מצורף המאמר בעברית של מוטי קרפל-
המאמר הופיע ב"מקור ראשון" בשבת האחרונה.
התרגום של המאמר לאנגלית נעשה על ידי נשים בירוק כשירות לציבור
יהודית קצובר ונדיה מטר
The following article appeared in Hebrew in Makor Rishon of Friday June 16th 2017
Translated as a public service by Women in Green
People of Faith Must Oppose the Agreement
by Motti Karpel
The political program that Netanyahu, Trump and Abu Mazen are devising, will, of necessity, fail, because it does not address the problem from its root.
Our task is to remind the public of the simple Israeli truth:
One does not enter into agreements with deceit and evil – one decisively defeats them. There is no alternative.
All indications point to the fact that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump's team of advisers are formulating a diplomatic agreement. Obviously, the details are not yet known – apparently, not even to them – but one can begin to approximate the general direction that it will take. The "moderate" Arab states decided to abandon Abu Mazen, both because they have grown sick of the Palestinians, and because their interests, mainly against Iran, require them to fall into line with Trump and with Israel.
Abu Mazen will have no choice – he will be forced to capitulate to Trump and to the coalition that he is building against Iran. Obviously, the framework will be officially: "Two states for two people," in order to silence the Europeans and to provide cover for Abu Mazen and the "moderate" states; however, the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority will be forced to settle for much less than that: Less than a sovereign state or enhanced autonomy – there is no real difference between them – under conditions dictated by Netanyahu.
Netanyahu will be able to celebrate a great political achievement from his perspective: A peace agreement with the Palestinians under the conditions upon which he has always insisted, and which the Israeli Left could only dream of attaining.
As stated above, the details are not yet known; however, whatever they may be, the agreement is a bad one. Not because it is a bad agreement; rather, because it is an agreement. The agreement is bad because it is an agreement.
That is because the agreement will never be able to resolve the "Palestinian problem," because the root of the problem is in the false national Palestinian demand of ownership over this land – a demand of ownership that is competing, contrary and hostile to our own. As long as that has not been defeated, nothing has changed. Agreement qua agreement must be signed with the promulgators of this deceit; therefore, it remains intact. It does not uproot it. The agreement will not resolve the problem – it will merely perpetuate it.
Indeed, perhaps it is impossible to reach an agreement under better conditions; however, the entire essence of the agreement is, in the best case, an improvement in our standing in the existing political-security and geopolitical framework, but not a fundamental change in the framework itself.
The resolution of the problem and a fundamental change in the situation can only be accomplished by means of defeating this contrary, competing claim of ownership. As long as we have not defeated it and it remains intact – nothing has changed. Tomorrow, Trump will fall or will be replaced, the interests of the "moderate" Arab states will change, Hamas will ascend to power, and the destructive root will blossom again, even though its wings and its branches have been cut, even more vigorously.
Netanyahu, Trump and Abu Mazen may yet manage to garner some small Nobel prize, but its status will be precisely like the one garnered by Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin: The prize will not be accompanied by the real thing.
We tend to compare right wing peace proposals based on the question of territory: Is the plan to annex all of Area C, only the settlement blocs, or only Greater Jerusalem and the like. However, that is not the appropriate criterion. The fundamental question is not the size of the territory; rather: Is the annexation executed in the framework of an agreement or is it the result of a unilateral, independent-sovereign Israeli decision.
From this perspective, application of independent sovereignty over Ma'ale Adumim alone is preferable to an agreement that will take effect over Area C in its entirety. The application of minimal sovereignty such as this is a correct step in the correct direction, and is beginning to trigger a positive process. In contrast, application of sovereignty in the framework of an agreement, even if it is over Area C in its entirety, does not completely uproot the problem, leaves the cause of the "conflict" intact and guarantees continued unrest, terrorism, bloodshed and instability.
One who seeks to resolve the problem from its foundation, and not merely to buy time or to improve positions in the framework of the existing situation, must understand that peace, quiet and relative stability are feasible only through the liquidation of the baseless Palestinian national demands on this land and the ultimate defeat of its representatives – the Palestinian Authority and its members.
As long as the Palestinian Authority exists, it must be hostile to Israel. It must incite against us and leave us as its primary enemy, as there is no other unifying factor capable of consolidating and uniting this Arab multitude, the collection of individuals deceitfully characterized as the "Palestinian people" or the "resistance" – this is its only glue.
The only way to change the situation from its foundation is to defeat the Palestinian national pretense, to completely uproot it and those speaking on its behalf. This situation requires a political decision: Application of the umbrella of sovereignty over all the territories of Judea and Samaria, through the liquidation of the Palestinian Authority. Under this sovereignty umbrella, on an individual, regional, or clan – but under no circumstances national – basis, numerous, different and varied solutions are possible.
Unrelated to the details of the agreement that is being consolidated and unrelated to the political support that Netanyahu can consolidate in its regard – it appears that he will be able to do so easily – the people of faith must oppose the agreement. It is based on denial, on weakness, on unwillingness to be decisive and to strive for victory, on dodging the challenge and reality and on moral bankruptcy. Therefore, ultimately, even if the agreement is realized, it is destined to fail.
Even if the people of faith will be unsuccessful in garnering majority support for its position, its role is to stand at the gates and sound the warning. Its role is to state the truth, to publicly call it by name and to remind the public of the simple Israeli truth: One does not enter into agreements with deceit and evil – one decisively defeats them. There is no alternative.
