Some points worth making

First of all, if you haven't already done so... go watch the short video I posted yesterday.  It is good... but perhaps not great.  There are a few side-points in the film that seem to distract some viewers from the main point... but while it isn't a slam dunk, it certainly makes many excellent points.

The video is intended to be the opening salvo in what promises to be a very active grass-roots campaign designed to get people to begin thinking critically about the current conventional wisdom surrounding the proposed 2-state solution.

For those not in the loop, 'the 2- state solution' is short hand for what many presume to be a done deal; the creation of a Palestinian state alongside the current Jewish State.  The conventional wisdom holds that while the final borders of this new state remain to be perfectly defined, they will most likely incorporate most or all of the west bank as well as Gaza (with some provision for continuity between them).

Here's a short list of questions that should occur to anyone thinking critically about 2-state:

Why us?

Why is Israel - and only Israel - presumed to be 100% responsible for providing land to create a Palestinian State.  Certainly, of all the countries that contributed to the creation of the Palestinian refugees (what some would call the creation of the Palestinian people), Israel is the least responsible... if for no other reason than that we accepted the UN Partition plan in 1947 while all the Arab countries did not.  And they attacked us... and lost.   So why is it that Israel is assumed to be the one that will pick up the check (i.e. pay war reparations in the form of land) to give these stateless people a state?

Why here?

Again, why is it accepted by almost all people today that Israel must carve out a huge piece of itself in order to make room for this new Palestinian state?  Why not Jordan?  Why not Egypt?  Why not Syria or Lebanon or Saudi Arabia?  Why not Iraq?   Why not some combination of them?  Certainly they all have far more land reserves - not to mention a commonality of language, culture and religion - that would lend a far better long-term fit for a Palestinian State!

Many people answer preemptively with, "But the Arab countries will never agree to such a thing so why waste time even suggesting it".  That right there should tell you something important about the justice of the proposed 2-state solution and the mindset of those who are pushing it.  Israel is essentially being penalized because we don't have the wit, or the ability, to say no.

Why should Israel suffer because it is the only reasonable entity in the region?  The Arab countries I named above attacked Israel and lost not one, but three different regional wars.  And throughout all this time, these same countries have kept their Palestinians locked up in virtual prison camps so as not to have to take any responsibility for the refugees their armed aggression helped to create.    

Why now?

Seriously, what's the hurry.  This sense of urgency to 'make peace' by creating a Palestinian state within some arbitrary time-frame is entirely artificial and can only work to the advantage of one party... not both.  Let's assume that the Palestinians are 'entitled' to a state of their own (not a fact that anyone has been able to demonstrate to me).  There was no urgency to create it when they were all living under Jordanian and Egyptian rule, respectively.  So why the sudden rush?  The obvious answer is that a ticking clock distracts the negotiating parties from looking too closely at the terms and conditions... and at the alternatives.

The Arabs have always used time as a negotiating tool.  When something is demanded of them, time becomes endlessly elastic.  But when they require something of us, yesterday is not soon enough. 

I'm not against negotiating with anyone who wants to sit down at the table with us.  But the terms and substance that each of the negotiating parties brings to the table are what matter... not how long anyone will agree to remain seated.  That is extortion... and a U.S. administration that will sanction such extortion (even in the name of leaving a legacy) is no friend of Israel.

Why at all?

Again, the idea of 'The 18' campaign is not about voting for or against anything... or doing anything more than getting people to begin thinking critically about something that has been taken as political gospel up until now. 

This may sound blunt... but if someone has a problem with taking a close, critical look at ANYTHING that - once done - will be both irreversible and will have long-lasting implications for an entire region... well, I question their interest in a just solution.

The world is full of failed or failing states that have sucked dry the resources and patience of their regional and global neighbors.  Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Chad top the list... but there are plenty more that are continually in the news (and not to report Nobel laureates or medical breakthroughs). 

What if the international community had had an opportunity to examine any of these failed states when they were still 'proto-states', and it was revealed that they had nothing to show for themselves but armed, warring factions, staggering corruption, negligible legal, legislative or fiscal transparency, and a complete lack of economic, educational, infrastructure or medical planning.  Could the international community, in good conscience, support and recommend their graduation to full-fledged nationhood?  Could it do so at the expense of any neighboring countries territory and/or security?  If not... why are the Palestinians being vetted for nationhood?

Given a choice, would you accept Chad or Somalia as neighbors?  Israel already has a failed proto-state cum Islamic terror base (Gaza) on our southern flank.  Why are we being rushed to accept another on our eastern flank? 

The essential appeal of the two state solution is that everyone is making the mistaken assumption that international Islamic terrorism is only about supporting Palestinian rights, and that it will evaporate the moment the Palestinians have their own state.  That is demonstratively false.  Islamic terrorism predates Israel's 'occupation' of the west bank and Gaza... and in fact predates the creation of the State of Israel. 

Although Israel and Jews have been singled out for particularly harsh treatment at the hands of Muslim terrorists and their state sponsors, few countries/peoples in the world have been spared the sting of this poisonous, expansionist ideology.  We only lack the common sense to take the Muslim world at their word when they say - quite plainly - that the entire planet belongs to them.

Why Obama?

President-elect Obama has a clear mandate, with huge popularity and both houses of congress in the hands of his party.  Few presidents have begin to govern with such an advantage.  Without prejudice for or against this president, the real danger for Israel is that her strongest ally in the world has officially endorsed the 2-state solution and is the driving force behind both the artificial timetables and the need for Israel to make massive territorial concessions.

Where Presidents Clinton and Bush were both partially hamstrung into inaction by partisan politics and scandals, Obama can push forward with pretty much any popular initiative he chooses.  And few initiative enjoy more popularity or bipartisan support than 2-state. 

Therefore there is a pressing need to remove as much of that popular support as possible... for all of the reasons listed above.  That's where 'The 18' comes into play.

Why The 18?

The goal of the campaign is to do nothing more or less than to get people to think critically about 2 state.  Question it!  Ask difficult (but obvious) questions about why Israel is being required to create such a state.  'The 18' demands that people begin to think critically about historical precedent for such a thing as well as what has happened in the wake of nearly every previous territorial concession Israel has made.   

Saying that 'the current situation is untenable' is not a good enough reason to go ahead with 2 state.  It simply means that other solutions must be found and examined.

As I wrote above, there are other countries with far more land and resources in this region who are far more responsible for the current plight (and existence) of the Palestinians than Israel. Why should it be accepted as gospel that a Palestinian state must be rushed into existence... and that only Israel need give birth to this new state out of its own loins? 

This new campaign called 'The 18' is simply about getting people to start thinking critically about 2 state instead of automatically accepting it as the only solution.  I can't imagine anyone would have a problem with a clarion call to simply think!

I hope I'm not wrong about that.