April 26, 2002 "No to Buffer
Zone - Just as there are no locks for thieves, neither are there borders for terrorists. In Israel, much talk continues about building a buffer zone between the Jewish state and the Palestinian enclaves or eventual state. It sounds simple, but it is folly. . . an invitation to calamity. Barak's unilateral withdrawal of Israeli forces in Southern Lebanon triggered the beginning of the intafada. For the first time in Israel's history, the enemy appeared victorious. Hizbollah was handed an undeserved victory and its terrorists incited their fellow Arabs to the South. This led the Palestinian Authority and their cohorts into believing that Israel is vulnerable. All the Arabs had to do was brainwash some gullible people into becoming homicide bombers and thus commit suicide, and the life-loving Israelis would defect, leaving Israel and its great cities, villages and settlements to become a Palestinian territory and state. Retreating behind a buffer zone would have the same affect. There are only two solutions: The first is peace–no doubt an extremely difficult objective; the second is a continued show of force and resistance to the terrorist onslaughts and world opinion. Many different ideas resonate among Jews. Some suggest transferring Arabs to Jordan and elsewhere, an absolutely ridiculous idea. It can't happen and should not even be discussed. The other calls for annexing the West Bank and Gaza. It's too late to annex; besides, who wants a terror-ridden Gaza to be part of Israel? Menachem Begin was a great statesman and Zionist leader, but he succumbed to Jimmy Carter's pressure at the Camp David talks. Begin had insisted that Egypt take the Gaza, along with the Sinai, as part of the peace agreement. Sadat strongly resisted, and Carter demanded that Israel be responsible for Gaza. The Egyptian Sadat knew very well that Gaza was an untenable territory which would only lead to constant insurrection and terror. Imagine today were Gaza Egyptian territory and thus not on the agenda of any negotiations. The West Bank issue alone would have been easily resolved by implementing either the Alon or Rogers' plan. It began with William Rogers, the American Secretary of State, who suggested after the Six Day War, Israel keep the northern, western and southern peripheries of the West Bank and part of the Jordan Valley. The rest would have been conveyed to the Jordanians. Jordan's King Hussein would have readily accepted the fertile heartlands of Samaria and Judea, free at the time of rebellion and terror. Yigal Alon's plan was very similar, and under both plans, Gaza would have remained with Egypt, the country that occupied this strip of land from 1948 to 1967. It is not too late for Israel to offer Gaza to the Egyptians. Hosni Mubarak will reject it, but at least, it would obviate the fact that Gaza is as much Egypt's responsibility as it is Israel's. A buffer zone along the long terrain that separates the West Bank from the rest of Israel would be easily penetrated. If terrorists found their way across the Atlantic Ocean to the very heart of America on September 11, then Palestinian terrorists will successfully penetrate Israel, even if surrounded by solid steel and concrete. Some may argue. . .but look at the borders between Jordan, Syria and Egypt. Have they not been peaceful as the result of separation? The argument is absurd. The Egyptian and Jordanian governments will not tolerate terrorists crossing their borders, but will the Palestinians have the same policies and interests? They managed to dig tunnels from Egypt to Gaza under the very nose of both Egyptian and Israeli border patrols to smuggle weapons in violation of the Oslo Accords. Peace is by far the best idea. At the moment, tragically, the Arabs do not have a partner for us, but in time, someone will inevitably succeed Arafat. Hopefully, this new Arab leader will care more about his people than the incumbent Palestinian dictator. Shabbat Shalom
|
||
