Sep 19th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Звезда не активнаЗвезда не активнаЗвезда не активнаЗвезда не активнаЗвезда не активна
Yesterday, I commented on the NYT article The Two State Solution Doesn’t Solve Anything but failed to address it on a strategic level.

For years now, many, myself included, have commented on the intent of the far left and the Muslim movements on Campus and elsewhere was not to usher in the two state solution or end the occupation but to end the State of Israel. Now the NYT has brought this intent into the mainstream. In the weeks and months to come, you will see more and more voices abandoning the two-state solution for the bi-national state.

Its happened before. 
When Oslo wasn’t going anywhere, Thomas Friedman of the NYT, reported that he had a conversation with King Abdullah about the peace process and the need for a plan and Abdullah said something to the effect that he happened to have such a plan in his drawer. Freidman introduced it to the world. That was in 2002. When the Roadmap was introduced in 2003, the Plan was given great prominence though it was in open conflict with the governing principle for 35 years, namely Resolution 242. When Sharon strenuously objected Powell rammed it down his throat saying the Roadmap was only a process. And now it has totally replaced Res 242 as the operating principles to achieve peace. But peace isn’t what it aspires to.

For years the left was complaining that Israel was a liability to the US and that the US was acting against its interest by allowing “those powerful Jews” to control policy. These complaints went mainstream with the publication of The Israel Lobby two years ago. Since then the attack on Israel as a liability has gained momentum. Obama’s policies certainly reflect this view.

And now the NYT leads the way again with its attack on Israel’s legitimacy arguing there is no peace in sight without satisfying the Arabs on the refugee problem created in 1948. This issue, it implies, can only be satisfied by Israel by accepting a bi-national state solution. This would be the end of Israel. No problem, they say, the creation of Israel was a mistake to begin with.

This issue could long ago been satisfied by the resettlement of the refugees all over the world. But the Arabs would have none of that and the West went along. No one cares about the refugees. They care about the take down of Israel.

It is not just the Right that has recognized the futility of the peace process and the fact that a two-state solution is unattainable and unworkable. Now the Left is openly saying the same thing.

The choice is clear. Either Israel will be forced to accept a bi-national state or Israel will resist the pressure and hold on to Judea and Samaria and ultimately annex them giving the Arabs autonomy only.

This has been driven home by the ongoing Fatah Conference which adopted a hard line on the refugee issue and even went so far as to demand all of Jerusalem. It also totally rejects recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.  You might ask what's it to them. A lot. It  would mean the end of conflict.  For the Arabs, the conflict will only be ended when Israel is ended. This is what the conflict has always been about.

Obama is clamoring for the commencement of negotiations. To what end? There is no compromise to be had from the Arabs and hopefully no compromise to be had from Israel and certainly no expectation that Israel will accede to all the demands of the Arabs.

Now that the Times has broken the ice, more and more people and countries will be promoting the bi-national state.

It’s an all or nothing deal now.

Russian version
An introduction to MAOF
Haim Goldman

Dear Friends,

Would you believe that the undersigned has anything in common with

-- Professor Victor Davis Hanson (Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University),
-- Dr Charles Krauthammer, (Washington Post, Time, The Weekly Standard),
-- Caroline Glick (Deputy Managing Editor of the Jerusalem Post),
-- Jonathan Tobin (Executive Editor of the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent).

Amazingly, the editors of the MAOF website decided that the missives of the undersigned are worthy of translation and posting along the articles written by these distinguished authors.

The first letter was published without the consent of the undersigned.
However, after thorough examination of the laudable attitude of MAOF and of the excellent contents of the website, the undersigned had most graciously granted his permission for publication of his missives in both English and Russian.

“Analytical Group MAOF” [1] is an organisation founded about ten years ago by Russian-speaking Jewish intellectuals. The attitude of MAOF is definitely pro-Zionist -- unambiguously and unapologetically.

One of MAOF’s primary purposes is providing information and analysis about Middle-Eastern and world affairs as well as about Israel’s history, values and dilemmas. In addition to extensive publication activity in various media, MAOF also organises excursions and seminars. While the vast majority of the contents of the MAOF website is in Russian, texts originally written in English are provided in the original [2] as well as in Russian.

There are arguably about 250 millions of Russian-speakers worldwide and many of them do not read English. The indisputable motivation for the author’s permission was to grant those millions of disadvantaged people the grand benefit of reading the author’s ruminations. If the author is ever maliciously accused that his tacit motivation for authorising the publication was his craving to be listed along with the above-mentioned distinguished writers, his plea will definitely be “nolo contendere”.

The editors of MAOF expressed their gratitude by granting the undersigned a privilege that no other author got – the opportunity to review and correct the Russian translation before publication. The original letters of the undersigned are at [3] and their Russian version is at [4]. At of today, only two letters are posted but several other letters are pending translation.

You are kindly ENCOURAGED TO RECOMMEND the MAOF website to your friends and colleagues worldwide, particularly those who speak Russian. Those who do not enjoy the benefit of proficiency in the exquisite Russian language can find many thought-provoking and inspiring articles about Middle-Eastern and world affairs in the English section [2].


Haim Goldman


[2] section.php3? sid=37&num=25
[3] authorg.php3? id=2107&type=a
[4] authorg.php3? id=2166&type=a