The big talk in Israel at the moment is a dual game of ‘what did he say?’ and ‘when did he say it?’
Over the last several days, both Bibi and Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon have made allegedly controversial statements, and then ‘clarified’ them.
Both, at some point, apparently said something to the effect that the Combined Groups of Arab Terrorists must first recognize Israel as a state – or as a Jewish state – before additional negotiations can “move forward”.
(Geez, I hate that phrase. Anytime anyone wants to “move forward” on some issue, you just know it’s something you wish would disappear entirely.)
Anyway, Israel’s quasi-demand that the Arabs first recognize the State of Israel is giving both the Community Organizer in the White House and Missus Bubba serious indigestion. How dare Israel set such a precondition? It’s almost enough to make the Community Organizer stop grinning like the Cheshire Cat.
I don’t get it. I can’t imagine why it’s an issue at all. Of course they have to recognize Israel – as a State or as a Jewish State. How on earth can any negotiations be carried on if they don’t?
If you don’t recognize the entity you’re negotiating with, how can you negotiate?
Logic aside, how about some common sense? If the Combined Groups of Arab Terrorists won’t recognize Israel as a legitimate state, how can anyone possibly fool themselves into thinking that the CGAT will honor any agreement they make?
We know they won’t honor any agreement, of course. Not only have they not honored any other agreement, but their version of Islam permits, nay, encourages Muslims to lie in order to get what they want from non-Muslims, in the furtherance of Islam. When you get right down to it, there’s hardly any point in hammering out an agreement when only one side is going to be required to honor the terms.
But let me put it another way: Suppose you and your next door neighbor have been battling for years over the ownership of your back yard. He believes he has just as much right to it as you do, in spite of the fact that you hold the deed. It’s not as though he needs more property – he’s turned down acreage on the other side of his house several times. But he doesn’t want THAT property, he wants yours. And – as he repeats endlessly – he’s willing to kill you to get it. In fact, every chance he gets, he tries to kill you.
The problem you see is that if you give him your back yard, he’s just going to want your living room next. And why not? Having succeeded in getting you to give up the back yard, he smells success. And of course once he has the back yard, he can carry on his nefarious plans with much greater ease. From your yard he can fire right into your bedrooms.
So now the question is, if you and your neighbor are going to seriously negotiate over if (and how much) of your back yard he’s going to get, does the neighbor have to recognize that you have a right to your home at all?
If he doesn’t have to recognize your ownership, then what’s the point? If he’s just demanding more and more property because he thinks you have no right to it at all, there’s really no point in negotiating. You may as well cut your losses and move. His demands won’t end with just your back yard. He intends to keep on until the whole thing is his.
And of course, once he has the back yard, he’s close enough to kill you at will. After all, that’s what he SAYS he’s going to do. He’s already killed family members, whenever he can. So why would you not believe him now?
Clearly, no such negotiation should ever begin. But if it must, surely it’s only rational to demand that first, the neighbor must concede that you have a right to exist. Only then can any kind of discussion begin.
So Bibi and Danny Ayalon may have said that the CGAT must first recognize Israel as a state. What’s so controversial about that?