Quote:
The government of Israel is the only one in the Middle East that is elected by free citizens -- including Arabs and Muslims: Israel is a free, Western country, which recognizes the individual rights of its citizens (such as their right to liberty and freedom of speech). It uses military force only in self-defense. The enemies of Israel, by contrast, are state sponsored terrorist organizations and dictatorships. They do not recognize the individual rights of their own subjects, much less those of the citizens of Israel. They initiate force indiscriminately in order to retain and expand their power.
Israel's achievements are vast and have no parallel in any other country of comparable size or age. They have been reached against an unremitting threat of violence, war, terror and delegitimation that might have defeated any lesser people. In almost every sphere – economic development, technology, integration of immigrants and the maintenance of democracy – Israel should today be internationally heralded as a model for others to emulate.
Above all, Israel has pursued peace. In a mere 10 years it made a cognitive leap for which it would be hard to find a precedent. The "peace process" whose main watchword is "territories for peace", involves a paradox whereby a minuscule democracy is being forced to provide its totalitarian enemies - scores of times its size - the only thing it lacks: territory. In exchange, the surrounding tyrannies are being asked to provide the one and only thing that they lack: peace. In 1990 Arafat's PLO was a proscribed terrorist organization.
By 2000 the Israeli prime minister had offered a Palestinian state in the whole of Gaza and 97 per cent of the West Bank, with east Jerusalem as its capital. The Palestinian terrorist regime turned this down and started the present terror war targeting Israeli civilians. The Palestinian terrorist regime does not want a Palestinian state by the side of Israel but one replacing Israel and the destruction of her free society.
The case for Israel should be apparent even to thoroughgoing supporters of the Palestinians. Who else has offered them a genuine future? Egypt? Jordan? Syria? Lebanon? The Gulf States? It takes only a cursory glance at the history of the Middle East to realize that for the most part, neighboring states have ruthlessly exploited the Palestinians for their own ends with callous indifference to the consequences. Israel, alone in the Middle East, has attempted to construct, with and for the Palestinians, a viable and peaceful future - and a Palestinian state.
Israel's strategy of winning Palestinian hearts and minds failed because Israeli carrots could never overcome the intimidation applied by Palestinian terrorist regime's sticks.
Criticism of Israeli policies in a reasonable and informed manner is legitimate and something that Israelis themselves do on a regular basis, as is the norm in a healthy democracy. Israel is certainly not infallible and makes mistakes - just as all other states have the capacity to do when confronted with the dilemmas that Israel faces in trying to protect its population from terrorist attacks. Israel must be treated by the same standards as any other country in the world and not singled out for special treatment at the hands of those who prefer to ignore genocide and human rights abuses in places such as Darfur, Chechnya, southern Sudan, Tibet and any number of Arab states and Iran.
Israel's achievements are vast and have no parallel in any other country of comparable size or age. They have been reached against an unremitting threat of violence, war, terror and delegitimation that might have defeated any lesser people. In almost every sphere – economic development, technology, integration of immigrants and the maintenance of democracy – Israel should today be internationally heralded as a model for others to emulate.
Above all, Israel has pursued peace. In a mere 10 years it made a cognitive leap for which it would be hard to find a precedent. The "peace process" whose main watchword is "territories for peace", involves a paradox whereby a minuscule democracy is being forced to provide its totalitarian enemies - scores of times its size - the only thing it lacks: territory. In exchange, the surrounding tyrannies are being asked to provide the one and only thing that they lack: peace. In 1990 Arafat's PLO was a proscribed terrorist organization.
By 2000 the Israeli prime minister had offered a Palestinian state in the whole of Gaza and 97 per cent of the West Bank, with east Jerusalem as its capital. The Palestinian terrorist regime turned this down and started the present terror war targeting Israeli civilians. The Palestinian terrorist regime does not want a Palestinian state by the side of Israel but one replacing Israel and the destruction of her free society.
The case for Israel should be apparent even to thoroughgoing supporters of the Palestinians. Who else has offered them a genuine future? Egypt? Jordan? Syria? Lebanon? The Gulf States? It takes only a cursory glance at the history of the Middle East to realize that for the most part, neighboring states have ruthlessly exploited the Palestinians for their own ends with callous indifference to the consequences. Israel, alone in the Middle East, has attempted to construct, with and for the Palestinians, a viable and peaceful future - and a Palestinian state.
Israel's strategy of winning Palestinian hearts and minds failed because Israeli carrots could never overcome the intimidation applied by Palestinian terrorist regime's sticks.
Criticism of Israeli policies in a reasonable and informed manner is legitimate and something that Israelis themselves do on a regular basis, as is the norm in a healthy democracy. Israel is certainly not infallible and makes mistakes - just as all other states have the capacity to do when confronted with the dilemmas that Israel faces in trying to protect its population from terrorist attacks. Israel must be treated by the same standards as any other country in the world and not singled out for special treatment at the hands of those who prefer to ignore genocide and human rights abuses in places such as Darfur, Chechnya, southern Sudan, Tibet and any number of Arab states and Iran.
So what do you think of this essay? I think its great.
Opinions? Criticisms?
