Brumar, is it your opinion that Israel will give up acquired territories if it is recignized by its neighbors. I think that is the key diffference between India and Israel in that India's territory is well established. I do not think we can have a situation where a country can keep expanding its borders, no matter what.
After being attacked is not exactly "no matter what", Chinu. The thing about Israel is that those 1967 borders that the Arabs have been demanding that Israel return to, were not recognized by them before 1967. They didn't recognize Israel at all and reserved the right to try to destroy it. All except Egypt and Jordan still do. The borders themselves were only the truce lines of 1949. The Arabs never recognized those borders for a minute in all the time that Israel remained inside them.
Now, the Saudis have said that they will (cough, cough, sort of) recognize Israel if it withdraws to the 1967 borders. This I suppose is an improvement, even if offered up purely as a political sham (though in no other conflict in the world is merest recognition supposed to be a huge favor that one side has to pay for), but of course, if they had agreed to this after 1967, when Israel did offer the territories back and got the three noes of Khartoum Conference -- no peace. no recognition. no negotiation -- this could have been settled long since.
However, for Israel to seriously consider returning to borders which leave it nine miles wide at Netanya, they have to believe that they would not just be putting their necks on the chopping blocks for the next war. Considering that the PA has fostered a psychotic death cult in which blowing up civilians is the highest glory and the Arab world in general is pouring forth Nazi-level anti-Semitism (and paying the suicide bombers), the Israelis are not feeling too safe at the moment. |
