- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Mr. Kamiya makes a few good points in his piece, but unfortunately he surrounds them with the same ole anti-Israeli rhetoric that we get to hear from the pro-Palestinian side whenever there is a flare up.
He makes an appeal for pragmatism, which is certainly called for by all parties involved, but most of his article is spent discussing Israel's "founding myths" as if that was even relevant to the discussion.
For example:
The problem is political and historical: the dispossession of Palestinians and the ongoing Israeli occupation of their land.
Well, there you have it, don't you? If the problem is ongoing Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, the only reasonable way to solve that problem is to evict the Israelis isn't it? I can't understand why the Israelis would not take the perfectly reasonable approach of nullifying their state and handing it over to the Arabs (note that the elected leaders of the PA, Hamas, claim all of Israel as Palestinian land, not just the '48 or '67 borders).
Getting into who did what over 60 years ago is no longer germane to the issue. We can all sit around and debate whether Israel's founding was legitimate until we're blue in the face, but unless/until the anti-Israeli forces have enough power to actually wipe Israel off the map as they like to say, such will just remain a pipe dream for them- a pipe dream that justifies all manners of atrocities and will forever block any real progress toward lasting peace. The Hatfields and the McCoys can each sulk about what injustices the other family has done, but it will never get them anywhere but dead.
The Israelis, for their part, also have to face the facts. Mr. Kamiya is correct that peace (and security) will not be won through militarism. However, neither will it be won by raising old questions about the legitimacy of the state.
What would America do if a militaristic Native American group were firing rockets into American cities (whether or not they caused casualties)? Well, we'd wipe them out, for better or worse. In fact, alter the time period, revert the technology, and you need not pose it as a hypothetical. That's exactly what we did. It may not have been humane (it certainly was not), it may not have justified, but that's what happened.
The Palestinians, however, as Mr. Kamiya points out, have somewhat better prospects than basing their future income on Israeli gambling and taste for nicotine. The question is, will they act on this opportunity, or will they continue to hold out hope of some future pan-Arab salvation that never materializes, while their children die either by Israeli bombs that drop on their towns or Iranian bombs that are strapped to their chests?
Neither Israel nor the Palestinians are going anywhere for a while, and until both sides return to the table with a realistic view toward negotiations, nothing will be accomplished but more bloodshed, and history indicates most of the blood shed will be that of the hapless Palestinians.
