Annexation of Judea-Samaria together with its Arab population, will culminate in Lebanonization of Israel and the end of the Zionist dream—as surely as the two-state paradigm it was meant to replace
By MARTIN SHERMAN
The road to hell is paved with good intentions
– An ancient English dictum of disputed origin
In my column last week, I once again raised the issue of the fading relevance of what has been hitherto the dominant policy paradigm that has all but monopolized the debate on how to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs: The two-state formula.
I urged initiating a vigorous debate on how Israel should react to this emerging situation and what policy prescription it should adopt to best contend with the onset of post two-state realities.
Preparing for post Two-State era
Clearly, the gathering skepticism as to the feasibility of the perilous and pernicious two-state idea is without doubt a potentially positive development for Israel. However, I cautioned, that whether the incipient benefits this entails will indeed materialize, depends largely on the prudence and foresight with which Israel conducts itself, and on the wisdom of the choices it makes.
For the threats that may well emerge in a post two-state era are no less menacing to the survival of the Jewish-state than the two-state prescription poses itself—arguably even more so.
I concluded the column by pointing out something that should be almost self-evident: To secure its survival as it was established to be – the nation-state of the Jews – Israel must embark on strategies that address both its geographic viability (i.e. its geographic imperative) and its demographic viability (i.e. its demographic imperative). Clearly, any policy, which does not contend adequately with either of these imperatives, imperils the Jewish nation-state, either geographically or demographically.
It is of course relatively easy to demonstrate, to all but fanatically obsessive two-staters, that—barring some wildly optimistic, and hence unrealistic, best case scenario—the two-state prescription, in any configuration remotely acceptable to even the most compliant Palestinian “partner”, will leave Israel unacceptably vulnerable geographically.
Sadly, however, I lamented that most alternatives advanced by leading critics of the two-state approach entailed proposals that jeopardize the existence of a Jewish Israel no less than the dangerous two-state folly.
Piquing one-stater’s ire
The column ignited a lively debate in cyberspace—particularly with “Right-wing” advocates of a one-state policy, whose ire I seemed to have piqued by suggesting that their proposal—i.e. annexation of all the territory of Judea-Samaria together with the Palestinian-Arab population resident there—would make Israel untenable demographically.
In defense of their position, they cite “alternative” (i.e. private initiative) demographic studies that show that the size of the Palestinian Arab population has been considerably over-estimated; and that in recent years there has been a dramatic plunge in Arab- Muslim birthrates, both in pre-1967 Israel and in Judea-Samaria, while Jewish fertility rates have risen strongly.
Let me clarify at the outset: I find these “alternative” demographic studies persuasive and believe their conclusions probably reflect the realities on the ground better than more commonly cited, official Establishment estimates. Moreover, there can be little doubt as to the steep decline in Arab-Muslim birthrates and the recent increase in Jewish ones.
However, even if we accept the numerical validity of these optimistic assessments, the political conclusions that “Right-wing” one-staters draw from them are – to greatly understate the case—highly questionable—and Israel would do well to avoid basing planning its long term national strategy on them.
Some daunting statistics
To grasp the detrimental repercussion of incorporating a large, and largely incompatibly recalcitrant Arab-Muslim population into Israel’s permanent populace—whether as fully enfranchised citizens or not—it is important to recognize that the problem is not only of electoral arithmetic at the polls. Perhaps far more important is the impact on the country’s socio-cultural fabric, its national coherence —and its ability to function as an undisputed Jewish state.
Seen in this regard, the statistics—even the optimistic version thereof—appear far more daunting. Indeed, even within the pre-1967 lines the picture of demographic trends and the socio-political effects likely accompany them.—are dour.
Thus, according to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), while in 1949, there were more than nine Jews to every Muslim within the Green Line, by 2015, this ratio had dropped dramatically to just under 4.3 Jews for each Muslim. In other words, in the six-and-a-half decades since independence, the Muslim population has more than doubled in comparison to the Jewish population – despite massive waves of Jewish immigration from around the world.
Moreover, the post-2000 statistics provide cold comfort for anyone pinning their hopes on decelerating Muslim momentum. For as recently as 2001, the CBS figures showed there were more than five Jews to every Muslim, compared to under 4.3 in 2015 – reflecting about a 17% percent decrease in the ratio of Jews to Muslims within pre-1967 Israel in less than a decade and a half.
Risk-fraught one-state proposals
Again, it is true that the difference between Jewish and Arab birth rates (once vastly higher in favor of the latter) is rapidly narrowing, almost approaching parity within the pre-1967 lines—with the Arab rate still just slightly above the Jewish one.
There is however, no guarantee that that this trend will continue, that Jewish fertility rates will continue to rise significantly above current levels, and that Arab rates will not bottom out around present figures. Indeed, today in Israel, family sizes are well beyond those of the OECD members, and accordingly, it is far from implausible that the birthrates may well remain at approximately current levels. To bet the “Zionist farm” on the assumption that current trends will continue and that a sizeable disparity in favor of the Jews will develop, is risky to say the least—if not dangerously farfetched.
Accordingly, the Muslim minority within the pre-1967 lines– without the addition of any co-religionists in Judea-Samaria – is fast approaching 20% of the total population. Thus in the absence of overwhelmingly compelling evidence to the contrary, the prudent working assumption for the nation’s future is that it is likely to stabilize at present levels.
This, together with growing Israeli-Arab political awareness and sophistication, poses an increasingly difficult challenge to preserving Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, a challenge –even without doubling the relative size of the permanent Muslim population, via annexation—which is likely to render it impossible.
Almost child-like naiveté
Indeed, it takes an almost-childlike naiveté to entertain the belief that Israel could sustain itself as a Jewish nation-state with a massive Muslim minority of 35- 40% – as the societal mayhem, which far smaller proportions have wrought in Europe, indicates.
In the past I have endeavored to underscore the irrevocable havoc a policy that calls for the annexation of Judea-Samaria and continued permanent residency of the Arab population there, is almost inevitably likely to cause – see: To My Colleague Caroline, A Caveat ; Sovereignty? Yes, But Look Before You Leap; Islamizing Israel – When The Radical Left And Hard Right Concur. I urge readers to take note of the arguments I raise in them—not all of which I am able to include in this essay.
There are only two post-annexation possibilities: Either the Arab population in the annexed territories will be accorded equal civil rights and liberties, or they will not. If they are not—and in the absence of any clear blueprint for their political future—Israel will be hopelessly, and rightly, exposed to accusations of ethnic discrimination—especially if the Jewish residents in those areas are accorded such rights.
If they are, the impact on Israel’s socio-economic and cultural fabric is likely to be devastating in terms of the effect on societal norms, leisure activities, acceptable modes of entertainment, gender equality and so on. This is especially true when the bulk of the newly annexed population has been subjected to decades of Judeophobic indoctrination and Judeocidal incitement.
The societal impact of one-statism
Once the Arab population of Judea-Samaria becomes incorporated into Israel’s permanent population, at least two crucial elements of national life are almost certain to be dramatically—and in Zionist-compliant terms, negatively –impacted. The one is the distribution of national resources; the other is population flows into, and out of, the country.
With regard to the former, clearly once the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria—whether enfranchised or not—become incorporated into the country’s permanent population, Israel will not be able to afford the kind of socio-economic disparities that prevail between the pre- and post-annexation segments of the population.
Accordingly, huge budget resources will have to be diverted to reduce such disparities – siphoning off funds currently spent on the Jewish population (and Israeli Arabs) in terms of welfare, medical care, infrastructure education and so on.
Indeed, if enfranchisement (eventual or immediate) is envisaged, the electoral potential of the Arab sector is liable to be elevated from its current 13-15 seats in parliament to 25-30. This will not only hugely bolster its ability to demand enhanced budgetary allotments, but also make it virtually impossible to form a governing coalition without their endorsement.
Moreover, various ad hoc parliamentary collaboration with radical Jewish left-wing factions are likely to nullify any formal calculations of an ostensible “Jewish majority”, and lead to legislative enterprises that ultra-Zionist proponents of annexation would strongly oppose – in an ironic manifestation of unintended consequences.
One-statism & the impact on “Aliyah”…and “Yeridah”
Some optimistic (or is that myopic?) one-staters believe that, following annexation of Palestinian-Arabs residents in Judea-Samaria, the Jewish population will be bolstered significantly by energized ways of Jewish immigration (Aliyah).
Such claims are unpersuasive, to say the least. After all, it is not immediately obvious how Israel, with a 30-40% Muslim minority ,will be any more attractive than it is today for Jews abroad to choose to live in it –and for Jews already resident in it to stay here. Indeed, a far more plausible case can be made for the claim that such annexation will deter Jewish immigration and spur Jewish emigration (Yeridah).
In terms of GDP per capita Israel will be catapulted backwards by decades, jeopardizing its status as an advanced postindustrial country and its newly won membership in the OECD—a development hardly likely to attract educated Jewish professionals from abroad to opt for Israel as their preferred place of abode.
Indeed, with an emboldened and enlarged Muslim minority, the new post-annexation Israel is not only likely to impede Jewish immigration, but stimulate Jewish emigration of current Israeli citizens , wishing to distance themselves, and their families, from the emerging post-annexation societal realities.
By contrast, the effect on Arab population movements in and out of the country is liable to be precisely the opposite. Annexation, and the prospect of being incorporated into the permanent population of Israel is likely to bring the currently accelerating Arab emigration to a shuddering halt.
One-statism & the Lebanonization of Israel
For those who believe Israel would adopt a far more robust and assertive policy than the Europeans in dealing with defiant challenges from its Muslim communities, the flaccid Israeli response to phenomena, like illegal Arab construction in the Galilee or general lawlessness (from drug trafficking to polygamy) in the Negev leave ample scope for skepticism, if not downright pessimism.
Annexation of Judea-Samaria, without any program for drastically reducing its Arab population, will inevitably culminate in the Lebanonization of Israel, with all the attendant inter-ethnic strife and violence that haunts that tortured and fractured country. It is a proposal that –however well-intentioned—will bring about the end of the Zionist dream—as surely as the two-state paradigm it was meant to replace.
Which brings me full circle.
Allow me to conclude this column with the same words I concluded last week’s.
“To ensure its survival as the nation state of the Jewish people Israel requires a policy paradigm that addresses both its geographic and demographic imperatives for survival…
Accordingly, it must be a proposal that ensures Israeli control over vital geo-strategic assets in Judea-Samaria and drastically reduces the presence of the hostile Arab population resident there—preferably by non-coercive means such as economic inducements…which, by the way, is what attracted the bulk of the Arab population here in the first place.
To formulate such an alternative policy paradigm in lieu of the two-state formula, to acquire sufficient legitimacy for it, to advance it in the public discourse and to generate widespread recognition for its adoption as a national imperative is undoubtedly one of the most pressing and pertinent questions on the Zionist agenda today”
Dr. Martin Sherman (www.martinsherman.org) is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (www.strategic-israel.org)
watsa46 Said:
Send resume !!!!!!!!!!!
@ honeybee:
I “wish”!!! Honey.
@ watsa46:
Sir, are you suggesting polygamy ?
yamit82 Said:
Boychik, you ain’t never been roped. Trust me, Mexican sisal.
yamit82 Said:
I shall have you contact my lawyers, accountants, drill boss, too pusher and ranch manager.
Sebastien Zorn Said:
I have learned through much trial and little error.
@ honeybee:
On the contrary, the more contribute the BETTER! Sweet heart!
honeybee Said:
I prefer hemp ropes.
Felix Quigley Said:
Are you referring to those who believe in a supreme being or god???? Objectively your Commie realism and projections looking forward pales to the accuracy and moral certainty of your despised super-nationalists.
honeybee Said:
You just like their accents.
Sebastien Zorn Said:
In Texas they say, ” just Bless yawl’s lit’O’ heart”.
watsa46 Said:
Correct, not even in top 10 in their priorities. We cannot and should not expect much help from diaspora Jews. THEIR COLLECTIVE FATES AS JEWS ARE NUMBERED.
Sebastien Zorn Said:
Depends on your ability to preform and no just complain. I ,as you may have read, great faith in Israeli men.
Sebastien Zorn Said:
‘ I am no grumbler,
Oh yes you are !!!!! When I taught first grade in a 8 room border school, Lupe came to me complaining that books in our little library were in disorder. I immediately put him in charge of the library. Be part of the solution or shut up.”
I take it then that in the highly unlikely event that I should run for President, I will have your unqualified support.
My mother thanks you, my father thanks you, my sister thanks you, and I thank you. From the bottom of my heart. Sincerely.
“The most important thing is sincerity. Once you learn to fake that, the rest is easy” – George Burns.
Sebastien Zorn Said:
Oh yes you are !!!!! When I taught first grade in a 8 room border school, Lupe came to me complaining that books in our little library were in disorder. I immediately put him in charge of the library. Be part of the solution or shut up.
yamit82 Said:
Watched the bullriding out of NC last night . You shore as Hell don’t want an Ol’Bramer bull after ya. That being said, I usually let a man chase me till I catches him up using a horse hair rope.
I just love this:
From “Look Back Mrs. Lot” (1965) by Ephraim Kishon quoted in Baedeker’s Israel, U.S. and Canadian edition. 1993. Chapter entitled, “Quotations”. pp. 88-89:
“The History of Tel Aviv, too, is quite notable. It dates back only fifty years. Once upon a time, fifty years ago, there were two Jews in a desolate sandy waste. One of them gave it as his opinion that no human being could live there. The other maintained that where there was a will there was a way. They made a bet in it. And so Tel Aviv was founded.
‘Conditions were so wretched, however, that for a very long time no one settled there. Those who tried were soon driven away by the infernal heat and scattered in all directions. Even the handful of jews who felt compelled, for reasons that were not always clear, to build their miserable shacks on the site and carry on their questionable businesses there fled to more hospitable regions when circumstances permitted.
‘ Tel Aviv came into being without any planning but with a great deal of noise. When the population rose to 15,000 the noise was so great that 5000 of the made good their escape.
‘ The lack of planning had increasingly distressing effects. The streets, laid out with a population of 10,000 in view, were much too cramped to allow even a semi-satisfactory flow of traffic for 50,000 people. As a result, even the greatest optimists despaired of the future of Tel Aviv. And certainly the dismal and unsightly town had a depressing effect on its 100,000 inhabitants, not least because of the almost complete absence of open spaces. When it is considered too, that the town had only inadequate rudiments of a drainage system, so that when it rained, whole districts were under water, it is easy to understand why the population never rose above 150,000. Tel Aviv, we must regretfully admit, is not an attractive town. How many Jews can we expect to live in an intolerably overcrowded huddle of houses in catastrophic housing conditions? Well, how many? 250,000? All right; but that is the absolute maximum.
‘ I am no grumbler, I assure you, but I cannot help wondering how it is possible for a city of 400,000 inhabitants to have no zoo and to do practically nothing else for its children. Why, for example, is there no decent bathing station? Why are there no nice places where people can enjoy a day in the country? These are not trifling questions: the justified complaints of 700,000 Jews are no trifle.
‘It is high time the city fathers did something about these things. Otherwise, it will be at least 3 years before the population of Tel Aviv reaches the million mark…”
Anti-Semitism drives record-high Western European immigration to IsraelAmid rise in attacks, 9,880 make aliya in 2015, including almost 8,000 from FranceBY ARON HELLER January 14, 2016, 5:21 pm 49
http://www.timesofisrael.com/anti-semitism-drives-record-high-western-european-immigration-to-israel/
“AP — Jewish immigration to Israel from Western Europe has reached an all-time high as a result of a rise in anti-Semitic attacks, a leading nonprofit group said Thursday.
‘The Jewish Agency, which works closely with the Israeli government and acts as a link for Jews around the world, reported that 9,880 Western European Jews immigrated to Israel in 2015 — the highest annual number ever.
‘The vast majority, close to 8,000, came from France where a rise in anti-Semitic attacks has shattered the sense of security of the world’s third-largest Jewish population.”
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/10000-French-immigrants-expected-to-arrive-in-2016-443786
Arielle Di Porto, director of aliya at the Jewish Agency, said that most of those coming from France are young families with children.
https://news.vice.com/article/why-record-numbers-of-ukrainian-jews-are-fleeing-to-israel
March 16, 2016 | 1:10 pm
“In 2015, some 7,500 Jewish people left Ukraine for Israel: up from 6,000 in 2014, and following many years when the flow from Kiev to Jerusalem was little more than a trickle. Most fled from the conflict-ridden east of the country: first westwards, and then across the Black Sea to Tel Aviv.’
@ Sebastien Zorn:Sharon and his lawyer sold everyone a bill of goods. They lied. They got the Bush letter to make it seem like Israel was getting something worthwhile out of the deal. The USA twisted not Israel’s hand but went along with Weinglass who was constantly in the White House working this out.
Here is the bill of goods sold the Israeli public.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Pay me to move!!! Make me an offer and I will seriously consider.
Arabs can easily be moved out or eliminated if there is either political will and or national necessity preferably both. 🙂
Anti-Semitism drives record-high Western European immigration to IsraelAmid rise in attacks, 9,880 make aliya in 2015, including almost 8,000 from FranceBY ARON HELLER January 14, 2016, 5:21 pm 49
http://www.timesofisrael.com/anti-semitism-drives-record-high-western-european-immigration-to-israel/
“AP — Jewish immigration to Israel from Western Europe has reached an all-time high as a result of a rise in anti-Semitic attacks, a leading nonprofit group said Thursday.
‘The Jewish Agency, which works closely with the Israeli government and acts as a link for Jews around the world, reported that 9,880 Western European Jews immigrated to Israel in 2015 — the highest annual number ever.
‘The vast majority, close to 8,000, came from France where a rise in anti-Semitic attacks has shattered the sense of security of the world’s third-largest Jewish population.”
@ honeybee:
Not that hard, depends who’s chasing
Austin Said:
I fully agree but you forget the 15 million Pashtuns….
Getting back to our problem:
In this article:
http://jcpa.org/article/the-disengagement-the-unanswered-question/
It says that there were hypothetical plans in IDF drawers and unsuccessful political campaigns advocating withdrawal but winds up inconclusively.
In this article http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19442 reading further down, it’s not just the rabbi but Ambassador Danny Ayalon:
“But the US government was behind it all along.
In meetings with concerned American citizens, Danny Ayalon, Israeli ambassador to the US at the time, clearly stated that Sharon’s Retreat Plan was part of an overall Israeli-American agreement.
In late June, 2005, Ayalon met with representatives of the Orthodox Union, one of the largest contingents of American Orthodox Jews, and told them clearly that “Prime Minister Sharon is left with no choice. He is doing exactly what the US expects him to do.”
In an interview with the Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, published on June 22nd, 2005, Ayalon reversed earlier Israeli government statements, saying that Israel does not expect the Palestinian Authority (PA) to dismantle terrorist infrastructure until after the planned expulsion. He mentioned that ending terrorism and anti-Israel incitement had been conditions Israel had demanded from the PA before carrying out the plan; however, Ayalon indicated that the agreement with the US was more important than an agreement with the PA.
The Israeli ambassador said, “Disengagement has to be viewed in the context of Israel-United States relations…. This pullout did not follow an agreement with the Palestinians, but it followed something which is much more important, an agreement with the United States. Disengagement is something that creates a common agenda between us and the United States.”
In the final interview given by Benyamin Netanyahu before his resignation from the Sharon government, he indicated that the current policy pursued by the government of Israel should be perceived as a threat to the security interests of the US and of all Western countries, since it created a terror base in Gaza, and since the Palestinian Authority incorporated the Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations instead of dismantling them.
Yet, the directive of the US State Department remained unaltered: Prime Minister Ariel Sharon must dismantle and withdraw any and all Israeli presence from every Jewish community in the Katif district of Gaza by mid-August.”
So, I re-iterate: Generals try to analyze every possible scenario. Politics is war by other means. So, once again: How about a hypothetical discussion: what’s the worst that could happen if Israel just says no.
yamit82 Said:
On who catches you ????
Sebastien Zorn Said:
It’s not the jump Sugar, it’s the landing that’s tricky.
@ watsa46:
I Agree well put
“So, if your friend Johnny decides to jump off the roof, you have to jump off the roof, too?”
Depends”
Very Japanese.
And yes, we can definitely see the Samurai influence of Bushido along with Hellenism on Jewish Culture. For example, we have the month of Nissan. Which is, of course, followed in rapid succession by the months of Toyota, Honda, Suzuki, Lexus and Mitsubishi.
@ Sebastien Zorn:
It’s OK name names.
REAL REASON FOR DISENGAGEMENT PLAN
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index788.htm
TED MY COMMENT WAS BOTTED PLS RETRIEVE VERY RELEVANT
Sebastien Zorn Said:
Depends
Sebastien Zorn Said:
An adage I always failed to heed.
I prefer not to get personal so I will leave names out and stick to substance. In response to “I was taught in Sat School the Jews must always behave in a manner that will garner the approval of the goyim.’ Which it’s true, I’ve heard a lot, I’m reminded another adage Jews learn at their Mother’s Knee:
“So, if your friend Johnny decides to jump off the roof, you have to jump off the roof, too?”
@ Bear Klein:
SHARON LIED TO EVERYONE…..Bear Klein is correct.
@ Bear Klein:
watsa46 Said:
Feeling a challenge, watsa46 ????
Is Sebastian a one man issue?
Very prolific.
I have noticed that general are POOR politicians!!! And should NOT get involved in premiership.
Examples:
Dayan gave up the Temple Mount to subhumans …
Rabin gave the disastrous Oslo Sh…t!
Barak ran away empty hands from S Lebanon
Sharon gave up Gaza in exchange for thousand of bombs and 3 or 4 wars!!!
Reasons:
Politicians if they are good, must have a long term view of issues; while generals must have a short term view of issues.
But BOTH have to work together to make sure that victories in arms are followed by victories in POLITICS! In the “civil” world!!! Where “corruption” is self-destructive.
Sebastien Zorn Said:
I was taught in Sat School the Jews must always behave in a manner that will garner the approval of the goyim.
@ Sebastien Zorn:Sharon may have told this lie to the Rabbi because he could NOT tell him the truth.
The USA asked the Israelis if they really wanted to do this.
Sharon was panicked by investigations of corruption and his lawyer Weinstein came up with this plan to change the subject. That way the leftist media would get off his back. This they did.
http://jcpa.org/article/the-disengagement-the-unanswered-question/
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19442
The rabbi who knew the real reason for Arik Sharon’s “Disengagement”
New Article on Arutz Sheva says Rabbi Sharon trusted said Sharon confided that the disengagement from Gaza was on the express orders from Washington. Israel also withdrew from territory on Eisenhower’s express orders. Bibi is also obviously dancing a tune accepting this ridiculous “aid” package that just hampers Israel’s defense industry and defense in time of war should Washington decide to hold up supplies of shells or spare parts like last time.
What is the worst the U.S. could do? Recognize Palestinian statehood in the U.N.? What could or would anybody do if Israel said, “so what”. We don’t recognize your decision. Why is it even necessary to stay in the U,N,?
George W. Bush had a great idea of an alliance of Democracies at one point.
How about discussing worst possible case scenarios, Jerusalem just says to Washington: No. We will go our own way. Do as you like.
@ Ted Belman:
Really Ted you are modifying my comment in praise of Israeli men??
CuriousAmerican Said:
I have faith that the Jewish/Israeli population can live up to the challenge.
CuriousAmerican Said:
I have much more faith then CA in the fruitfulness of the Jewish/Israeli population.
CuriousAmerican Said:
I have much more faith in the virility of Jewish/Israeli men.