Why not a land-for-peace solution?

Submitted by Peter J. Herz (United States), Nov 8, 2005 at 21:01

Yes, land for peace. Since the land-for-peace solution worked famously for Czechoslovakia (and the world) in the late 1930's and is supposed to work for Israel, why shouldn't enlightened France try it with its Muslim rioters? Perhaps a gerrymander cutting through the land to embrace the principal Muslim slums snaking from La Manche to the Riviera--a little like the UN partition plan for British-mandated Palestine--will satisfy the Muslim minority and keep them out of the post-Christian majority's hair. I'm sure this will appeal to the socilaist conscience of France--those same people who taught Pol Pot his Marx, and thus helped launch a bold social experiment in participatory democracy and authenticity. What does France have to lose?

---

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".