The U.S. and Biblical Israel
Instead of the “two-state solution,” restore what God gave Abraham’s people.

Section of a map of Israel in Old Testament times. (Bible History Online)


Growing numbers of states succumbed to it from the 1970s on, joining the Arabs in pressing for a Palestinian state, but America didn’t really buy the great Taqqiya until quite recently. The Oslo accord — the ersatz peace agreement President Clinton and Israeli prime minister Yizhak Rabin signed with the ersatz Palestinians on Sept. 13, 1993 — offered them self-rule, but not a state. Palestinian statehood did not become official American policy until June 24, 2002, when George W. Bush became the first U.S. president to endorse the idea, albeit with reasonable-sounding requirements, at first. In the decade since that fateful day, all requirements have been abandoned, and both America and Israel have suffered a continuing series of losses, disappointments, retreats, and defeats. Year after year, we made concession after concession, getting nothing, and less than nothing, in return. Today, it is painfully obvious to almost everyone that real peace — an end to continuing hatred, incitement, rocket and terrorist attacks, and threats of wars of annihilation down the road — is further away now than ever. It is equally obvious that a Palestinian state would be a terrorist state, a mortal threat to Israel.

Slightly less obvious, perhaps, is the fact that a Palestinian state would be a serious threat to us, too, because the Palestinians are controlled — by their own choice — by the Muslim Brotherhood’s most aggressive terrorist arm, Hamas, just as once-Christian Lebanon is now controlled by the terrorists of Hezbollah. As I write this, the Brotherhood is in the process of taking control of Egypt, the Sunni population giant to the west, while Hezbollah is controlled by Iran, the Shiite population giant to the east. These terrorist groups and their sponsoring states don’t threaten only Israel. Most Americans know they have directed their bombs at us, too, and not just in the Middle East, so it is no mystery that big majorities of Americans in public as well as private life are opposed to Palestinian statehood now.

The mystery is why so many Americans who recognize these obvious facts fail to reject the two-state “solution” altogether; why, instead of saying a clear, confident “No” to the two-state idea, they can only respond to the unending pressure from Muslim supremacists in the Organization of the Islamic Conference, their appeasers in the U.N. and the EU, and their allies on the Bill Ayers Left with a feeble, evasive “Not now.” Why don’t we stand up and say, “No. A Palestinian state is a Trojan horse of an idea; accepting it was a great mistake, and it is past time to firmly and finally reject it”? Some few won’t do that because they still cling to the blind faith that if we just push the Israelis to make more of the sorts of increasingly painful and enfeebling concessions they have been making to no avail since the Oslo accord two decades ago, Muslim supremacists will suddenly make a 180-degree turn and say, “Okay, that’s enough, we accept you as equals,” and peace and brotherhood with a small b — a brotherhood that embraces all people everywhere, not just Muslims — will prevail at last. Most Americans abandoned that illusion years ago, slowly and regretfully, but fully.

The problem for the great majority of Americans, I think, is that they have no new formulation with which to replace the two-state idea, no new policy idea they can openly embrace and work to implement in its stead. And when they look for one in the tangle of U.N. legalisms that greeted Israel’s rebirth, they get nowhere, because it is the wrong starting place. The shrunken and misshapen little piece of lowland the U.N. initially ceded to Israel was militarily indefensible — an open invitation to the attacks that followed. Looking for answers in the Zionist movement Theodor Herzl founded in Europe in the 19th century is no answer either. Herzl and his pioneering followers in Europe and America did yeoman’s work, culminating in modern Israel’s declaration of independence in 1948, but it is shortsighted Western ethnocentrism to say that they created Israel.

A Jewish state in Biblical Israel could not be created by the U.N. or by the Jews of the West, only re-created. Ancient walls, scrolls, steles, and pottery, meticulously dated by modern science, bear irrefutable testimony to the existence of Biblical Israel. It was created nearly 4,000 years ago, and Jews have lived there, continuously, ever since.

It was only in the last 400 or so years that they migrated to the West in significant numbers, first to Europe and then to America. As late as the 19th century, a majority of all the world’s Jews still lived in the Middle East. Often, in their long, tortured past, they were reduced to a remnant in Israel itself, but they never disappeared entirely, and most did not go far; they remained in the Middle East. And from the rise of Islam in the seventh century on, they lived there as dhimmis, subservient, regarded as religious inferiors, impoverished, mostly, and with no rights that a Muslim was bound to respect. Today, these native Middle Eastern Jews — not Ashkenazi immigrants from the west — are a majority of all the Jews in Israel. They became the majority not long after Israel declared its independence in 1948, because Arabs in Middle Eastern countries where Jews had lived for centuries responded by stripping them of whatever possessions they had and driving them out, creating about a million refugees. Mass expulsions like this were not new to the Jewish people, east or west, but this time, all the Jews had a place to go. Nearly all of the eastern Jews, the Mizrahi, went home, to Israel.