIS, Hezbollah and countless Islamic terror groups around the region, the terror group tapped into grievances among a local minority, invented an identity for them, and, backed by foreign donors, launched a campaign to “liberate” them.
There are dozens of similar enterprises going on in the region at any given time. They don’t enjoy the same level of support and recognition as the PLO does. None of them can actually run a state. Or want to. But neither does anyone else in the region. That’s why it’s always on the verge of exploding.
That brings us to the third assumption.
Peace as the natural state of the world is an exciting European delusion from just after one war and then another war that devastated the continent. There is as little evidence for this idea in human history as there is for the existence of a Palestinian kingdom, empire or anthill. And even less evidence for either the existence of peace or the Palestinians in its own region which has never experienced either one.
Even in Europe, the inevitability of peace keeps being interrupted by wars every generation. There are soldiers in the streets of Paris, where the first League of Nations meeting was held, fighting the war that France failed to fight in Algeria. After reviling the Pied-Noirs, the French are two generations away from becoming a nation of Pied-Noirs themselves, fleeing to Montreal to escape the Battle of Paris.
Peace is not the natural condition of mankind. It is a lovely thing that sometimes happens.
Generations of western diplomats keep stumbling into disasters because they believe that peace is inevitable. Therefore, the other side is bound to want it, because it wants the same things they do.
They never ask the terrible question, what if the other side wants something else?
Our foreign policy keeps falling apart because we never ask that question. We take the other side’s claims at face value and view them through the flawed lens of our own wants and needs. We want peace; therefore, they must want it too. We want the killing to stop, how could they not?
No matter how many times peace fails, the fundamental assumptions are never questioned.
What if instead of negotiating with a national minority that wants land for its own state, we’ve been funding an Islamic terror group that was set up by the USSR to destabilize the region?
Which of these two possibilities better explains the history of failures in the peace process?
If the Palestinian Authority were a terror group set up by the USSR to destabilize the region, undermine Israel’s existence, and drag America into a messy conflict, what would it be doing differently?
Nothing.
There’s no solution here. There never was. The region is never at peace for longer than a week. When peace can’t even hold between Sunnis and Shiites, how was it supposed to hold between either Muslim group and the Jews? The Arab Spring reminded us that every state in the region is just one crackup away from splitting apart into a civil war. What made anyone think that a terror group could create a state?
Or that it even wanted to.
We can solve the problem that five administrations have struggled with if we reevaluate our flawed assumptions about the world, the Palestinian Authority and the fictional people it represents.
All we have to do is ask the right three questions.
CRUSADER says
Such a strife driven part of the world.
And, the Muslim Arabs don’t help one bit.
They keep pushing their “palestinian” DELUSION !
Samoa is a place residents are trying to find peace without Islam….
But, of course, there is always some Muzzie with a mouth:
“Muslim in Samoa speaks out” ~
https://www.samoaobserver.ws/category/samoa/19081
The Head of the Muslim League in Samoa, Dr. Muhammad Yahya, is confident that the government will not yield to a call from the National Council of Churches (N.C.C.) to ban Islam in Samoa.
Dr. Muhammad, also known as Laulu Dan Stanley, said the call places Samoa in the same light as extremists in the United States of America, especially supporters of Donald Trump, who are calling for a ban on Muslims.
“This is a way of inhuman thinking,” he said. “They are acting like herds. One man makes a decision and they run like cows.”
Dr. Muhammad make the comments in response to questions from the Samoa Observer about the call made by the Secretary General of the National Council of Churches, Reverend Ma’auga Motu, to ban Islam.
Embracing an indication from Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi to review the religious freedom provisions of the Constitution, Rev. Motu, of the Congregational Christian Church of Samoa said he would go a step further and ban the religion of Islam, saying it poses a threat to the country.
“We are not going too far, no,” Reverend Motu is quoted as saying.
“We are still wanting our own people to be prevented from this kind of influence, even though there are so many people who are good people but still there are some dangerous people among them who might come and threaten our peace.”
According to the 2011 census, 98% of the Samoan population is Christian.
The remainder consists of Hindus, Buddhists and Jews, mainly based around the capital city. But there is also a remarkably small community of Muslim people, consisting of roughly 120 people.
According to Rev. Motu, this miniscule minority that has established itself in Samoa more than 25 years ago, is a threat.
But this is not true, according to Imam, Dr. Muhammad, who said Rev. Motu’s fears are misplaced, guided by the untruths spread on mainstream media and social media platforms.
“That happens because of the media coverage,” he said.
“People nowadays have to separate between religious people and terrorists. If somebody leads a normal life within a normal family, they are no terrorists. But people who start violence against others are.”
Dr. Muhammad admits that there are Muslims who are responsible for deadly attacks around the world. But he said this is “super-minority” and all Muslims cannot be judged by their actions.
As for the call to ban, Islam, Dr. Muhammad said this will not happen.
“They will not achieve the banishment of our religion in Samoa, because that would make them the biggest bunch of hypocrites in this world,” he said.
“They don’t want to accept Islam and therefore they don’t want to accept this line of Abraham, and at the same time, they say they’re Christians.
“Rather should they start rethinking these issues and follow examples from other parts of our world.
“Chancellor Merkel in Germany is not looking at all those people coming to her country as Muslims, but as human beings with rights. Although she is a political leader, she is more human than the so-called leaders of our churches here.
“As human beings, we have rights in our community as well.”
The right that the Imam was talking about is guaranteed in the Constitution of Samoa.
The fact that there are talks going on about changing the country’s Constitution because of a small group of Muslim people led Dr. Muhammad to ask another important question.
“Just look at the prisons of this country. I ask you: do you find any Muslim in a Samoan prison?”
Dr. Muhammad has found support from a Samoan academic who warned that it could be a dangerous move to prohibit a religion in Samoa’s Constitution.
Professor Iati Iati from the University of Otago said the pervasiveness of Christianity in Samoa was one of the reasons for the country’s stability, and the faith is fully integrated into the political and cultural structures.
But he said Samoa would be treading down a dangerous path to ban other faiths.
“I think the writers of the Samoa constitution were wise beyond their years and I don’t think the government should be meddling with the constitution. I think it’s pretty good as it is.”
Dr. John Shaver from the University of Otago said that in places where minority groups were that small, it was easy for ignorance to spread.
“The problem is a lack of information and when your personal experiences don’t often lead you to interactions with peaceful Muslims then you rely on the media,” he said.
“And we know that positive examplars of minority groups in the media are capable of reducing prejudice.”
jarmanray says
Crusader,
Thank you for this article and having traveled to Samoa several times, I found the men to be rather on the large size but some of the most gentle people anywhere in the world. The families still have remnants of the long cabin attitude where the entire family lived in a single dwelling and the family hierarchy was well established. When I was there, even in Apia, there were no street addresses. One would simply ask a taxi to take you to a specific residency. The only time one finds a Samoan in battle is on the rugby pitch and even the Wallabies and All Blacks fear them. The last thing that this wonderful island needs is a cult hell bent on destroying everything beautiful and a people who welcome visitors with open arms. I almost forgot, Robert Louis Stevens is buried on a hill top just outside of Apia.
CRUSADER says
Samoans also fill the ranks of football teams in USA
and have played in the NFL at ratios far exceeding their
population levels. However, they just work hard and smile.
They don’t bitch and get influenced into inflaming situations
the way BLM followers have done. Many of the Samoan
players remain professional….and….GRATEFUL.
Christian ways have merged well with Samoan ethnic culture.
terry sullivan says
cut all aid
gravenimage says
+1
Anjuli Pandavar says
This is by far the best piece of writing I’ve read on JW. Cuts to the chase, calls a spade a spade, spares no tender feelings and suffers no illusions. Thank you, Daniel.
CRUSADER says
Daniel Greenfield is a warrior in his own right.
Magnificent writer who deeply knows the situation, and tells it.
“Peace is not the natural condition of mankind.
It is a lovely thing that sometimes happens.”
Israel has developed well.
Worth visiting sooner in life, rather than at later ages.
You’ll be glad to do so. It’ll give you chances to repeat trips!
Be sure also to visit Friends of Zion / FOZ museum:
https://www.fozmuseum.com
gravenimage says
Yes–Daniel Greenfield is an important Anti-Jihadist.
Oldone says
I thought I was the only one who saw the “real problems”!!!…There is no sovereign state of Palestine, therefore there can be no people who are called Palestinians…There are only Arabs, mosty Jordanian, and Syrian, by ethnic heritage, who refused the Israeli invitation to “Stay and help us build the sovereign nation of Israel”, in the late ’40’s…They made themselves refugees….The Jewish state had nothing to do with it…The so called, “Palestinian Organizations”, do NOT want peace…If peace was somehow achieved, the PLO and all the other “organizations”, would be out of business…No more power…No more Treasury to pilfer…No more luxury lifestyle…No more invitations to the big “Player Tables”…No more world pity, to mine for money, and allies…Peace is not their business…Strife, War, and Terrorism are their businesses…They should be moved to the “Other Arab” nations, and financially supported by their oil rich Arab brothers…Gaza and the East Bank should be taken over by Israel, and turned into great places to live, whose main purpose, should become, the raising of families, instead of rocket launching sites…All Western aid should be terminated…Immediately,,,
mortimer says
A LITTLE HISTORY OF THE NAME ‘PALESTINE’:
Arabs always referred to the region (now Israel) as LOWER SYRIA. The Arabs called the Jewish settlers “Palestinians” because they were pushing for a new country they would form out of Mandatory Palestine, the name given to it by Britain and the League of Nations.
The new Emirate of Trans-Jordan did not even use the name Palestine, because it was associated with the Jews.
The Arabs showed their thinking when Trans-Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1948. Great Britain recognized the annexation in an act of perfidy. Only three countries recognized the annexation.
Arabs continued to use the name ‘Palestine’ because they refused to admit there could ever be a Jewish state.
After promising to create a Jewish state, Great Britain dragged its feat and continued to make it difficult to realize. There should never have been any question of Israel using the same borders as were decided by UK in 1930 when Trans-Jordan was sliced off of Mandatory Palestine. The West Bank was intended as part of the Jewish national home.
mortimer says
The West Bank is JUDEA … the home of the Tribe of Judah. Judeans were the leading tribe in ancient Israel. Jews take their name from Judah and Judea. Israel without Judea is not logical, since Judea is the original homeland of Jews.
Tom says
“There’s no solution here. There never was. The region is never at peace for longer than a week. When peace can’t even hold between Sunnis and Shiites, how was it supposed to hold between either Muslim group and the Jews?” Exactly!!!
The conflicts between Shia and Sunni are based, as are all of the conflicts in which Muslims are involved directly, on the religion of Islam.
So it is with the Palestinians and their hatred of Israel. That is why there will never be any real will on the part of the Palestinians to negotiate a peaceful solution with Israel.
Walter Sieruk says
Before and at the start and founding of the modern State of Israel in 1948 all people in lived in the area of land in the Middle East , be they Arabs or Jews, when by the title of “Palestinian.” Only much later did the Arab/Muslims start to apply the title of “Palestinian’ only to themselves ,as if they felt by giving that title excursively to themselves that might give them some kind of “valid” claim to that land ,in the eyes of the world.
In reality there is no distinct racial or ethnic people who may truly be called “The Palestinians.”
Walter Sieruk says
A few years ago I met and talked with a man who was both an Arab and a Muslim as he called himself a “Palestinian.” He told to me that he was born in the town of Bethlehem therefore he was sure, since he was born there he was “a natural native of that land and has a right to all that land.”
Just to think about his claim ,its absurd. For example if a married couple of Europeans would travel to China to live the rest of their lives . After obtaining Chinese citizenship the had a baby in China in a town in China. That baby might grow up having Chinese citizenship as well as speak and write the language of China, nevertheless , he would not really be real Chinese person as well as not having the right to all of China.
Like it or not , to but this an another way “If my cat had kittens in the oven I wouldn’t believe that the kittens where actually muffins .”
Likewise, that claim by the Arab /Muslim I met was and is an invalid claim.
Walter Sieruk says
Real ,genuine lasting peace in the State of Israel between the Jews and the Arab/Muslims,who call themselves the “Palestinians,” is not possible because of their religion of Islam
As, the Bible in Psalm 55:20, 21. Reads “Such men do violence to those at peace with them and break their promised word; their speech is smoother the butter but their thoughts are of war.” [N.E.B.]
James says
It seems to me that peace between Israel and the Muslims will be long in the future if it occurs. The people in Yugoslavia could not get along, even though they were basically the same in culture and language. The people in Northern Ireland are basically the same ethnic group, and have a similar culture and language. And the Islamic religion seems to have such a long history of totalitarianism, it would be hard to imagine them ever accepting a Jewish state in the Near East, even if there were a Palestinian state next to Israel. And really the two world wars do not seem to have been necessary either, the combatants all had basically the same civilization, if one looks at it generally. Or the American Civil War. All unnecessary wars. Someone told me that the moderate Muslims would make peace, and probably they would, but who would give them a chance? Probably not Hamas or the PA or Iran. So, I would say the author seems to be right, although I am no judge.
gravenimage says
I think you need to look into the concept of Jihad, James. Muslims are not going to live in peace with anyone, Jews least of all.
There would be peace in the Middle East if the Muslims stopped waging violent Jihad.
Angemon says
As Ion Mihai Pacepa, former chief of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Romania, stated:
gravenimage says
So true.
Mr. Cohen says
Three articles answer this question:
Who are the Palestinians?
http://www.jns.org/opinion/the-invention-of-palestinians/
http://www.algemeiner.com/2019/02/14/the-invention-of-palestinians/
https://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/2018/06/who-are-palestinians.html
gravenimage says
Peace Doesn’t Exist – Nor Do the Palestinians
………………………..
What is being done to Salah Abu Miala shows how much the “Palestinian” Muslims want peace.
Mark Swan says
Thank you Mr. Greenfield,
Concise, clear—fresh air.