“Things you see from here you do not see from there.” This timeless statement was uttered by Ariel Sharon, the former prime minister of Israel, as he carried out Israel’s disengagement plan from Gaza in 2005. Sharon’s words ring true when it comes to the current debate regarding the two-state solution. The view from within Israel is quite different than the view from outside the State.
Recently, there have been critical debates between Israel and other countries regarding the two-state solution and what emerges is two different approaches. The first perspective suggests that Israel should annex Judea and Samaria and grant citizenship to residents of the Palestinian Authority. In my humble opinion, this will lead to the demise of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state and therefore it is inherently wrong. The second view advocates that Israel should quickly negotiate a two-state solution before it’s too late. Even the supporters of this approach admit that it is not the right solution, but simply the best option at the moment because it prevents Israel from becoming an apartheid state. We have to ask: Is that really true?
Here is the perspective from within Israel. Whenever the international community proposed to divide the land, Israel agreed to go along often taking painful measures of uprooting its citizens from their homes. On the other side, the Arabs have consistently unleashed waves of terror and mass violence, leading to thousands of Israeli and Palestinian deaths. This was the case in 1937, 1947, 1994 and 2000. Since Ariel Sharon’s withdrawal in 2005, Israel has received countless rocket attacks from Gaza. What’s most regrettable is that the international community barely seems to notice.
Moreover, a deeper understanding of the Palestinian Authority only confirms what the Western world should be fearing. The Palestinian leadership ultimately seeks to establish a state in place of Israel instead of state next to Israel. Similar to the dark days of Nazi Germany, incitement found in Palestinian media and educational system destroy all hopes for meaningful change from the Palestinians. Further, the Palestinian leaders often support two states in English but in Arabic they are encouraging Jihad. Just recently, Abbas Zaki, a Palestinian leader, said in an interview to Al Jazeera that the Palestinians’ ultimate goal is to destroy Israel, but they cannot say that to the world.
Here is what is especially troubling. Since the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994, it has received more than $26 billion to create an independent state. This is double the amount of money that it took for the Marshall Plan to rehabilitate Europe. Where did all the money go? Unfortunately, it went to fund a corrupt government that invests its money in terrorism rather than humanitarian aid. Let’s think of what would happen if the Palestinians established a terror state that was protected by the international community. This would go against all the principles and values of the West.
It must be emphasized that in the current reality, most Palestinians live under self-autonomy. Israel does not control them but only does what is necessary to protect its citizens from terrorism. If Israel did control the Palestinians, as some mistakenly claim, it would prevent all the incitement described above. Rather, Israel is also doing whatever it can to allow the Palestinians to prosper. One of many examples includes the fact that Israel forgave a Palestinian debt of $70 million dollars to allow Palestinian residents to have electricity.
Many Israelis are willing to accept the establishment of a Palestinian state on condition that it does not replace the State of Israel. Therefore, it is important to continue negotiations to find a solution acceptable to both sides. At the same time, we have the obligation to do everything we can to put an end to the Palestinians who believe that Israelis will not remain in Israel forever.
This is one reason why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists that the Palestinians recognize the Jewish state and insists on ensuring that all of Israel’s security needs are met. Further, one-sided criticism against Israel, like UN Resolution 2334, is harmful and counterproductive. Therefore, it must be said that President Trump’s approach to the Israel-Palestinian conflict is a sensible and realistic approach. Unfortunately, the damage created by the Obama administration may affect future generations and will certainly take time to repair.
Eli Hazan is the director of foreign affairs of Likud Party in Israel
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions.
