MILNET Brief
Beres on the Mideast
"Irony still surrounds the Road Map to peace in the Middle East. Should
this deadly plan create the impression that it can put a halt to
Palestinian terrorism... "
- Louis Rene Beres
|

Avoiding The `Road Map` After Arafat By Louis Rene Beres
The Jewish Press - 12/15/2004
Arafat is gone, but the "Road Map" remains. Indeed, regarding Israel`s
continuance in the Middle East, absolutely nothing has changed in the
Palestinian Authority or in the Arab world generally. Notwithstanding
President Bush`s explicit plea for a "Two State Solution," the PA and
its allies still see only one state. This State of Palestine would
include all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and ALL of the rest of Israel.
So why should Israel follow the Road Map, a route leading directly to
its own extinction? Cartographically, Israel is already the victim of
an Arab genocide. Why, then, should the leaders and people of Israel
now permit the Arabs to proceed from maps to flesh and blood
annihilation?
Irony still surrounds the Road Map to peace in the Middle East. Should
this deadly plan create the impression that it can put a halt to
Palestinian terrorism — perhaps by carefully coordinated Arab
orchestration of a temporary halt to terror violence — Israel would
then be under increasing pressure to accept a Palestinian state. This
is especially the case if Prime Minister Sharon should proceed
simultaneously with his declared policy of "disengagement" from Gaza.
To be sure, once codified, the new enemy state of Palestine would move
as soon as practicable to implement final stages of the never-withdrawn
1974 PLO "Phased Plan" for Israel`s dismemberment.
For Israel, the Road Map is a "lose-lose" proposition. If the
post-Arafat Palestinian Authority cannot prevent further acts of
anti-Israel terror (or remains itself actively committed to such acts),
the Jewish state will still suffer inhumane attacks upon its civilians.
If, however, the post-Arafat PA can and will reign in Hamas, Islamic
Jihad and several militant Fatah factions — that is, if it can be
"successful" — a permanent Palestinian terror state will almost
certainly be established in Judea, Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza. This
state of "Palestine" will create several new levels of security
nightmare for Israel, including a mobilizing point of hostility for
"Israeli Arabs" and a launching point for future WMD aggressions
against Jewish populations.
It would be very hard for Israel to deny claims for Arab
self-determination in the West Bank/Gaza if the Palestinians were to
show "good faith" by stopping their wanton murders of Jewish women and
children. The world would never allow Israel to stand in the way of a
Palestinian state in such seemingly conciliatory circumstances. Surely
not when Israel`s Prime Minister himself continues to speaks openly in
terms of uprooting Jewish settlements.
It is conceivable, of course, that Israel could somehow coexist with a
Palestinian state, and that a "successful" Road Map might not
necessarily finalize Israel`s demise. After all, the creation of this
state would give Palestinian terrorists a precise and readily
identifiable "address," a situation wherein Israel would gain certain
tactical benefits not presently available. In terms of worldwide public
opinion, Israel`s counter-terrorism operations could then be mounted
with fewer fears of condemnation as there could be reduced civilian
Palestinian casualties. This would be the case if at least the new Arab
government chose to comply with humanitarian international law. Here,
optimistically, with enemy belligerents now in the identifiable uniform
of a regular Palestinian army and no longer criminally secreted among
Arab civilians, the Israel Defense Force could be freed from very
dangerous and widely unpopular forms of counter-terrorism. But there
are other predictable aspects of a Palestinian state that must now be
carefully understood. For one, Israel`s own Arab populations would
surely begin to operate more vigorously as a fifth column, offering
loyalty and more to their brethren in "Palestine." It is altogether
unlikely that Israeli Arabs would actually want to move to th! e new
state, but Palestine would still provide an institutionalized focus for
a new sort of intifada. This would be a steadily-expanding Arab
rebellion within the Jewish homeland itself.
In living with "Palestine," Israel would need to take various effective
measures to ensure that an Israeli-Arab fifth column does not pose
intolerable security costs. These costs would include not only direct
terror violence against Israeli Jews, but also carefully calculated
interference with IDF mobilization plans in any future war. The fifth
column which would almost certainly be spawned by a Palestinian state
could even endanger Israel`s physical survival. It follows that if a
state of Palestine is declared, Israeli efforts at security would have
to focus more fully not only on the new enemy country, but also on a
significant fraction of Israel`s own population.
If one believes that we in the United States have a homeland security
problem, it pales beside what would happen to Israel immediately
following the creation of a Palestinian state. This issue could even
pose the single most serious existential hazard of a Palestinian state
to Israel. It could involve essential infringements on Israeli-Arab
civil liberties and a resultant backlash of Israeli-Arab terrorism
and/or still wider Arab/Islamic wars of aggression.
The Arab world is presently comprised of 22 states containing nearly
five million square miles and 144 million people. The wider Islamic
world contains 44 states with more than 1 billion people. These Islamic
states comprise an area 672 times the size of Israel. The State of
Israel, with a population of about five million Jews, would fit two
times into Lake Michigan. The Sinai Desert, which Israel ceded to Egypt
in the 1979 treaty in exchange for vague and still unfulfilled promises
of "friendship," is itself three times larger than the entire State of
Israel.
Maps tell much of the story. Just a brief glance at maps of the Midd!
le East reveal, on their face, the inherent contradictions of
Palestinian claims and expectations. Nonetheless, it is probably too
late for pointing out the obvious, and Israel will surely have to base
its future security on the particular way it chooses to deal with the
Road Map.
As outright rejection, the best way, is perhaps no longer possible,
Prime Minister Sharon should now acknowledge that a "successful" Road
Map would provide the very worst route for Israel and promptly re-think
his own perilous plan for "disengagement." From the standpoint of
American interests in the region, it is clear that a Palestinian state
would be entirely injurious and should now be opposed in all of its
possible forms. Although such recognition would represent an abrupt
about-face from existing policy, the indisputable alternative would be
the birth of yet another anti-American terror regime in the Middle
East.
Immediately after Arafat`s burial, a groundswell of Palestinian
support! emerged for mass-murderer Marwan Barghouti as his successor.
Now serving multiple life sentences in an Israeli jail for
masterminding the burning, maiming and slaughtering of defenseless
Jewish men, women and children, Barghouti would bring to a Palestinian
state the only leadership criterion cherished on every Arab street;
that is, a relentless commitment to bring another "Final Solution" to
the Middle East. Exactly what kind of people would want Barghouti as
their "President?" The obvious answer speaks volumes about the Road Map
and its inevitable destination. ?
© Copyright 2004, The Jewish Press Inc.
(ISSN 0021-6674). First published in The Jewish Press. All
rights reserved, used with the Author's permission