Since Oslo, and as of this writing (Dec. 22), 109 Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorism, with no words of condemnation by Yasser Arafat, and no effort at all to amend the PLO Covenant calling for Israel's destruction. Indeed, Arafat's own faction -- Fatah -- has taken its full share of the carnage, killing and injuring more Israelis than in any previous year of its existance.
I now see that I must turn my efforts to the page preceding mine in this publication. In the January 1995 issue of "Jewish Life", Anthony Rusonik posits that the "Peace Process must continue despite the carnage". He starts his argument with a metaphor which I will continue. "Relentless thrusts of the Hamas dagger into the Israeli body politic have now plunged to within inches of their target." First, it is not just Hamas doing the thrusting. It is Fatah, the rest of the PLO, and Hizballah as well. Second, they have hit their target -- the heart of the Jewish people. After all, what is this nation based upon if not its individuals? What better way to attack the Jews than to kill their members? To continue the analogy, what purpose is there in negotiating with your killer while he is still stabbing you? Instead, you would defend yourself as best you could.
Israel instead is participating by cutting off its own arms. The demoralization in the Israeli Defense Forces is so endemic that even the incoming Chief of Staff, an ardent supporter of Yitzchak Rabin, is warning that the negotiations must stop. Dr. Rusonik claims that "there is little logical or empirical strength to the assumption that suspending the peace process will reduce terror." First, there was no strength at all to the reverse assumption, yet it was acted upon with total disregard to security for Israelis. Second, the strength to this assumption is there quite plainly. If Israel stops the negotiations, it can then crack down on all terrorists without endangering the process that is no longer there. Since Israel needs to crack down powerfully, eliminating as many obstacles to such action is of the highest priority. Additionally, by stopping the process, Israel ceases its legitimization of anti-Jewish terrorism. By continuing the negotiations, Rabin continues to legitimize terrorism. Since when do you invite the murder of your children over for tea and crumpets?
Dr. Rusonik goes on to claim that "there is no territorial buffer against suicidal, sophisticated, determined terrorists". This is quite true. But control over the territory from which the terrorists come goes a long way to preventing their actions. This is one explanation for the drastic rise in terrorist attacks since the Oslo accord was signed. Before the announcement of Oslo, there were 185 Israelis killed in almost six years of the Intifadah. Since that time, there have been 109 in 15 months. As Israel relinquishes control of Judea and Samaria, terrorists are given much wider berth with which to plan, organize, and carry out their brutal slayings. It does not matter that a the majority of the victims since the Oslo announcement have been inside the pre-1967 boundaries of Israel. Why would abandoning Judea and Samaria increase the security of these areas?
The most interesting development to have come out of Oslo, and likley an important factor in the rise in terrorism, is the abandonment of Arab informants within organizations such as Hamas. Israel has employed such informants in the past, and they have provided Israeli intelligence with the capability to prevent terrorist actions by knowing in advance when and where they would be attempted. In the past year, such informants have felt that they are no longer being proteced by Israel, and they have thus stopped providing their life-saving information. 109 dead Jews is the result.
Dr. Rusonik claims that "Arafat ordered the arrests of over 400 activists in Gaza". First, these are not "activists", they are terrorists and murderers, plain and simple. Second, they were all released within seven days of their arrest -- a testament to Arafat's commitment to security. "Only if Arafat is granted a clear mandate can Israel hold him fully accountable for Palestinian behaviour", says Rusonik, in calling for prompt Palestinian elections. Why? Israel held him fully accountable until 1992 with no mandate. If Israel cannot hold him accountable now, why have they invested their future in him by opening the negotiations in the first place? And what happens if Arafat loses the elections as is likely to happen if the recent university elections are any indication. Hamas won 91.5 percent of the vote in Palestinian universities within Israel in December -- a sure sign that Arafat will not win the elections, since 60 percent of Palestinians are under the age of 25.
Lastly, Rusonik quotes the late Dr. Yehoshafat Harkabi. "Explaining his evolution from hawk to dove at mid-life, Harkabi sighed that 'the choice is not between good and bad; it is between bad and worse'." Honestly my heart bleeds for both Harkabi and Rusonik. Harkabi did not "evolve"; he mutated. His statement was quite correct though -- the choice is between bad and worse. What I cannot understand is why Harkabi decided to choose worse. Apparently, Anthony Rusonik is advocating a similar decision by Israelis. But Israel can no longer afford to choose worse. In 1993 and 1994, Israel chose worse; they chose death. Let us hope for the sake of the Jewish people that 1995 will be a year of better choices: a year of choosing life, safety, security, and hope for all Jews -- especially in Israel.
Copyright 1994. Reproduction in electronic or print format by permission only.
