liebermania

Is Liebermania harmful to peace?

By David Verveer

Mark Antony:
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him;

Currently, we, Israelis are undergoing a shock treatment initiated by one of the most controversial politicians; Israel ever has produced. I am talking about Israel's new foreign minister, Avikdor Lieberman, who on his maiden speech as foreign minister, immediately told his audience and together with them, the entire world, how he intents to run his office and what his priorities are. An outsider would say that he acted "like a Bull in a China Store", when he told his audience that he opposes one sided actions by Israel, and if the Arabs really want peace, they need to reciprocate in equal terms, or in other words: "Peace for Peace".

His speech (and his expected policies) are putting an end to the general trend of International peace efforts, agreements and treaties, oppose everything ever agreed upon during the numerous Israeli – Arab meetings and discussions, and put the entire Middle Eastern conflict in a new perspective.
But let us one moment be totally fair, the peace efforts going on and on, every time Israel is forced by International pressure to concede to the Palestinians, and the peace is still not in the vicinity, as the Palestinians are known for always missing opportunities. A harsh and unrelenting policy might force the Palestinians to grasp the last straw, in order to prevent that Lieberman and "Liebermania" will ruin for ever, an alternative for two independent states, side by side.

We should be clear, the settlers, the occupation and Israel's actions are not the cause of the Middle Eastern struggle, they complicate any future solution, they give Israel a bad world opinion, but the war is about something entirely different, namely the stability and continuance of autocratic anti democratic regimes running the neighboring Arab countries, who see a democratic nucleus in their midst, as a danger for their existence. As has been proven over the 60 odd years of the conflict, compromises and considerations have never moved anything in the direction of peace, just the opposite; it accelerated the demands and claims by the Arabs. Everything Israel ever did was received by the International public opinion as aggressive acts against those poor Arabs, and Lieberman's sentiments indeed echo today the majority of the Israelis, as can be seen in the latest election results.

Perhaps we, the humanistic socialist minority, who more or less governed Israel until now, trying to please our beneficiaries, the USA and the EU, are wrong, perhaps we do not understand the enemy, by treating them as equals, perhaps our attitude is not suitable in our region, as the Arabs do not comprehend our gestures of peace and live on principles of Jihad, vengeance and hate. It might be that Lieberman's policy is much closer to the Arab way of thinking, basing on pure force. Lieberman is correct, I hate to admit it, that our policies until now had meager results and did not accomplish anything, nor brought peace and tranquility to the population. What did the action by Arik Sharon, by removing the settlers from the Gaza strip, accomplish? Nothing other than famine and despair for the local inhabitants, which were depending for their income of labor from those settlements? Would the Gaza's laborers had utilized the existing thriving farm units in continuing farming there, they would not be in such poverty today, but than again, a prospering Gaza would not serve the Palestinian cause.

"Liebermania" might be risky, might bring the fury of the entire world on Israel through boycotting it, severing diplomatic relations and causing empty resolutions at the UN and Security Council, but on the other hand, the entire free world needs to start dealing with the Islamic invasion and Israel could be like "the gates of Vienna", stopping the Muslim advances. Defending your ideals is not always racism, even if it on a short term looks like it.