RUTHFULLY YOURS

Nicholas Kristof, in his column “Seeking Balance in the Middle East” suggests that Congressional opposition to the forthcoming UN vote on a Palestinian state is a serious mistake, and he recommends that President Obama would be better advised to follow the advice of the anti-Israel Jewish group J-Street on U.S.-Israel relations so as to produce a more “balanced foreign policy” and enable the U.S. to capitalize on the “Arab Spring.”

What “Arab Spring”? For anyone who has the slightest understanding of the socio-political crises gripping the Arab Middle East today, it is clear that the “Arab Spring” is morphing into an “Arab Winter” leaving in its wake instability, Sunni-Shiite rivalries, bloody clashes, assassinations, bombings, massacres of civilians, sectarian violence and massive refugee problems – everything except democracy. Recalling that the “democratic” revolution in Iran in 1979 was hijacked by the Khomeini Islamists, he fails to realize that the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood – the parent organization of Hamas and the ideological cousin of al Qaeda – and its surrogates are similarly poised to seize power in Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Yemen, Syria, Tunisia and the West Bank, the moment the opportunity presents itself.

If he or J-Street labor under the illusion that democracy will rise from this chaos, he need only consult the most recent Gallup poll in Egypt (and Egypt is typical of other Arab countries in this regard) where 64% of Egyptians say that Sharia must be the only source of legislation in their country. With elections scheduled for November, that day may be fast approaching. Unless I’m missing something……….gender apartheid, hostility to Western influence, mandatory donning of the veil for women, honor killings, polygamy, execution of homosexuals, female genital mutilation, bans on music, dancing, men and women mixing in public, and practicing any religion other than Islam (witness the recent attacks on Copts and Christian Coptic churches in Egypt) ……….are anything but democratic, unless one defines “democracy” as “one man, one vote, one time” under Islamic rule. Once introduced, Sharia law (if Islamic history is any guide) will exclude non-Muslims from full participation in Arab societies, confer second-class status (dhimmitude) on them, and protect their lives and property only so long as they pay the Jizya – a tax that must be paid by non-Muslims under Islamic law.

None of this will benefit democracy or American interests.

Moreover, J-Street has no significant following in the U.S. or Israel, and has consistently opposed U.S. interests in the Middle East. While presenting itself as a “pro-Israel” and “pro-peace” Jewish lobby group, it is in fact the antithesis of that. It has facilitated meetings on Capitol Hill for Richard Goldstone to promote his discredited report, and applied moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas during Operation Cast Lead claiming that “there are many who recognize elements of truth on both sides of this gaping divide” and it reproached Israel for launching “a disproportionate response” against Hamas. In its accusation, it accused Israelis of “lacking sanity and moderation” in their attitude toward Hamas – which accounts for why the group issued a congratulatory message to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on the alliance he formed with the terrorist group. In its April 29th, 2011 press release, J-Street went so far as to say that “the preliminary agreement on political reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas poses one of the most important challenges in years to those who hope to see a peaceful two-state resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

How can a “peaceful two-state solution” be achieved by signing a reconciliation pact with a terrorist organization that has a culture extolling “martyrdom”, a lust to kill Jews and eradicate Israel, and supports an agenda that calls for a global Islamic caliphate (as stated in its Charter), not a national one? Abbas knows this, and he also knows that, given the nature of Palestinian society, he can’t make peace with Israel and negotiate a two-state solution that would recognize Israel’s legitimacy as a Jewish state in the Middle East – no matter what the terms of the agreement or where the final borders might be drawn – as it contradicts the Palestinian claim for an absolute and unconditional “right of return” to Israel.

Palestinian attitudes towards Jews and Israel were further revealed in July by a detailed survey conducted by American pollster Stanley Greenberg in partnership with the Beit Sahour-based Palestinian Center for Public Opinion. That survey determined that 72% of Palestinians deny the two-thousand year historical connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem, 61% reject the concept of two-states-for-two-peoples, 62% support kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage, and 53% support inciting hatred of Jews in Palestinian schools. The survey also noted that when given an anti-Semitic quote from the Hamas Charter about the need for battalions from the Arab and Islamic world to defeat the Jews, 80% of Palestinians agreed, and 73% specifically agreed with a quote from the Charter about the need to kill Jews wherever they are found. These attitudes confirm that anti-Semitism is the common political language of the Arab world. It is the one thing that unites all the major Arab political factions – from secular “liberals” to Islamists. Given this reality, how can Kristof and J-Street possibly believe that a “peaceful two-state solution” can evolve from such a culture, and worse, that Israel should be forced into making further suicidal concessions to bring it about?

As if supporting an accord with a terrorist organization opposed to U.S. interests in the Middle East was not enough, J-Street joined with the pro-Iranian lobby – the National Iranian American Council – to oppose congressional efforts to impose sanctions on Iran (although it later reversed itself), and in March this year, in the wake of the Fogel family massacre in Israel, it lobbied the U.S. Congress against a resolution that condemned the blatant incitement in Palestinian school books and the Palestinian media, while refusing to comment on the curriculum of the PA which openly promotes the violent struggle to liberate all of Palestine (meaning Israel).

If Kristof really wants to know how much credibility J-Street enjoys, he should consider its recent rallies in New York and Los Angeles. In August, it held a “Day of Action” to rally its members to contact Congress in support a two-state solution. One hundred people showed up in New York and twenty-five in Los Angeles. Is this a group that should be advising the President of the United States on how to promote U.S. interests in the Middle East?

He also suggests that the U.S. should not veto the resolution on Palestinian statehood that is scheduled to come before the UN on September 20th. It would seem that establishing a hopelessly fractured and dysfunctional state that has no semblance of government unity, inadequate control over terror groups, undefined borders, massive corruption and economic mismanagement doesn’t matter all that much to him, J-Street or the morally bankrupt UN. But apparently, it matters a great deal to the U.S. House of Representatives that voted 407-6 calling upon the Obama Administration to veto any such resolution and back the suspension of funds should the PA pursue its bid for a unilateral declaration of statehood. The American people have no desire to establish another unstable Arab state with Islamic Hamas lurking in the shadows, waiting for its chance to take over the government of Palestine just as it took over Gaza four years ago – throwing Palestinian Authority (Fatah) supporters off 15-story buildings in the process?

But the most disturbing aspect of Kristof’s editorial are his comments on Israel’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in December 2008. Numerous Commissions have held Hamas responsible for having violated international law and committing war crimes by firing missiles into Israeli cities and towns, using ambulances to transport weapons, using schools, mosques and private homes to store them, and using civilians as human shields. It was only after thousands of these Iranian-supplied missiles landed in Southern Israel that Israel finally decided to take action by striking at Hamas missile-firing teams, weapons workshops, arms-smuggling tunnels and missile storage facilities. In doing so, it made every effort to target only those directly responsible for the missile attacks while protecting the civilian population in Gaza by dropping millions of leaflets and making cell phone calls in Arabic to those living in targeted areas – warning them to leave the area immediately.

That’s why Israeli actions were supported by a 390-5 vote of the House that considered Israel’s response to be a legitimate act of self-defense. Kristof, however, dismisses the House vote as “congressional tom-foolery (that) bewilders our friends and fritters away our international capital.” He also mocked the fact that he expected to be accused of applying double standards to Israel, yet, that is precisely what he is doing when he refers to the House resolution as having taken place “as Gazan blood flowed”. What about Israeli blood shed by these missile attacks and the trauma sustained by ordinary Israelis forced to retreat into bomb shelters with only seconds notice?

The hypocrisy is stunning. When Israelis respond to missile attacks, they are compelled to justify their actions. But those who fire the missiles are not. When civilians are killed by Western airstrikes in Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya, or by the Turkish air force bombing Iraqi villages or sites suspected of housing PKK members, resulting in the deaths of innocent people, these deaths are seen as regrettable accidents. But when Israel is involved, it is implied that its actions are intentional and “disproportionate”. If a nation has no right to defend itself (or is condemned if it does), the implication is that it has no right to exist. The Arab world understands this very well which is why this line of attack dovetails with its efforts to delegitimize and demonize “the Zionist entity”.

Do Kristof and J-Street really believe that if Israel complied with the demands of its enemies by ceding more land to them, that these fanatics would turn their swords into ploughshares, become America’s best friends, enshrine social justice into their societies as a matter of law, end their 1,400-year bloody history of Sunni-Shiite tribal hatred, forgo jihad against the West, cease anti-Semitic incitement in their schools, summer camps, mosques and media, drop their demand that Islamic Sharia law be the sole basis upon which to govern their populations, allow freedom of religion, end their dictatorships, institute political and economic reforms, permit secular opposition parties and unions to operate without fear of being butchered by their own security forces, establish an independent judiciary, and join the family of civilized nations? If so, they are delusional.

It is shameful to suggest that the only reason for the problems in the Middle East is because of Israeli obstinacy as if it is the fault of the Israelis and not the rejectionist Arab world that cannot stand the thought of a sovereign Jewish state in its midst. The survivors of the exiles, the blood libels, the inquisitions, the pogroms, the ghettos, and the death camps don’t need lectures on why Israelis must seek “normalization” with their enemies. Kristof’s support for J-Street’s positions is symptomatic of the failure of NGOs, media commentators, politicians, heads of state, social activists and proponents of human rights to recognize that those who seek Israel’s destruction by chanting “Death to Israel” and who intend to introduce Sharia law throughout the Middle East, also seek the destruction of the Western democracies when they chant “Death to America” in the same breath.

Kristof believes that the only chance America has in the region is to seek “a new beginning” by adopting “a more balanced policy” (meaning a more pro-Islamist policy in the current context) promoted by J-Street. Fortunately, the American people don’t see it that way.