Right of Conquest

Submitted by DaveP (United Kingdom), Jan 15, 2008 at 20:23

In June 1967, Israel not only had overwhelming victory but the sympathy and admiration of the whole world. And yet its leaders did not take advantage of this and consolidate their "once in 2000 years good fortune". Instead they went into appeasement mode, which simply indicated to the Arab world, that they could have what they wanted, not by war but by other means.

The Arabs, in their religion, as well as their actions through history, have believed in the "Right of Conquest". If Israel had simply annexed Judaea and Samaria, and closed the matter as spoils of war, one that was not of their making, Israel would be in a much stronger position. It is not too late to reverse the dire straits Israel find itself in.

Reject outright any concessions on territory or division of Jerusalem. Demand compensation for displaced Jews from Arab countries. Enforce Israeli sovereignty over all religious sites in Israel, particularly the Temple Mount. As a concession, offer the Arabs peace, but only if they want peace, and nothing else. In addition, annexe Judaea and Samaria, if Arabs persist in terrorism. At this moment, Arabs are in a win-win position - they can wage war with no concommitant loss.

Israel will be pleasantly surprised at the sudden change in the Arab disposition, if it takes a common sense stance, one that any nation would take. Arabs have always respected power coupled with confidence, and conversely, viewed appeasement with disdain and contempt.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".