Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
Israel, Palestine, and
the Peace Pieties

The peace pieties are the code phrases used to undermine Israel and, ultimately, the West.

By Barbara Lerner


Archive Latest E-Mail RSS Send
Text  

Faithful NRO readers are increasingly clear-eyed about what President Obama and his supporters call “the Middle East peace process.” They know this process has a diplomatic language of its own, a propaganda language that uses code phrases to make maximalist demands sound like righteous — or at least reasonable — negotiating positions. I call these phrases “the peace pieties.” Four of them are fundamental to the process, and NRO authors such as Andrew McCarthy, Charles Krauthammer, Mona Charen, and Clifford May have done an outstanding job of translating the first three into plain American English.

Peace piety #1 holds that “Israel must return to its 1967 borders.” President Obama said just that on May 19, 2011, and was clearly surprised by the speed with which a wall of opposition rose up against him. He hadn’t caught up with the fact that this peace piety has become the most widely exposed of the lot. NRO readers and millions of other Americans translated it swiftly and accurately. It means: Make Israel indefensible by giving the Arabs the high ground to the north and the east, leaving the Jewish state with an exposed western plain and a midsection nine miles wide. There would be no natural barrier between tiny Israel and millions of Palestinian Arabs committed to its destruction, backed by 22 Arab states with the same aim, as well as Iran. Calling that an acceptable border is a cruel joke. More and more Americans get it, and they’re not laughing.

Advertisement

Peace piety #2, the insistence that “Jerusalem must be a shared capital,” has long been transparent to Christian Evangelicals, and is increasingly so to millions of other thoughtful Americans, secular as well as religious. It means: Ignore the fact that Jerusalem is the holiest, most historically significant city in the 4,000-year history of the Judaeo-Christian world, the geographical heart of the two great religions that shaped Western civilization, making us who we are and our country the beacon of freedom it is. Ignore the fact that no self-respecting Muslim would —  or should — accept non-Muslim control of any part of Islam’s holiest and most historically significant cities, Mecca and Medina. Ignore the fact that no honorable Muslim would or should passively accept the sight of Islam’s holy shrines elsewhere being willfully defaced or destroyed, or the sight of peaceful Muslims being denied access to them or the right to pray there.

Then, ignore the fact that whenever Arab forces have controlled Jewish and Christian shrines, in Jerusalem and beyond — from the seventh century right through to today — they have repeatedly done exactly that and more, killing Jewish and Christian worshippers in a long series of attacks on “infidels,” in Jerusalem as in Cairo, Baghdad, and every other Middle Eastern city that still has any Jewish or Christian shrines left standing, or any Jews or Christians left alive to try to gain access to them. “Sharing Jerusalem” means ignoring all that and giving half of Jerusalem to the terrorist-embracing, shrine-destroying Arabs who call themselves Palestinians. This is not “sharing.” It is surrendering, and it is neither wise nor honorable. It sends a powerful message of weakness, of a declining Western civilization, ripe for toppling.

Peace piety #3, “the refugees’ right of return,” is less well known. Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain — a true and committed friend of Israel — was momentarily suckered into making quasi-accepting noises about it in response to a question on Fox News on May 22. He corrected himself within hours, after learning what NRO readers and millions of other good Americans have also learned. The “Palestinian right of return” is code for: Destroy Israel by swamping its 6 million Jews with millions of new Arab immigrants, as committed to the destruction of the Jewish state as the millions who are already on Israel’s side of the River Jordan. Again, this is not a formula for any sort of peace between Jews and Arabs. It is a death sentence for the Jewish state.

1   2   3   Next >
Text  

You Might Also Like...

Trinko: Will Fear Decide Texas Senate Race?

Symposium: Polling Life

Malkin: Obama’s Land of the LOST



COMMENTS   8

EXPAND  

   JRapp
   06/17/11 08:50

I agree, expect that the "Right of Return" is Piety #1 since it is effectively the same as calling for Israel's destruction, dressed up in noble sounding language.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 08:55

Huzzah!! Huzzah!!

The first cracks in the house of lies to have been publicly exposed. The rest of the edifice will soon also disintegrate.

Ms. Lerner. Israel will prevail with or without America. We will all live to see this wonder.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 RobL
   06/17/11 09:53

Thank you Ms. Learner, a very good history.

I would disagree with you on one point. While true the ‘Palestinians’ are not historically a nation or a state (simplified definitions- State being a legal border defined entities and Nation being a discrete people of common culture), they historically have belonged to other nation-states.

That said though after the Israeli wars of independence those other nation states voluntarily withdrew from Gaza/West Bank leaving that land in a vacuum.

It is not unreasonable that those living in the vacuum belong to a nation-state, whether it is their own or some amalgamation with other nations.

However that nation-state is designed though, it needs to be one that Israel can live with, as Israel won the wars they have the right to dictate the terms of its creation.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
butpygmies
   06/17/11 10:41

"That said though after the Israeli wars of independence those other nation states voluntarily withdrew from Gaza/West Bank leaving that land in a vacuum."

Not so. Jordan lost the West Bank in 1967, and eventually denounced any claim to it. Egypt lost Gaza in 1967.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
butpygmies
   06/17/11 10:05

"After their third military defeat, in 1973, they relied on that, and terrorist assaults — rather than massed armies — to destroy Israel over time."

It's worse, and more than that. After they were defeated in 1973, OPEC, in which Saudi Arabia is/was the most powerful force, began to use oil as a weapon against all of us. They said so. The purpose was (and is) to bring down our economy...just like UBL said Al Qaeda aimed to do.

This is not a war for Israel. This is The World War. In fact, Israel is a front. Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and Iraq are fronts. Thankfully, the Sunni and Shia hate each other just enough to triangulate the contestants. Otherwise....

The war we all know we are in started in 1973.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   06/17/11 14:31

There is absolutely nothing to worry about. Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin's mother have been putting their heads together to determine the best way forward.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 RobL
   06/17/11 16:44

@butpygmies

Notice I said ‘wars’ not ‘war’ of independence. I kind of look at the 4 wars (1st independence war, Suez Crisis, 7 day, and Yom Kippur war as a series of wars against Israeli independence, sorry for not being clear.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   07/19/11 11:41

We should also remember that, in 1947, the UNSCOP (UN Special Commission on Palestine)took statements from local Jewish & Arab representatives. The Arabs said something along the lines of: "What you call Palestine is nothing but a European, colonialist, Zionist invention. What you call Palestine is nothing more then Southern Syria." During the 3 decades of British rule, the local Arabs rejected the designation as "Palestinians", while the Jews accepted it.
Conclusion: Palestine, as a separated polity, is a fraud. Until the recently it never existed in Arab political thought, unlike Egypt, Syria, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, etc.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact