BEN-ELIEZER COMMENTS ON US PRESIDENT BUSH'S SPEECH

[IMRA: DM Ben-Eliezer joins the rest of the Israeli politicians who are dropping the ball. The PA is not Enron (in need of better financial controls). Unless Israel takes the initiative and comes up with concrete OBSERVABLE measures for the PA to take (e.g.. estimates of how large a pile of various weapons the PA should be able to confiscate and hand over to the CIA) we will shortly see Mr. Powell's team claiming that the PA is in fact "making an effort" to "reform" and after a terror-supporting public elects a "new" team Israel will find itself facing a nightmare:

+ Following the traditional "enemies of peace" approach, Israel will be expected not to respond to terror attacks carried out by "enemies" of the PA.

+ When Israel asks that terrorists be detained by the PA, the PA's independent legal system will order the release of the terrorists due to lack of evidence, etc..

+ Israel will be pressed to bend over backwards with concessions so that "democratically elected" Palestinain leadership can "show progress".]

Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer has welcomed US President George Bush's speech and views it as a historic milestone, which outlines a security, political and economic horizon for ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer believes that the key to implementing this horizon, in the words of US President Bush, lays in the carrying out of basic reforms by the Palestinian side, centering on the replacement of the Palestinian Authority leadership, the renunciation of terror and incitement, and the establishment of transparent democratic processes. Progress in this direction will move forward the political process, which is the only way to end the conflict.

Defense Minister Ben-Eliezer believes that realizing the dream of two states, living alongside each other in peace and security, is a supreme Israeli interest. If we find an honest, peace-seeking, terror-free interlocutor on the other side, who is amenable to historic compromise, the Defense Minister would support very significant compromises for peace.

Defense Minister Ben-Eliezer is convinced that Israel - along with the pragmatic Arab states and other international bodies - will do everything in its power to assist the American efforts, in the spirit of US President Bush's speech.

IMRA's warning is well taken. The Palestinians are not innocents being denied any rights by Israel. From what we have seen the only right they are apparently interested in is the right to have a free hand to commit mass murder of Jews at leisure. That being the case its hard to fathom Defense Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer saying that Bush's initiative promises "a new political horizon." It does nothing of the sort. There's every chance Colon Bowell's State Department will try to twist the President's conditions into something that give the Palestinians the equivalent of a passing grade through grade inflation. For instance, merely the promise to hold free elections would count instead of actually holding free elections. Israel better make sure the ball remains in the Palestinians court and insist there is an actual verification process in place to make sure the Palestinians do what they're committed to do. Assuming they ever get around to accepting the Bush plan.

If we find an honest, peace-seeking, terror-free interlocutor on the other side, who is amenable to historic compromise, the Defense Minister would support very significant compromises for peace.

I predict that with an attitude like this, to try and compromise with those who want your destruction ... with those who teach entire generations of their own young people to kill themselves and as many innocent Israeli men women and children as possible in an effort to drive Israel into the sea ... to try and "compromise" for peace ... they will never have a lasting peace until the Prince of Peace returns.

No "quick fix" is going to be possible. I can forsee NO Palestinian leader coming forth in this environment who is not "compromised" by terror already. I am afraid that is the cold reality that Israel has to deal with and will have to work from. It would be many years, IMHO, after what has already happened before I would trust any one of them that "bubbles" to the top in that environment.

In the mean time, the Israelis should physically take a swath of land every time there is another terror attack. Like Freeper Travis McGee proposes ... one kilometer for each attack ... not occupied by Israel ... OWNED by Israel.

After they stop the terror and live in peace for many years with "new" leadership and verify their intentions by sustained actions ... then perhaps talk of peace would be possible ... but only IMHO from the standpoint of retaining what Israel already has purchased in blood at that point for their security. A peace "in place" at that point. NO COMPROMISE.

Yes I do. Because at the very least, I believe she is being used by them to present a "moderate" front that is used to advance their causes.

I have heard her speak and have read her interviews on many occassions. She continues (IMHO) what I consider to be apologies for abject terrorism, particularly by Yasir Arafat. She maintains a close relationship to him, she has served as one of his principle negotiators. She should TOTALLY distance herself from him and disavow his activities for what they are.

It might perhaps be said that she cannot realistically do this, given the environment. But, if so, then the environment itself is compromised by terrorism and this is my point.

I believe it will take years for an environment to develop that is not so beset and not so influenced. In that time, while it is happening, Israel is going to have to remain firm and not compromise their security, and not in the least even appear to reward the terrorism of the last months in any way shape or form.

I believe the idea to move the borders every time there is such an incident puts the owness on the Palestinian leadership and their people. I hope they can throw off the mantle of hate and genocide that infects them and make this possible ... I really do.

Just my opinion.

I believe she is being used by them to present a "moderate" front that is used to advance their causes.

She IS a moderate, Jeff.

They DO have some legitimate causes to advance.

When EVEN THE MODERATES are tarred with the same "terrorist" brush, Jeff . . . when moderate voices are disallowed the violent cycle is AMPLIFIED, RADICALIZED and the cycle continues.

The mistake is to deny the Palestinians a voice - even a moderate voice.

We'll have to agree to disagree here, Jeff.

I would not deny them a moderate voice my friend. I just believe that:

The moderates are being used by the terrorists.
She cannot come out four square against the real terror that Arafat rtepresents because of the environment ... meaning terror has compromised the process.
Someone is going to have to risk it all and come out against Arafat sooner or later and label him and his cronies exactly what they are. Whomever does this will literally be taking their lives into their hands because they are apt to be killed/lynched.

In such an environment, it will take years of "moderating" to come to a peaceful conclusion, during which time Israel MUST stand its guard and not reward terror.

If a moderate voice can rise in those conditions and make real, meaningful change ... then I say God bless them. But, given what has already happened, and what is apt to continue to happen, I believe it ill be extremely difficult and that Israel cannot compromise at this point in any case.

I view the kind of compromises being talked about for Israel as similar in principle to the compromises the farmers in Klamath are being asked to make. Funny it is the same administration floating both sets of compromise, eh? There are certain things one cannot compromise ... neither an individual, a group of individuals or a people IMHO. In the American West, deeded water rights are certainly one of those. In the Mid East, I believe the security of Israel is another ... for the Israelis.

If you disagree with that (the part about Israel's security vs. the conditions of the Palestinians), then indeed we shall agree to disagree.

Best to you and yours.

Some of the cornerstones for the "security of Israel" are presently "occupied" by the "Israeli Taliban" - that element of Israel's population as well as that element of Israel's supporters who believe that the path to peace and security passes through the Book of Revelations. . . those who believe that prior to peace we must first have Armageddon. If you are one of those then, yes, we must disagree.

I will not deny believing in the Bible and that ultimately Israel's long term poeace, and in fact world peace lies through the path that will bring the Prince of Peace back to earth.

But the problem is, I have no idea when that may be at this point ... and neither does anyone else. While there are some fairly specific events that will give us an idea once they occur ... they haven;t occurred to date and we do not know when they will. I am content to leave those events in God's hands.

I do not believe that makes me a "Israeli Taliban", a Christian Taliban" or a "Taliban" of any sort. You see, the Taliban resorted to abject force and tyranny to further their arguements ... I of course am not doing so ... and of the two sides in the conflict, I see much more of the Taliban methodology in the terrorism directed against the Israelis than I do oin Israels response to it.

In the mean time, in our own hands is the path to peace between now and those future events that I allude to and my stated opinions deals with that reality. I do not believe that path will be easy or quickly achieved. I do not believe it can be achieved until a good period of time passes when terror does not rule and direct the Palestinian path. In the mean time I believe that Israel MUST not compromise with that terror and must see to its security.

Hope that makes my position clearer ... albeit that may well not be something you agree with.

Again, best regards.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.