(Continued from p.6)
and further weaken the peace process "
"Our most loyal democratic allies in the region should not be punished with threats and ultimatums, but given our fullest confidence as they attempt to balance their mutual needs of peace and security. America's best assistance can be offered as a facilitator, not a bully. Your administration must reevaluate its policy in this area."
At the same press conference, Rep. Bill Paxon (R-NY) released a similar, cautionary letter to the President signed by a bipartisan group of over 218 Members of Congress--more than a majority of the House of Representatives. It reminded Mr. Clinton that: "[Then-Secretary of State Warren] Christopher made a written commitment that it would be up to Israel to decide the size and scope of further redeployment of Israeli forces on the West Bank. Public presentation of an American plan .... especially one that includes a specific redeployment figure beyond what Israel believes to be prudent to its national security, before final status agreements, runs counter to Secretary Christopher's commitment and can only undermine Israel's confidence."
Another letter was sent to Congress last month by 81 Republican and Democratic Senators. It made, among others, the following, telling point: "Chairman Arafat may hope that American frustration with the pace of the process will lead to an American decision to force even more from Israel. Instead, the United States should quietly accept Israel's latest offer and move to final status negotiations."
The Real Problem with the Peace Process
In the final analysis, no amount of pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu or his government will make possible a real and lasting peace. For, in the absence of a commitment on the part of the Palestinian leadership --and on the part of many among their followers--to peaceful co-existence with Israel, Mr. Clinton's "peace process" can only lead to the conditions called for in the PLO's 1974 "Plan of Phases": the creation through negotiation of a Palestinian state or base of operations (Phase 1) from which the ultimate campaign to liberate the rest of "Palestine" (i.e., pre-1967 Israel--Phase 2) can be launched.
Evidence of this abiding objective is to be
found not only in speeches made by Arafat and his
lieutenants. It is also apparent from the maps of
"Palestine" used incessantly by the Palestinian Authority--on
the uniforms of its "police forces"; as backdrops to its
social and cultural events, its television broadcasts and
official ceremonies; and as the structure of a forty-foot
memorial to the "martyrs" (read, terrorists) for the cause of
liberating Palestine. Worst of all, the PA uses this map in
its textbooks to teach Palestinian Arab children a
message obvious even to those who cannot read: The
goal remains the destruction of the State of Israel.
The Bottom Line
The Clinton-Albright ultimatum should be formally rescinded even before it is rejected by the government of Israel. Failing the former, the second must occur. Let the Israelis look to their security. And let Israel's true friends among the American people and Members of Congress look to protecting the critical U.S.-Israeli relationship from the dire straits to which the Clinton administration, misguided peace activists and Arabists at home and abroad, seem determined to condemn it.
Frank Gaffney, Jr. is director of the Center for Security Policy, a Washington, D.C-based think tank.
(Continued from p.3)
of Zion as anything other than an embarrassment for anti-Zionists. So they have seized onto a new propaganda tactic, complaining that the Jews are Oh So Mean and Cruel and Bullies. At long last--to be accused of being bullies! To leave the anti-Semites with no more effective weapon than heaping invective upon the mean Jews. For this one must say a blessing. And often. It is Zionism's greatest achievement.Professor Steven Plaut teaches economics at Haifa University.
(Continued from p.10)
Smithsonian cancelled."If the quote is true, Mr. Harel should be bounced from the settler movement and referred for psychiatric treatment. We are guilty as charged, and darn proud of it, that we helped get the Smithsonian to cancel the New Israel Fund's program. However, we had nothing to do with setting off any alarms, except those in the media which alerted people to the leftist, anti-Israel bias of the New Israel Fund. If vandalism were our wont, we would turn on the sprinklers, but in fact, the participants at that event were all wet to begin with.
June 1998 - 11 - Outpost