Beware The Good Ole Days…
     First, some apparent good news…at least for now.
     Upon Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s visit to Washington, President George W. Bush stated, before millions watching him on television and listening otherwise, that his letter to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in April 2004 was still valid.
     Note, please, that back then Dubya stated, again at a highly visible press conference, that Israel should not have to return to the 1949, U.N.-imposed armistice lines--and he called them just that, not “borders”-- which turned it into a 9-mile rump state, forever at the mercy of those who would destroy it.
     And at that same 2004 April Magic conference, the President proclaimed the other essential ingredient to the solution as well...Any Arabs “returning” to Palestine would have to do so in the new territories under Arab control. The Arab dream of overwhelming the Jews in their sole, tiny state would have to go the way of the dinosaurs. Arabs have almost two dozen of their own to date, conquered and forcibly Arabized from mostly non-Arab peoples.
     No doubt about it. Any real solution to the Arab-Israeli mess must include the above.
     The problem was, no sooner were those essential words spoken, pressures mounted on the President from a variety of quarters--with the Foggy Folks in the lead--to retract them.
      By the following year--after Dubya’s reelection--the President was singing a different tune and claiming that any change in Israel’s territorial status had to first get the approval of the Arabs themselves. The latter don’t approve of a 9-mile wide Israel, let alone any thing larger.
      Condi led the charge after the reelection to indeed try to force Israel back to the ‘49 lines…something that  the final draft of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 expressly did not call for. On the contrary, “secure and recognized borders” were to replace those fragile Auschwitz lines, and any withdrawal was to be done in the context of peace agreements. Think Sinai, Israel, and Egypt...
      President Lyndon Johnson summarized the situation this way on June 19, 1967:
      " A return to the situation on June 4 (the day before outbreak of war) was not a prescription for peace but for renewed hostilities." He then called for "new recognized boundaries that would provide security against terror, destruction, and war."
      President Ronald Reagan, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, previous Secretaries of State, and others held to this position as well. Admittedly, however, the farther we moved in years beyond the Egyptian blockade of Israel (a casus belli) and other hostile acts which led to the '67 War, the more amnesia seemed to set in regarding all of this.
      Back to the future--now--it was thus, again, good to hear the President recognizing that even in this modern age of warfare, territory still has meaning to the survivability of a state…especially one surrounded by enemies sworn to its death. And in Israel's case, the conflict has always been over Israel's very existence, not how big it is.
      So much for the relative good news…and it is relative. Condi, for example, wouldn’t even allow Israel to build its fence so that Israel’s main airport, Ben-Gurion, would receive protection from Arabs trying to shoot down civilian planes. And that was when the alleged “good guys” Abbas and his Fatah darlings were still at the helm.
      But anyone who believes that the Jewish State should exist and has been following events since the Arab population itself elected Hamas--an organization openly dedicated to Israel’s destruction--has some serious cause for concern. And not because of Hamas’ political triumph.
      As I’ve oft written before, the ascendancy of Hamas is, in many ways, a good thing. Honesty is better than lies. So Israel must do what any other nation would do with such a enemy...Obliterate it with no second thoughts and ignore the complaining hypocrites afterwards.
      The larger problem, however, is the current tendency to portray Mahmoud Abbas, Ahmed Qurei’, and other Fatah protégés of Arafat as the good guys whom Israel should be missing right now. Indeed, at the recent news conference, both President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert were virtually singing this very tune.
      A translation by the highly respected Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) on July 3, 2003 dealt with an interview with Ahmed Qurei' (Abu Alaa,), who was up until recently the second Abu running the show in the wake of Arafat’s death. Among other things, he was asked about the Arabs' problem with having the word "Jewish" placed in front of the words "State of Israel" at the summits leading up to the roadmap. Here was his response:
      "What is the meaning of a Jewish state? Do we say...Sunni state...Shi'ite state....Christian state? These are definitions that will bring...turmoil."
      Qurei’ and Abbas, sweet-talking Arafatians in suits, both held the same positions regarding a Jewish State. Fatah’s Charter is no different than Hamas’ when it comes to this subject…regardless of claims to the contrary. The honey-coating is for Western consumption only…to get the latter to squeeze the Jews harder for one-sided concessions. That's what diplomacy amounts to for Jews.
      Abbas earlier openly ran on a platform for Israel’s destruction--but by “more acceptable” means. Fatah’s earlier alleged showcase model moderate, Faisal al-Husseini, called for the creation of “Palestine” from the River to the Sea.
      The “moderates” repeatedly call any dealings with the Jews via "diplomacy" merely a “Trojan Horse.” Hopefully this needs no further explanation to my readers…
      The most that has been offered--despite others, like the Foggy Folks and even our President, putting words into their mouths--is a hudna…a temporary ceasefire like that which the Prophet Muhammad allowed his enemies until he gained the strength to deal them the final blow. Hamas’ leader in Syria recently offered this same “gift” in return for Israel caving in to all of his demands. More on that later...
      Recently, Abbas allegedly confronted Hamas with the idea of accepting a state based on Israel’s withdrawal to the pre-‘67 armistice lines, which he called “borders.”
      Keep in mind that Arabs have always said--especially Abbas’ folks--that they would follow a destruction in stages scenario. First, get Israel back to its indefensible, 1949 armistice lines, and then--as in the words, again, of Faisal al-Husseini and many others as well--at the proper moment, finish it off. Keep in mind that when Arafat tried to overthrow King Hussein of Jordan in 1970, Syrian tanks poured across the border to assist him. Given the right set of circumstances, this same scenario could unfold against Israel as well...and with Arab states also joining the ranks, armed to the teeth with top of the line American weaponry and such.
     A mere look at Abbas’ and Fatah’s website, maps, textbooks and such tells the whole story. "Palestine" takes the place of Israel…doesn’t exist side by side of it.
     From the kindergarten to the play camps to the radio and television stations to the sermons in the mosques and so forth, there has been no attempt by Abbas and his so-called “moderates” to condition their fellow Arabs to the thought that any, besides themselves, are deserving of justice in the region…no matter how tiny that sliver is.
     Keep in mind how areas Israel has already withdrawn from are currently being used…as launching pads for mortar, rocket, and suicide attacks against herself. And this was so when Abbas was also still solely in charge, let alone his predecessor, the late Egyptian ghoul (aka Arafat).
     And after each suicide bombing, Abbas "condemned" it as hurting the Arab cause…not because it was wrong to blow innocent people--often school kids--apart.
     Enough of reiterating the past.
     Here’s what needs to be done now
     Israel must insist on drawing its own borders, using 242 as the guidelines. Arabs are still dreaming of the destruction in stages manure, and too many elsewhere support them on this. So Israel has no other choice but to act unilaterally. So it must. And it must do so to thrive, not merely survive. Any 22nd state created for Arabs (and second, not first, Arab one in "Palestine") must not come at the expense of the one for Jews.
     Israel's final borders must reflect a fair territorial compromise--one which will give Israel some semblance of strategic depth (keep President Johnson and Reagan’s above comments in mind), yet one which will not bring the bulk of Judea and Samaria’s (known by those names far longer than they were called the “West Bank”) Arabs--most of whom were newcomers into “Palestine” themselves--under Israel’s control. Keeping in mind that purely Arab Jordan sits on some 80% of the original 1920 Palestinian Mandate’s territory, Arabs will still wind up with more than a fair deal here…far more than anything that Arabs themselves have ever offered to any of their own national competitors, be they Kurds, Copts, Assyrians, black Africans, Jews, Berbers, and so forth.
     As Israel took in more Jewish refugees fleeing "Arab"/Muslim lands than Arab refugees who were created as a result of the invasion of Israel in 1948 by a half dozen Arab states, Israel should do nothing but laugh at the humor of Arabs--including the “moderates”--insisting that the Jews slit their own throats by accepting any of those raised on jihad into their country. None…Zilch…Nada…in these regards.
     Finally, Israel has to stop caving in to those whose policies may change from day to day. Remember Lord Palmerston’s famous quote: “Nations have no permanent friends, just interests.”
     Israel must offer Arabs peace for peace, not land for peace. The latter idea has not worked, and Israel has only been perceived as weak as a result. Gaza has been turned into the terror entity all thinking minds knew it would.
     When the time comes, Israel must not risk any more of its own 19-year olds going in on the ground.
     Gaza must be dealt with the way Britain, America, and others have dealt with their own deadly enemies in years past…It must be flattened from above. Qassams striking Israel proper must be answered by artillery or bombers hitting meaningful and painful targets…not empty fields and buildings. Jewish blood must come at an extremely painful price for those who take--or support those who take--it. Keep in mind that the Arab populace elected Hamas itself.
      No further land or other hard concessions should be made until real peace treaties are entered into with Arab partners capable of living up to them. Not one without the other…as has been the case up until now.
     And finally, the Jew of the Nations must tell the Arabs to stick their proposed hudnas as far up whatever  orifice of their own choosing they select. Such ceasefires only allow Arabs to get one-sided concessions from Jews while strengthening and building themselves up for future and more deadly attacks upon Jewish innocents.
     Whether the Arabs have been led by Hamas or Fatah, the past is not the model to hope for…
     Beware the good ole days.

Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous university campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many anti-Israel spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in hundreds of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites around the world. His official website is:

Our special thanks to the author for submitting this article. A. G. S.