A few years ago Thomas Friedman wrote a column, “Wanted: Fanatical moderates.” It was advocating the Geneva Accords, a PR exercise undertaken by Yossi Beilin and Yasser Abed Rabbo and a number of others. The point of the exercise was to lay out an example of what an Israeli Palestinian peace treaty might look like.
The fanatical moderate of the title was Yossi Beilin, an Israeli politician and former Knesset member and member of the cabinet. Of course, in Israel, Beilin isn’t in politics anymore. Last election he couldn’t even get a seat. It’s not because there’s anything extreme about Israel’s political scene – it is in fact pretty leftist in orientation compared to twenty years ago – it’s because Beilin is so far the left he no longer has any constituency.
Friedman wanted to sound clever by using words that sound oxymoronic, but, according to him, fit together. The problem is that what he was describing was fanaticism not moderate, so his oxymoron may have sounded clever and counterintuitive when, in fact, it was wrong.
What was clear from that column though is that Friedman is a firm believer in outside pressure to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
He just dredged up his old tricks again this week with, “Time for radical pragmatism.”
After arguing that there’s no way to create a Palestinian state, he argues for more American pressure for Israel to cede land to Abbas to give him a chance to develop credibility. It’s an astonishing argument, especially as he himself noted:
The trust deficit is exacerbated by the fact that after Israel quit the Gaza Strip in 2005, Palestinians, instead of building Singapore there, built Somalia and focused not on how to make microchips, but on how to make rockets to hit Israel.
So you say, but that was Hamas, this is Abbas and Fatah. Why would we expect a different result? Barry Rubin observed a few months ago:
Abbas tells his people and others that, as he said recently to an Islamic summit, Palestinians “are facing a campaign of annihilation” by Israel. The U.S. State Department merely calls this “overheated political rhetoric,” not comprehending that such talk by Abbas incites terrorism and forecloses his own options.It’s easy to justify violence but hard to rationalize making peace with those you say are committing genocide against you. That’s why the PA does things like letting “imprisoned” terrorists who murdered two Israeli hikers to “escape.” Every such terrorist is seen by both the PA and public opinion as a hero.
Fatah is every bit as committed to terror as is Hamas, it’s just a little less open and a lot less competent at it.
The security wall that Israel built (and Operation Defensive Shield ) have reduced Fatah’s terror making ability. But instead of praising this effort to protect Israeli lives, Friedman disparages it (thanks to Elie for observation)
The second energy shortage comes from the fact that Israel, with the wall that it has erected around the West Bank, has so effectively shut down Palestinian suicide bombers that the Israeli public right now feels no sense of urgency, especially with the Israeli economy booming. The West Bank behind the wall might as well be in Afghanistan.
Nor does his suggestion that asking Jordan to come in and help with the security make much sense. (He assured us that Egypt would do everything in its power to prevent a Hamas takeover in Gaza.)
In the end the failure to create a Palestinian state in the territory Israel has ceded is not Israel’s fault, it’s due the failure of Palestinian nationalism to evolve and accept Israel. Forget about settlements. The PLO failed to create a single police force of an acceptable number as stipulated in the accords. It failed to stop incitement. It failed to stop terror. It used its foreign aid to enhance the lifestyles of its favored few. Had it behaved, the popular pressure in Israel (however misguided) would have forced the government to continue ceding more control to the PLO. But Fatah never changed. It never earned the legitimacy it was granted in 1993.
Maybe Israel made mistakes, but the main failures were Fatah’s and the Palestinians’. It never changed from its roots of terror and they never really accepted Israel.
So what Friedman wants isn’t pragmatic, but it is radical. And that’s why his stupid oxymoron is simply moronic.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
This article neglects the primary oxymoron:
“palestinian Intelligence Services” !
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 06/06/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
Now, let’s be fair to Friedman. He is merely followin the line of the western media and diplomats: from the Israelis, deeds are required; from the Palestinians, words.
(He assured us that Egypt would do everything in its power to prevent a Hamas takeover in Gaza.)
Yes, like the Peace Agreement with Egypt assured the world. All the arms and explosives that the Egyptians permitted to be stockpiled in Rafiah and smuggled across the Egyptian Gaza border through the tunnels; the week the border remained open, the first time it was “breached”, for trucks to clear the stockpiles; for the movement of Hezbollah “operatives” to move in and out training Hamas and Islamic Jihad while researching bigger and better IEDs against israeli tanks, later to be put to such effective use against Americans in Iraq, …..
Yes, like Rice’s assurance on the security of the Filidelfi corridor ….
Journalists, second hand car salesmen, politicians (would you let your daughter marry one of them?)