In a piece for Commentary entitled Lying About Abbas Won’t Bring Peace, Jonathan Tobin writes the following:

war1.png - image uploaded to PicamaticIn short, peace process advocates believe the only way to plow ahead to an agreement is to keep the pressure up on Netanyahu to give the maximum while treating Abbas with kid gloves, all the while fearing to offend him or to give his enemies within Fatah, not to mention Hamas and Islamic Jihad rivals, any ammunition with which to attack him as soft on the Israelis. Anything else, they tell us, risks blowing up the process leaving no hope for peace.

 

But the problem here isn’t so much the double standard for Netanyahu or even the blatant dishonesty involved in American and Israeli officials attesting to the sincerity and good intentions of the Palestinian leader. It’s that this theory of peace negotiating has already been tried and failed with disastrous results.

 

I know it’s hard for many in the mainstream media to think back as far as last week or last month (ancient history in the news business), let alone 10, 15, or 20 years back. But the theory of negotiating with the Palestinians that is being employed by both the Obama administration and Israelis like Livni and Peres, was already tried in the 1990s.

Precisely.

We’ve already been down this road and we know where it leads. It leads to a terror war against the Jewish people of the Middle East. It leads to Jewish and Arab blood in the streets. One place that the so-called “peace process” will not lead, sadly, is to peace. The Arabs do not want peace, what they want is victory and until that victory is attained they will continue to do whatever they can possibly do to make life miserable for Jewish people on historically Jewish land.

It has to be understood, however, that this is nothing new. The Arab-Muslim majority in the Middle East has made life difficult for the indigenous Jewish population since they conquered that land shortly after the death of Muhammad in the 7th century and placed us under subjugation.

What we are witnessing today is a small slice of a much longer process of displacement and persecution which has been ongoing for centuries, resulting in the decimation of the Jewish population in that part of the world. The Jews of the Middle East today are the surviving remnant of a harassed and diminished minority that has been despised by the Islamic world since the Jews rejected the testament of Muhammad.

Tobin concludes:

The point here is that we have already seen this movie and know the ending. If the president is sincere about wanting to broker peace, he needs to lay it on the line and make sure Abbas knows that the U.S. will blame him–and not an Israel that has already signaled that it will, albeit with misgivings, agree to Kerry’s framework–for the collapse of the talks. But if the president continues to double down on a policy of letting the Palestinians off the hook, it is laying the groundwork for a repeat of the same disaster that ended the Oslo process. The resulting bloodshed should be blamed primarily on Abbas. But Obama, and those Israelis who continue to lie about Abbas for what they believe is the sake of peace, will also bear some responsibility.

The current American administration will not in any meaningful way pressure Fatah because to do so would violate progressive-left presumptions concerning who has power and who does not and thus who should be threatened and who should be sheltered. It is for ideological reasons that Barack Obama refuses to pressure the Palestinian-Arabs into making peace with the indigenous Jews.

Despite the fact that around half the Israeli-Jewish population is non-Ashkenazi, and thus not “white,” the western Left, including the Obama administration, tend to see Jewish Israelis, at best, as a dominating power, or, at worst, as a foreign imperial power continuing the nineteenth-century European tradition of imperial exploitation that employs methods akin to those of Nazi Germany.

Pressuring the Arab majority to end their never-ending siege against the Jewish minority is considered “racist,” which is why the Obama administration will never do it.

Pressuring the Jewish minority into agreeing to what it has always agreed to — sharing the land — is considered a matter of social justice. Thus the Obama administration pressures the Jews of the Middle East into accepting what they have always accepted and until they accept what they already accept he will keep the pressure on.

What we are looking at here, my friends, is a sucker’s game and we’re the suckers.

.

Michael Lumish is the editor of Israel Thrives.