Not irrelevant at all. The Israelis are trying to avoid their nightmare vision of the future, in which they become a Jewish minority in the 14th Arab dictatorship in the Mideast. This is why they never annexed the territories in the first place, which would have greatly improved the living conditions of the Palestinians. These fears have driven their policy since before the creation of the state.
If the Palestinian leadership had had any brains, it would have tried to assuage these fears instead of doing its best to feed them. The Palestinians should have led a non-violent struggle because it was in their self-interest to do so -- Israel has a conscience, Israel does not want to remain an occupier of another people. If there was a Likud party, there was also Labor and Meretz, which historically used to be stronger. If the Palestinians had taken a deal in '67, or '70, or '74, or '79 they would easily have gotten the whole territories back. Even in Oslo, even after Arafat proved a hundred times that his word is worthless, they were offered over 95%, and could have bargained for even more. If the Palestinians had ever had a statesman they would have had a state. But they had no Mandela, only Arafat.
Abba Ebban's observation has by now acquired the force of law: "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." |
