The Israeli Death Wish

(Continued from p.3)

However, once Rabin became Prime Minister in 1992, his most conspicuous activity during his three and a half years tenure in office prior to his assassination was to establish an independent sovereign Arab entity in Judea and Samaria. As for the Golan, as late as June 10, 1992, Rabin announced: "It is unthinkable that we, even in peace, will withdraw from the Golan Heights. Anyone who will consider withdrawal from the Golan Heights will jeopardize the security of Israel." A mere two years later, Rabin committed himself to ceding the region to Syria. Asked about the drastic change in his positions, Rabin replied: "Anyone who speaks of peace with Syria with the Golan Heights is telling a lie than which there is no greater."....

When it comes to Shimon Peres, quotations could fill many volumes. Peres never ceased to caution that the lack of strategic depth is an innate structural fault in Israel's geography, because "in the twentieth century with the development of the ability to deploy armies rapidly, the growing importance of the depth of security zones has increased..." If Israel were to abandon its control over Judea and Samaria, wrote Peres, "The absence of minimal territorial expanse will leave Israel in a position of total non-deterrence...and will arouse in the Arabs an irresistible desire to attack and destroy the Jewish state. In wartime, the borders of the Palestinian state will serve as an excellent springboard for mobile forces to immediately advance toward Israel's vital infrastructure, diminish the Israeli Air Force's freedom of action in Israel's air space and cause much bloodshed, using massive artillery barrages from just beyond the border."

In the late 1980s, Peres completely reversed his position and has since then devoted his life to a comprehensive, systematic repudiation of his previously held beliefs. In 1992, he initiated meetings with the PLO which led to the Oslo agreements. He has become the chief proponent for returning Israel to the 1949 borders, dividing Jerusalem and establishing a Palestinian state. In fact, by his own definition, Shimon Peres is working to destroy the State of Israel, as "without defensible borders the state will be annihilated in war."

And what of Benjamin Netanyahu? He based his political path to the Prime Minister's office on negation of the Oslo agreements as an existential disaster for Israel. He expounded his political philosophy in an intelligent, articulate and powerful book which was pub-lished in 1995, one year before the elections that brought him to power. In the introduction, Netanyahu describes Israel's territorial concessions as a nightmare, resulting from the loss of its raison d'etat, physically and spiritually.

"After concessions in territory and power which Israel will actualize by withdrawing to the 1967 lines, after celebratory propaganda ceremonies which will accompany the signing of these withdrawal agreements, the dust which has clouded our grasp of reality will clear and we will be left standing dwarfed and weakened before a bitter and pathetic reality. Then, from around us, the all too familiar demands that we withdraw from territories which we 'conquered illegally' 'in contravention of the partition agreement' will be propounded more powerfully, and internally supporters will be found claiming that we have no rights even to the miniscule land which remains in our possession. This is a process which will necessarily lead either to a new, terrible war or to the liquidation of the State through 'peaceful means.' This is a process which must be halted."

Yet as soon as he entered the prime minister's office, Netanyahu declared that he would continue the previous government's peace process. Indeed, only a few weeks later, he went to Arafat in Gaza and shook his hand. At their Washington D.C. summit meeting, Netanyahu was effusive: "There is complete trust between myself and Mr. Arafat...the ice has been broken...friendship and understanding have been established."

When Netanyahu assumed office, withdrawal from Hebron was a political issue on the agenda of the Peres-Rabin government that had not been resolved. Shortly prior to his election, this is what Netanyahu had to say about Hebron as he celebrated the Passover seder there in 1995. "Whoever abandons Hebron, the most ancient Jewish city in the world, Jerusalem's older sister, will not only neglect the personal security of the Jewish community of Hebron, but betray 4,000 years of Jewish history. Whoever does this, his name will be in eternal infamy in the annals of the Jewish nation."

Yet in January 1997, six months after becoming prime minister, Netanyahu had not only withdrawn from Hebron (even supplying weapons to the Palestinian Authority's police force), but proudly announced: "We have resolved the Hebron issue, something the previous government was unable to do." Netanyahu even received warmly Arafat's incitement-filled speech on the day following the withdrawal (in which he promised "the liberation of Hebron will pave the way for the liberation of Jerusalem"), which he characterized "despite certain dissonance" as "moderate."

At the first Likud convention following the elections, Netanyahu declared, raising his voice and banging his fist on the table: "There will be no Palestinian

(Continued on p.5)

Outpost               - 4 -               July-August 1999