By Niram Ferretti, Postato il
Following the latest conflict between Israel and Gaza, L’Informale wanted to hear the opinion of Martin Sherman, former Ministerial Advisor of Yitzakh Shamir and founder and executive director of the Institute for Israeli Strategic Studies, one of the leading experts in the Middle East and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The recent conflict between Israel and Hamas encapsulates a new element, riots by Arab-Israeli. In 2004, Israeli historian Benny Morris, said that Arab-Israeli were a time bomb. Was he right?
Yes I think he was right. Morris transitioned from being a radical left wing Arab sympathizer to someone having a rather harsh view about the Arab role in the conflict. I believe that this is a zero sum game between the Jews and the Arabs over the Holy Land. Under the surface, there was, indeed,is latent but smoldering, animosity that was going to break out. You saw this a few times. Under Rabin and Peres for example there were wide spread Arab riots throughout Israel which were put down with a number of fatalities and then also under Ehud Barak there was a revolt, just before the Intifada and again there were fatalities. So there are precedents for this, the novelty is that now the riots are combined with the issue of the evictions in Sheikh Jarrah, which involve a property dispute now in the courts. The issue has nothing to do with ethnic discrimination. It is the refusal of people living there to pay the rent. Jews who don’t pay the rents are also evicted from the properties where they stay. This is a very dangerous situation. Yes, it is a time bomb that has exploded in small scales in the past and that now with the issue of the Temple Mount and Sheikh Jarrah and the shelling from Gaza it seems to be far more flammable than the other events in the past. It is a time for a far-raching change in Israel’s attitude towards its Arab citizens. They can’t have it both ways. They have considerable benefits living in Israel rather than in one of the neighboring countries, and perhaps the last thing they really want is Israel being replaced by an Arab regime, because then, their situation would be far worse. I certainly agree with Benny Morris, but I am less pessimistic, because Morris doesn’t seem see anyway for Israel to continue surviving inth elong run, while I think it still has options, but none of them includes leaving inherently disloyal citizens inside its sovereign boundaries.
As in the past, the new conflict has ended with a truce, it’s just a question of time before a new conflict will start again. It looks like a vicious circle. Is this so?
It depends what your basic assumptions are. It was Albert Einstein who said that you can’t solve problems within the same level of thinking that created them and basically what created the problem here is the attempt
to confer self determination on the Palestinian Arabs, whether that is in Judea and Samaria or in Gaza. As long as you believe that there can be some self-governing Arab entity in Gaza, the situation will drag on. I have been saying this for three decades now: The only way to solve the problem is to remove the Arab presence in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria by large scale initiatives for incentivized immigration. Many Gazans would be more than willing to accept a generous payment and find a better and more secure life elsewhere, outside the circle of violence and extract themselves from the cruel and corrupt clique that has led them from disaster to disaster. If you are a Jew who lives in the Negev, in the south, close to Gaza, why would you want continue to bring up children in the kind of atmosphere we have today? Eventually Israel is going to face a very thorny dilemma: there either be Jews in the Negev or Arabs in Gaza, but there won’t be both. The Palestinians have showed great ingenuity in only one area, developing armaments and no one can dismiss the claim that they may be able to create something like a low flowing Cruise -type missile, that Iron Dome is not designed to intercept. I do not think there can to be any consensual resolution of the situation in Gaza except that of incentivizing immigration and letting the population find a better and more secure life in third party countries.
What you just said brings up the next topic. You have been advocating this for years and called it “The humanitarian paradigm”, in other words the incentivized immigration of Arabs from Israel.
They have tried the two states solution now for one third of a century, backed by massive international endorsement . It has produced devastation for both Jews and Arabs, especially for the Arabs. It has put them under a tyrannical regime which no sincere liberal ought to support. After all, by supporting a Palestinian state you are supporting the establishment of yet another homophobic, misogynist, Muslim majority tyranny whose hallmarks would be the harassment of homosexuals, gender bias against women, the suppression of political dissidence and the persecution of non Muslim faiths. Significantly, When I predict that this will be the nature of a Palestinian state I have not heard any two staters producing an argument to contradict this assumption. Why would it be different than what we see in Gaza? There are people talking about demilitarizing Gaza, but if you demilitarize Gaza who will be responsible for its external security? It has been a decade and a half since Israel pulled out of Gaza and what has been the improvement?
The demand to lift the quarantine amounts nothing less than antisemitic, because it means that Jews should not be allowed cannot defend themselves. Israel has mistakenly supported the Hamas regime with humanitarian aid through money coming from Qatar, instead of letting whole the thing collapse and initiate a large immigration scheme. I give a theoretical example not necessarily a practical one, but if all the Arabs in Gaza including also Judea and Samaria were to immigrate to say, Indonesia it would be a very small change into the Indonesian population and Indonesia would have a influx of billions of dollars into its economy. It looks like a win-win situation to me for every one except for the corrupt leadership of the Palestinians. I think this shold be an alternative to be seriously discussed by the international community. If the international community would endorse it, the problem would be solved easily.
With this conflict it seems that Hamas has reached a major goal, superseding Fatah as the main referent for Palestinians in their conflict against Israel. Is this so?
In the Palestinian territories Hamas won handsomely, this is the reason why Mahmoud Abbas after twelve years of his four years term is afraid of elections. Hamas has been the ascendant force in the Palestinian society long before this conflict and this indicates that there can be no consensual solution because the raison d’être of Hamas is to be an uncompromising enemy of Israel.
In a recent article of yours you have written that Netanyahu is the only Israeli politician capable of coping with the challenges that Israel must face. Why?
I think that Netanyahu’s biggest advantage at this stage is that there is no real alternative. I don’t see anyone that can come close to him in terms of his international stature, his grasp of the international theatre and the breath of his knowledge. This being said I have a lot of disagreements with him, he has been very lax in dealing with the problem of crime in the Arab sector, I think he has not allotted enough resources for Israel’s public diplomacy. I don’t think he has been robust enough in dealing with the distortions in Israel’s legal system, especially the judiciary and he is now reaping the bitter fruits of that himself because of the ridiculous campaign against him. I agree with the barrage of prominent American jurists according to whom, Netanyahu should have never been brought to trial. He is not an unblemished political figure but in comparison none of the competitors are anywhere near him.
What is your opinion about Netanyahu having considered to have the Arab party Ra’am backing a right wing coalition?
The situation was then that Ra’am would either have gone with the right wing government or the left wing government and probably the least of all evils at that stage was that Ra’am should be affiliated with the right wing government rather than the opposite, which would have made far more concessions in relation to its demands.
How worried are you about the Biden administration reentering the JCPOA? Do you think this is ultimately going to happen?
The short answer is that I am extremely worried It doesn’t even matter if they enter into something similar–non exactly the same as the JCPOA. Some years ago Henry Kissinger and George Shultz wrote a really good article in The Wall Street Journal in which they argued that the agreement is basically a license for the Iranians to develop weaponized capabilities.
But it is ’s not only the fact that they may use these capabilities but the fact they would be able spread a nuclear umbrella over their proxies and allow them to operate with impunity because they will have nuclear protection. This means massive terror waves across the world which you could do really little about. Biden worries me a great eal. I think there certainly will be a strong tailwind driving everything into the direction of something like the JCPOA or something similar, maybe slightly better but non significantly , because how are you going to deal with the Iranian rocket technology and their promotion of terror across the globe? There has been an enormous misconception with the Democratic party regarding Islam. Biden himself is a cardboard cutout president, he is just here to do the serve thae agendas of others like Kamala Harris, Alexandra Ocasio Cortez, Omar Ilhan and Rhashida Tlaib . All the ideological and organizational energies in the Democratic Party are with the “progresives” –i.e. the radical left The moderates have no real ability to stop this,thus the party will drift further to the left and become more radicalized which will make the deal with the Iranians advantageous for them. There is not much room for optimism, we can just hope for the unexpected.
It seems you are already missing Donald Trump.
The thing about Trump is that unfortunately the American voters could not distinguish between personality and policy. Trump did not have a particularly endearing public personality, his public persona was very abrasive, but his policies were good. This inability to distinguish between good policies and bad personality, at least his public personality, brought about this disaster called Biden.
The NGO must pay DIRECTLY to the movers, packers, cab companies, etc. which on their “approved” list. and DIRECTLY to the airlines, etc. for the tickets.
The “resettlement” money should be deposited to a bank chosen by the NGO in the country where the family is going to reside after receiving the proof of residence, and the bonus money paid the same way to the family after one year.
Otherwise, there will be a great business of fleecing the NGO while staying put where they are.
No problem, Bear.
@Peloni
Thanks for your detailed answer.
(2 of 2)
With regards to Bibi, he was a young and ambitious politician who unseated his leader and became PM to face the political behemoth called Bill Clinton which he squarely opposed and then was squarely defeated by. This inopportune moment could have been avoided by the more politically savvy and very slippery Bibi of 2021.
Bennett has the opportunity to outshine Bibi in this regard as the similarities of the situation are clear, and I hope for his every success in doing so, but he has hamstrung himself with limiting factors that, like or not, may restrict his reach of a proper response to Obama and Obama is likely quite aware of these limiting constraints which he will aim to utilize as he moves to further empowering Iran.
I opposed Bibi onmany smaller issues such as the Bedouin in the Negev and other topics, but such resolutions could have been dealt with in less auspicious times than now. Everything should, I believe, be mustered to oppose the will of Obama in this moment. And Bennett’s gov’t seems more fashioned towards seeking domestic reforms that are not unimportant or insignificant to the state – it’s just that they are less vital to the survival of the state.
So, no, I do not wish to spank Bennett, his partners are worrisome and I like others would gain great support of the disclosure of the arrangements which I now understand are incomplete at current. Should his gov’t survive the election process, I will wish him every success, I just am concerned as to what success his dubious alliances may allow.
I do not hope to have these partners of his, who I oppose on many vital issues, to remain long in the gov’t. From Gantz to Abbas, I have serious question on each of them and these questions have little to do with an intention towards upsetting political sensitivities.
I see Israel as being in a very great storm and many would choose this time to mend fences and dig a new well as if they were mindless of the weather. Hence, the questions I raise should not be accepted as some subterfuge to upset or confound Bennett’s support, they are just questions of concern that are more fairly based than supports such suspicions. But politics is an ugly business, so I do understand such suspicions are likely to remain of my motives for such inquires.
Regarding the inner workings of the Israeli gov’t, I am pretty familiar with it. My question was not of the authority of the ministers within their portfolio, it is the question of gov’t funding for such projects, i.e. the budget, but now I see you specifically noted they were NGO’s. Sorry for my confusion on this point. I am very supportive of your idea here.
One more point, Bibi could well have done much more in the last two years as PM when Trump was president, but he was a lame duck due to Lieberman’s twisted political maneuvers to block the formation of a Right-wing gov’t from that day to today and, I believe, this cost the state many great rewards.
/2
(1 of 2)
Bear, I appreciate your likely suspicions of my opposition for Bennett’s move to form this gov’t. And, you would naturally take input for this opposition from my revelation that I am unmoved in my certainty that Bibi is the best champion for Israel to achieve success in the daunting battles(many of them I think) that the state is facing as it approaches Obama’s Third Term.
But these are different topics in my mind, though I seem pathetically capable in my ability to likely convince people of this very definite fact. Bennett has moved to empower Abbas. Bibi did make the first offers of something to Abbas, but as we all know about Bibi, he has become a master at avoiding having to close such unpleasant deals.
I could write volumes on this very foolish move by Bibi to make such offers and Bennett to make such awards as will become tomorrow’s reality with the full support of law. The elevation of this political Dentist will lead to him gaining much, very much, more support from the Arab voters in future, but more importantly, he is likely becoming something of a rock star to the Arab youth, our future partners in the land and struggle that has defined Israel since decades before 1948.
It is distasteful for the Israeli Arabs to find celebrity among terrorists, but for Israel’s leadership, first with Bibi’s endorsement of him and then Bennett’s actual rewards of lands and fiscal grants to him, to support such a poor choice of Arab leadership will have serious consequences.
And in the same moment Bennett allows Meretz to be elevated to some authority, near sources of such details of state as I would not allow men such as these in the same block. These are my strongest oppositions to this gov’t, but not all. Gantz and Lapid both supported the JPOA in 2015, which is why I pressed you last week on this point. So, there is a lot that supports opposition in this gov’t for me and it has little to do with a nostalgia of Bibi. I have, fairly stated that for too long, too much was made of this dominating issue of Bibi.
He is no monster and he is no deity. He is a successful leader who has afford great opposition to our enemies and great leadership to the nation who seems to have been defeated by the creation of a phantom of the Left which was wielded by many hands of the Right. If Bennett had defeated him with a Rightwing gov’t, regardless of my concerns of Obama, I could support him easily. But this is no Right-wing gov’t that I see. And of course the devil lies in the details, so the sooner we see them the better for all, as I have stated.
/1
@Peloni, actually the way Israeli government works I am not sure you truly understand. I know you do not approve of the government so you are inclined to try and find a way to spank verbally its formation (kindly correct me if I am wrong here).
I proposed two NGOs be formed. If Orbach ends up in charge of settlements that does NOT mean he must run everything by the entire coalition as an example to do anything. The Prime Minister also has a lot of power.
So getting Bennett on Saar on board and using the two NGOs (who are not part of the government) would be a mechanism to start implementing a version of the Humanitarian plan. Yes somethings would need Coalition approval such as applying Israeli Law to Judea/Samaria. This will not happen under this coalition and would not have happened if Bibi was PM and Biden POTUS. Hell Bibi did not do it when Trump was POTUS.
@Bear Klein
Creative solutions to solve a lack of momentum, Bear. This raises a question about Bennett’s partners in my mind – and not Meretz or Abbas. Everything must be approved by all members, so lets suppose that Meretz and Abbas are soon leveraged into the rear-view mirror of political import – a happy moment I look forward to celebrating. Lapid and Gantz would still have to agree to moves that would oppose both Lapid’s two state agenda and Gantz’s decided faith to the wishes of our American friends. So, do you agree with this assessment, or do you suspect my assessment with these two is unwarranted?
I have always like Martin’s idea as a core idea that I would like to see enacted.
Truth is it has never had any traction. NOT one current politician pushes this idea (meaning any MK in the in the last 10 years).
So Martin or anyone else reading my comment how does your idea get real world traction? What will get it moving? Just writing an occasional article or doing an interview is NOT sufficient. Action is needed to make it real world.
My idea has been to:
1. Form an NGO to buy Palestinian Properties in Jerusalem and elsewhere in Judea/Samaria starting with Area C in villages next to Jewish Towns. Resell these properties to Jews and recycle the money to buy more Arab owned properties.
2. Form a different NGO to help Arabs quickly move to other countries. Provide financial incentives to help them go. Make sure they receive their funds when it is confirmed they are leaving.
Also in addition to the above is get Bennett and Saar to approve of the above concept and find financially and organizationally able partners to implement the above. Martin, in the past you wanted to use a shot gun approach meaning just pay all anywhere to leave. This I believe will dilute the impact on the ground and result in nothing of significance happening.
@Peloni
EXACTLY
(3 of 3)
Also, funds would be used to create an emerging society that the Pals could join as members of the nation rather than approach as incoming princes rich with Israeli money and the nagging mental impasse of having no political solution. The Jordan option would not be cost free, but the expense of funds would be to an actual nation and create a stable homeland – something the Pals could come to value as a basis to give up concepts of conquest. The cost would also be likely less substantial that large stipends to each Pal emigrating.
The Jordan Option also provides the advantage of a partner to take responsibility for the unpleasant reality that the concentration of the Pals and their violent tendencies could result in much mischief. The education of Pals would need to be addressed as well as they are fed antisemitic diet from birth til death. But with the proper political partner in Jordan who would take responsibility for both their citizens and the boundary between the two states, a peace could be obtained. But it would take a sincerely willing ruler in Jordan. It would also require a honest broker to be present in the US White House, i.e. not the 3rd term for Obama and his antisemitic crew.
A serious draw back to the Jordan Option lies in the time element. There is not a friendly ruler in Jordan at current, regardless of the instability of the nation. Beyond this, there is also the issue of the increased state of living that would be needed to support and draw the Pals to live in Jordan, the support of Saudi Arabia and the likely opposition of the Pal’s international allies, who will likely oppose the Jordan Option for the same reasons as Sherman’s plan. But as far as plans go, I believe this would be a more viable option should these hurdles be met. Ultimately, though, I am uncertain that any plan will achieve the goal of peace, as much hatred has been nurtured against Israel and much distrust exists of Arabs by Israel. But should any plan hope to be successful, it would surely need to address the political settlement expectant of the Pals or it will fail in one way or another in its stated goals.
/3
(2 of 3)
To begin with there exists a historical basis, namely that Jordan is the Arab homeland that was promised in the Cairo conference of 1921. It was created in agreement between two notable Englishmen, Winston Churchill and T.E. Lawrence, but much of the world was sliced into relevant borders first created using English cutlery. The nation of Jordan was intended to not be involved in the creation of the Jewish homeland in the balance of the territory with is Israel today. Jordan is also not in a foreign region, as it is just across the River, so to speak(and of course that is not necessarily for the best, but history is what it is). This point of history is significant in spite of the fact that it seems to be a little known fact to many.
The increased stability of the Kingdom of Jordan is hinged on someone actually running it and this would require the King being replaced. Given the instability in this kingdom, such a thing could take place soon. Hopefully with Mudar or a like minded pro-Israel soul would come to power without blood oaths and and able to carryout plans bringing Jordan into a non-failed state economy. The Jordan Option requires Jordan create infrastructure improvements and housing projects that would radically improve the lives of the inhabitants of Jordan – and increase the income levels of the local inhabitants. This could act to draw the Pals living under miserable conditions in Gaza and PA to willingly emigrate to Jordan. Also, the close distance between Jordan and those Israeli Arabs living not far from the border could draw elements of this group from Israel as some already have family and friends in Jordan.
Also to further support this reinvisioned Jordan, Israel could create joint economic investments and partnerships that would benefit each other, and Israel’s many peace partners could do much to help implement such arrangement. The Saudi’s would need to be convinced of the wisdom of this plan, among others.
/2
(1 of 3)
So, it seems Ted wrote a response comparing the two scenarios while I seem to have teased a similar comment into 3 parts. But since I wrote it, I figure I should share it.
The use of significant money to trans-locate Pals into foreign states will place wealthy Pals into substandard economies. That could lead the Pals to have a significant financial, and hence, political advantage within this new nation filled with a poor populace. This newly arriving group of Pals will have a very toxic history which tends to find resolution in barbaric and violent plots to fulfill their objectives.
Should these Pals be sent to an allied nation such as, say, Sudan, this financial/political influence could act like a virus and remove the friendly gov’t – either by political/financial methods or the Pals favorite tool, violence in the way of a well funded coup – thus loosing a new ally in the region. Should somewhere more remote such as Indonesia be chosen the same result with a little more distance will occur, and such distance is somewhat meaningless in today’s mass transit.
The resulting transfer of wealth, presumably from the Israeli public to these love-to-see-the-back-of-you-emmigrants would be a terrible financial burden upon the public, unless it was funded by internationalist sources, of which I am skeptical(see below). But of all the issues that make this proposal unlikely to succeed is that it ignores the political expectation of both the Pals and their terrorist groups and allies. Simply put, they want a state.
They want our state. But they can’t have it. So going to Sudan or Indonesia will not fulfill that political want. They will be in the wrong part of the globe with a large sum of cash. Once that is gone, the political identity will not disappear. What is more, the money given to them will be used by them and others to further the usual antisemitic tropes of Jews and their money.
Meanwhile these funds can be used to purchase death and mayhem which they will be able to ship back to Israel and possibly to our new allies to once again isolate us. Without a political solution to explain to their rising Arab constituencies, I see the international allies of the Pals not only not stepping up to pay for this resolution of the Arab-Israeli problem, I think they will outright oppose it.
Part of the problem with the international community is their domestic Arab constituents. These Arabs are centered around the Israel problem. Should this be removed, what then? They might start looking more domestic agendas to which they might lend their financials support and satiate their violent tendencies if the Israel problem were not present to distract these resources otherwise. With these points of concern in mind, I believe the Jordan Option is a more stable concept.
/1
The humanitarian solution is the only solution but as Adam points out, is it implementable? Its also very costly.
Out of that solution and difficulty was born the Jordan Option, at least my version of it. It is 10% of the cost and very doable.
In essence it involves. 1. replacing the King with a friendly Palestinian leader and 2. Inducing the Palestinians to move 100 miles to the east. Jordan can replace UNRWA providing education, social security and healthcare. Once UNRWA folds, all refugees will have to emigrate to Jordan to get these benefits. Plus many Palestinians living in Gaza and J&S will move to Jordan to get employment. Israel will build industrial centers in Jordan rather than in Area C. Plus our plan involves free housing for all new immigrants to Jordan.
Palestinians east and west of the Jordan river speak the same language and are part of the same clans. In fact there are more Palestinians east of the river than there are west of it.
The international community is not needed and if done right, wont have a say in the matter.
“This inability to distinguish between good policies and bad personality, at least his public personality, brought about this disaster called Biden. ” I am surprised to hear it from Martin Sherman. Trump’s personality is loved by the majority of Americans (me included). What is bad about it? Biden was not elected, we all know it. It was a gigantic operation by the globalists to falsify the election and make this puppet Biden the POTUS. If a big part of the military still supports Trump, hopefully something good can still happen. Otherwise America is gone.
I agree with Dr. Sherman that what he calls the humanitarian solution would be the best solution for Israel, and perhaps also for most Palestinian Arabs as well. However, I also believe that there is a wall of international hostility to this solution, or any solution that involves what the PLO charter calls ‘the liquidation of the Palestinian Question,” that make it impossible to implement it at present and for the forseeable future. Adding to this difficulty is the considerable domestic opposition to this solution by a large minority of Israeli Jews.
Equally , it will benecessary is to persuade the many Israelis who now think that the Palestinian Arabs have a right to a state, and “exiling” them for Palestine/Eretz Israel would be inhumane and unjust, that they are wrong. Both years of Arab propaganda and their own misdirected humanitarian and democratic impulses have misled them.These Israeli Jews, probably a large minority of the population, will also have to be persuaded that a resettlement program and integration into existing states outside “Palestine” could also lead to a happier and more prosperous lives for most Palestinian Arabs than life in a Palestinian state ruled by violent and corrupt politicians.
Unless a future Israel government can somehow accomplish this dramatic turnaround in both international and domestic opinion, advocacy of the humanitarian solution will remain empty talk and will accomplish nothing.
The reasons why international opinion is overwhelmingly hostile to Israel and overwhelmingly supportive of the “Palestinian cause” are complex, but I think antisemitism is at the root of it, since it is a cultural inheritance of both Western ‘post-Christian” and Islamic culture. But Israel’s failure to respond to the massive barrage of well-financed and often very sophisticated, plausible propaganda directed against it, aimed at delegitimizing it, is another major reason why Israel is so hated and despised by the outside world.
In order to be able to implement the humanitarian solution, Israel must develop an effective counter-propaganda and international public-relations and educational repose. (I prefer these expressions to the phrase “public diplomacy favored by Dr. Sherman to describe this putative future campaign, since I think it is too imprecise).
What I hope for is that patriotic Israelis and sincere Zionists will work on developing a practical program for turning around both international and internal Israeli opinion on this issue. I hope in the near future. to share some preliminary brainstorming suggestions I have come up with for making progress towards this goal with Dr.Sherman.
@Ted Belman
Very well stated!!
Now that I read the article again, I find another comment to complain about.
“Biden himself is a cardboard cutout president, he is just there to serve the agendas of others like Kamala Harris, Alexandra Ocasio Cortez, Omar Ilhan and Rhashida Tlaib “
Wrong again. They didn’t put him in power. Obama and many other globalist forces did. The same people who perpetrated the fraud. Biden is doing their bidding. Biden is surrounded by all Obama men who are running the show.
I wrote to Martin the following;
You said;
“The thing about Trump is that unfortunately the American voters could not distinguish between personality and policy. Trump did not have a particularly This inability to distinguish between good policies and bad personality, at least his public personality, brought about this disaster called Biden.”
The American people loved him and his policies. He drew massive crowds at all his many rallies and he got more votes than any American president ever got. He had a great personality.
If you watched him chairing a meeting of experts, advocates or politicians he was very impressive and engaging.
As for whether his public personality brought about Pres Biden not remotely. What brought about Biden was massive fraud so big it was unbelievable. By the end of June it will all come out..
He didn’t bring about President Biden, the fraud did.
Actually, it was more related to the millions of fake votes and swapped votes by Chinese and Iranian hackers who were likely organized by a globalist aligned group which intended to see that the US first policy was doomed to never return.