From an anti-realistic reductionist point of view, Israel is unreasonably occupying the West Bank and the Golan Heights and preventing Gazans from accessing their civil rights.
However, The statement of the “truth” and the “right” shouldn’t depend only on abstract ideas or general principles that might eventually lead to delusive conclusions, but instead, it should simultaneously be in correspondence with external independent reality; taking in consideration the complexity of the whole shebang, its mechanisms; the changing context; the actual nature of the conflict. …
A Palestinian state is not a doctrine; it is rather an opinion that was suggested, and opinions do change when the circumstances change. And I do believe, however, that the Palestinian population could grow prosperous and enlightened under an Israeli rule rather than any other Arab or Islamist dictatorship in the Middle East, including Hamas.
Are Israelis (as some argue) actually feeling comfortable with the situation along the Gaza border, the building of tunnels, the raining down rockets, the suicide attacks on civilians? Not at all. Yet, the situation would have been far worse if those territories had gained a sovereign status.
Islamists do not want land—a recognized national state, with a fluttering flag, exerting responsibilities associated with state power; a state which is friendly to Israel and the world and in harmonious relationship with modern values. That is “a handful of putrid clay!” (in the words of Islamist theorist Sayyid Qutb). They are after the land where they could be free to establish an Islamic state. An army of invasions. …
They are driven by aspirations based essentially on a pre-Westfalian aura; the Islamist hankering for a reconquista; Jerusalem and the whole lot of the historical Palestine would be just the initial phase of a long process of consecutive incursions encompassing the four corners of the world ( the concept of jihad is intrinsically eternal).
These are not some fantasies of a minority of zealots or isolated troglodytes on the edges of the Palestinian and the Arab societies. It is, indeed, the vogue of the Middle East. An overwhelming collective belief that is circulated routinely like a Goebbelsian propaganda from the Friday sermons to the popular sitcoms of the month of Ramadan.
What happens in Makkah stays in Makkah!
Because they communicate with each other in Arabic, few people from outside the Arabsphere enclosed circles have access to their casual conversations, media forums activities or written works. Unlike their counterparts in the west who often choose their words carefully, and sometimes cunningly use their linguistic skills to hide their real intentions by resorting to word-play and double-meaning statements or dog-whistle politics.
But for an Arabist, the ideological argumentations legitimizing bigotry and barbarism are overflowing and the drumbeats of Jihad and violence are resounding. A typical conversation between two Arabs from Yemen for example or Tunisia discussing a tedious matter that one of them is blowing his trumpet about would be like:
‘I did it!’
‘Oh, really? From the sound of it, I almost thought you freed Palestine!’
This might sound a bit trivial, but in fact, it connotes the highest of the wishes that that jeering character could dream about— freeing Palestine. In Algeria, the ongoing protests against the enduring regime of the resigned dictator Abdelaziz Bouteflika have an intriguing aspect. It was noticeable the stream of Palestinian flags floating above protesters in an exclusive national matter. Even in popular sport like football the Arab stadiums are obsessed with tifos and choreography displayed by fans to show grievances against Israel.
For the last two hundred years, Christianity and Judaism have both undergone a successful historical-critical methodology; great efforts conducted by great scholars made religion compatible with civilized values and modern lifestyle, and in its most refined forms the practice of religion has become a spiritual fine art. Islam didn’t go through such process, hence everything in the script, no matter how insane or inhuman, is carried out to the letter. The Islamic state (IS) was the inevitable by-product of those societies adherents of the same set of ideas. And It could be regenerated easily at anytime in the future and anywhere in the Mideast.
If Israel didn’t occupy the Golan in the 1967 Six-Day war, then this holy grail could have been granted today to Hezbollah amid Syrian civil war. If the Israeli-Syrian peace talks (before the Arab spring) had resulted in the withdrawal of the IDF from the plateau, it would have been much harder for Israel now to deter Iranian revolutionary guard from making the Golan a strategic front to threaten Israeli soil with ground-to-ground missiles.
If some political pundits in the west are unable to see through the stained-glass of the ideology, than they may easily fall for the apartheid rhetoric.
Islamists do not believe in the ballot box of modern democracies, for it is for them a gross transgression against Allah’s rule. Societies should be governed by Quranic rules only, and humans must not have the option to choose between Shariah law and the sordid pagan Greek mode of governance.
Islamists do not believe in coexistence within a sovereign Jewish state because ideologically the Jews and Christians alike should be subjugated to Islamic Jizya (a tax dates back to Middle Ages paid by non-Muslims to the Muslim ruler). And it takes a great deal of naivety to believe that someone who actually wants to throw Israel into the sea is craving to vote in Israeli elections. At least that’s how Islamist harbingers like Linda Sarsour and Ilhan Omar are deluding the U.S. public opinion.