New York Posts columnist Michael Goodwin on July 13, 2014, wrote that even before the shooting stops between Israel and Palestinian terrorists, the one guarantee is that Israel will get most of the blame. Already the demands from the United Nations that Israel show “restraint” are as predictable as Palestinian rockets. Excerpts below:
The tiny Jewish state is under fierce attack, with millions of its citizens spending long hours in bomb shelters. Yet any response beyond a mere tit-for-tat is labeled disproportionate, putting Israel in the impossible position of being damned if it does and doomed if it doesn’t.
Of course, it must strike back hard, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears resolved that the Hamas that started this war will not be the same Hamas when it is over. How and when we get there remains unknown, but one thing we do know is how we got where we are.
In addition to justifying a firm Israeli ¬response, history also illustrates why -Netanyahu resists American pressure to keep making territorial concessions in the hope of peace. The idea of a Palestinian state has ¬always rested on the promise of “two states living side-by-side in peace and security.”
Over decades, versions of that promise were tied to a formula that had Israel trade some of the land it seized in wars with other Arabs in exchange for peace.
The formula more or less worked with Egypt and Jordan. Gaza proves its fallacy, or at least its limits.
The reality is that Gaza, an unoccupied Palestinian state with its own elected government, is a terrorist state.
It does not want to live in peace with Israel, no matter the borders. It refuses to accept ¬Israel’s right to exist within any borders.
That is the central fact fueling the conflict, and yet President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry continue to insist that Israel negotiate with a so-called unity government that includes Hamas and the West Bank leaders of Fatah. But as Israelis put it, how do you negotiate with someone whose single aim is to kill you?
The demand that Israel negotiate with Hamas is especially rich coming from Obama. He refuses even to negotiate with Republicans, whom he seems to regard as terrorists because they don’t agree with him. Israel, ¬unfortunately, has to deal with the real thing.
Still, the Israeli public remains remarkably willing to accept Palestinian independence. What it refuses to accept is that it must give up more land, and then have only a limited right of self-defense when that land becomes a launching pad for attacks. That makes additional disengagement from the West Bank unlikely.
…Until the Palestinians accept Israel, there can be no lasting peace.
Israelis know that, and it’s time America’s leaders accept it, too.