Will William F. Buckley Jr. be thrown out of the conservative ranks for denouncing Ariel Sharon's scorched earth campaign? The grand old man of the American Right delivers a stinging rebuke to the War Fever crowd:
"My         vote is that General Sharon's offensive is the stupidest campaign in         recent memory. Defined here as a campaign that has: solved nothing,         increased Israel's problems, intensified Palestinian hatred of Israel,         estranged many Europeans and Americans, and fanned Islamic         hostility."
I         hope it's not that bad. Obviously, Israel has do something. In         his prime, Sharon was a brilliant battlefield tactician. But he's an old         man now, and, besides, his strategic sense was always iffy. Over the         years, has any single man done more to alienate Israel's more objective         well-wishers? There is a fascinating untold story about why some great         Reagan Administration patriots like Caspar Weinberger hate         Sharon. (I don't know the details, although I can guess.)
The         only long run "solution," such as it is, would be for Israel         to figure out a defensible border, tear down the settlements beyond the         border, and build a Berlin Wall along that boundary to prevent         all physical contact between Israelis and West Bank Palestinians.         (This has worked on nearby Cyprus for a quarter of a century.) They         can't blow you up if they can't get next to you. Even Andrew Sullivan         agreed with that today. (Perhaps Andrew was between his testosterone         injections when he wrote that?)
In         contrast, trying to make peace with the Palestinians is doomed.         Their hotheads are even less likely to accept Israel's right to exist         than Americans today would be willing - if the War in the Pacific had         turned out differently - to accept the right to exist of a "Shintoist         State" that had taken control of the visually similar         California coastal region. (Think about that analogy for awhile. It         helped me understand the Middle East a lot better. And keep in mind that         we Americans are a lot less inclined to hold grudges than Arabs         are.)
But,         what kind of permanent solution can devastating Palestinian cities achieve?         Suicide bombing takes very little "infrastructure." The Palestinians         are outbreeding the Israelis. The Palestinians will outnumber the         Jews by 2020 in Israel and the Occupied Territories. The handwriting is         on the wall.
The         state of Israel avowedly exists for the good of a single,         hereditarily-defined group (see the "basic law of Israel," the         Law of Return, for the heredity-based definition of who can immigrate to         Israel). I suppose this statement will be controversial, but it         shouldn't be. It's the reason Israel is "the Jewish State."         There are plenty of other states that exist to be the political         expression of a single extremely extended family: Japan is a good         example. Iceland is another. Hereditarily-defined states can work         reasonably well, fostering harmony, democracy, and human rights (as         Japan and Iceland do), but only as long as the state rules over         its own racial group and no other large group.
Otherwise, it generally         must become a racial security state, like the old Afrikaaner-run         South Africa. The Israelis have better things to do with their lives         than be the Palestinians' prison guards. Israelis need to return to         their roots as a people that shall dwell apart. Mr. Sharon, put up         this Wall!
And as Ron Unz argued today, the American Right has better things to do with its time than be a repetitious mouthpiece for the more extreme members of the Israeli Right.
 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment