"Close Settlement" of Jews in Mandatory Palestine and the Jewish State of Israel

Submitted by Robert (United States), Nov 3, 2022 at 13:32

In most wars organized hostilities come to an end rather sharply and after that the boundaries and borders of communities and sovereign states are relative well define, Thereafter any violence becomes a crime of murder.

Your commentator, David, explains the Left, Islamists, and Flags very well, but he is not able to address the fact of Israel's exceptionalism and why it fails to fit the mold of a normal or average country. To address this difficult issue I will review a bit the relevant Jewish history.

Most struggles for the Westphalian Nation State involved a consciousness of the major vernacular by peoples in their immediate vicinity Europe. By the end of the 19th century most of borders in Western Europe were pretty much defined. And Europe emerged as the "center" of the Civilized and Modern World. However, the Jew seemed to be everywhere and excelling in climbing beyond his cohorts statistical distribution. And the Jew didn't really "belong." As a consequence, it was the German William Marr who consciously invented the term "anti-Semitism." It was the Austrian secular Jewish journalist - Herzl - who wrote and published his booklet, "The Jewish State." He realized, after the drama in France of the Dreyfus Affair that the Jew would never be accepted in Europe and would remain an outsider. So as Marx previously organized his International for workers, Herzl organized his First Zionist Congress (in Switzerland) to find a place where Jews could live as Jews in their own community where they would be the majority.

I skip over what happened thereafter to the Jews of the world, assuming the reader to know it. Now fast forward to the present. Jews now have a Sovereign State named Israel. However, it has not yet resolved two issues which every victorious state accomplishes, more or less, at the end of war: (1) Define its Border and (2) Terminate Violent Hostilities. But why is that? In a word or phrase, the answer is the Non-Jewish Palestinian Arb who now emerges as the "other" among Jews. After more than 2,000 of being the minority "other" among non-Jews Jews have morally become incapable of doing what others did to them when they formed their states, in particular, resulting in population exchanges (Greece-Turkey) or expulsion (Germans out of Poland and Czechoslovakia), and the Holocaust against the Jews (6,000,000 dead by 1945).

Since Israelis Zionists aren't Nazi Germans the that horrible solution is inconceivable. What remains is defining Israel's (1) Sovereign Border and (2) Israeli Citizenship. Here, the issues are Ideological rather then Military. To extend citizenship to all Palestinian Arabs within Israel, as well as Citizenship, would make Jews the minority with its own Jewish State. So there seems to be only one solution for an ultimate "Victory": in two words, Close Settlement(s). And that seems to be what will happen next when Bibi take office with his two other-party associates on the alleged "extreme right" wing of the Knesset (Israel's Parliament).

I never quite figured out what the word "close" preceding the word "settlement" actually meant. I can only imagine it means all-Jewish communities. Accordingly, it is what Israel's enemies now call "apartheid" and "occupation" and "racism" (did I leave anything out?).

Recently, the UN, through one of its subordinate bodies issued one of its Antisemitic reports charging Israel with these alleged violations of "human rights" and "international law." But in fact the UN is a hypocritical organization exhibiting the Tyranny of the Majority. But it is powerless to impose its Antisemitic will on the Sovereign State of Jewish Israel with its Capitol in Jerusalem, partly thanks to the Philosemitic American President euphemistically once known as "The Donald."

If or when there emerges a Palestinian State, it most likely will be confined to Gaza. What will happen to the Disputed Territories of the so-called West Bank perhaps should remain open at this time. But there is no reason why continued Israeli Jewish (Close) settlements shouldn't continue to be built. How is "settlement" by Jews in territory liberated from Jordan in 1967 a "crime"? Must an alleged future Palestinian state be 100% "free of Jews" (Judenfrei)?

In war the question always arises of who should take the offensive (as opposed to the defensive) stance. As in the case of Ukraine, militarily it is the Ukrainian armed forces who have now assumed the counter-offensive and so they are deemed to be winning this "special military operation" commenced by Russia's Putin.

What is extremely peculiar is that Israel's best alternative is to assume a defensive military posture - except when it comes to Iran if its goal remains to attain the status of a Nuclear power (for obvious reasons).

Accordingly, an Israeli "Victory" entails simply the continued Close Settlement of Jews within Mandatory Palestine and f***K the Antisemitic United Nation - where not the General Assembly, but the Security Council, has the power to define so-called International Law.

PS1: I hypothesize that Saudi Arabia, particularly under the leadership of MbS, is most discussed with the Palestinians and their (Muslim Brotherhood) Hamas. And it is the Saudis who, obviously, represent all Arabs; it is out of Saudi Arabia that Muhammad launched his Muslim Empire. Accordingly, if Close Settlements are to go forward, these should proceed primarily without upsetting MbS, assuming that's possible.

PS2: Readers should be reminded that Jordan was initially a part of Mandatory Palestine and that probably more than 50% of its residents are Palestinians who fled Israel and the West Bank. Thus if violence emerges, as in the case of the new Lion's Den Palestinian ("youth," resistance"), Jordan is a natural place for this latest cohort to flee to). In other words, the may or should be more Palestinian refugees and they should be absorbed by Jordan in the first place. There was this weak a meeting of the Arab League, But it ended inconspicuously with Abbas complaining as always about Israel ans his dream of a 2-state solution going back to the boundaries of 1948 Armistice. But why should Israel or Jews accept that?

---

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".