RUTHFULLY YOURS

True, the nuclearization of Iran is the immediate danger occupying Israel’s leadership, but the Palestinian threat, in the long run, is the real existential threat. Now that the children who were born in 1993, when the Oslo Accords were signed, are 18 years old, it may be worthwhile to re-examine how beneficial, or detrimental, the various peace agreements have been to Israel over the years.

First of all, under these peace deals, Israel has relinquished sites important to our heritage, historically holy Jewish sites. Let us recall that during 2,000 years of exile, the Jews yearned not for Tel Aviv or Netanya, but for Jerusalem, Hebron and Bethlehem, precisely the territories that Israel handed to the Palestinians on a silver platter.

Secondly, in the wake of these peace agreements, a Palestinian terror organization gained international legitimacy. PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, who up until then needed special authorization to address the U.N. and was whisked back home immediately afterward, suddenly began appearing at the U.N. and in world capitals flanked by an honor guard.

Third, the David and Goliath balance of power was reversed. Israel was no longer in the role of David — this now became the Palestinians’ role. Israel was made out to be an abusive Goliath, oppressing a small, helpless people. The David image, which once characterized Israel and won the Jews sympathy across the globe, especially during times of danger, had now disappeared. Since then, the Palestinians have been the ones enjoying global support, even though they are a part of a large Arab world, and they engage in terror.

In the world’s perception, Israel became a colonialist entity. No more were we the long-suffering people who had returned to our land after 2,000 years of exile, but an occupier who stole the Arabs’ homes. The Palestinians, however, were granted not only legitimization, but also territories, media outlets and weapons.

They took advantage of all this to the fullest. They trained terrorists and used their radio and television outlets to incite to hostility and armed struggle. The relocation of the PLO headquarters from Tunis to the West Bank, following the Oslo Accords, set in motion the Palestinian quest for the Right of Return. Tens of thousands of Palestinians returned legally in this way.

Once it signed the peace agreements, Israel abandoned its public diplomacy efforts. The authors of the peace accords believed that in order to appease the Arabs, Israel must accept Palestinian aggression without any response. The Arabs, however, had a thousand complaints. They attacked Israel. Israeli officials stammered, and at times even justified the Palestinians. The Palestinians, on the other hand, didn’t give a thing in return for everything they got. But they never stopped complaining.

These allegations began trickling into the Jewish sector, in part because Israel was blessed with organizations, calling themselves human rights organizations, that taught the Palestinians a thing or two about how to exert pressure on Israel and indirectly assisted the terrorists by dragging Israel’s name through the mud in international forums.

This eventually led to the social phenomena of Israeli soldiers refusing to serve in the Palestinian territories, boycotts on Israeli products manufactured in the Palestinian territories, academic boycotts on Israel and, in general, the turning of Israel into a pariah state.

Professor Abraham Sion is the director of the Center for Law and Mass Media at the Ariel University Center of Samaria. This article was written for Monday’s Ariel Conference for Law and Mass Media.