The recent successes of the IDF against Hezbollah have not brought calm to Israel. Any illusions that we had weakened the terrorist group's rocket launching capabilities were mistaken. A drone struck the heart of a military base, killing four soldiers and injuring dozens. The grief is overwhelming. Sirens blared in 182 communities in central Israel at once as a barrage of rockets rained down. There’s no end in sight. This has been Israel’s hardest year since its founding.
We’re told this won’t end until the Palestinian issue is resolved. There were moments when we deluded ourselves into thinking the issue had been sidelined, but it never truly disappeared. Worse yet, in the past year, the Palestinians have become a central cause for the global left, portrayed as the world’s leading victims.
1 View gallery
Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi with Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian
Yet, by objective measures, the condition of the Palestinians — even in Gaza — was better before October 7 than the global average in terms of life expectancy, infant mortality and education. Billions in the developing world live in far worse conditions, but they don’t attract the same attention.
Some argue that peace is possible if Israel only agrees to a Palestinian state. Former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and former Palestinian UN Ambassador Nasser al-Qudwa once signed a peace proposal. It didn’t cause much of a stir in Israel, though it was published in outlets like Le Monde.
Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi made a statement a little over two weeks ago, posing as dramatic: “We, the representatives of 57 Arab and Muslim states, declare our willingness to guarantee Israel’s security in the context of ending the occupation and establishing a Palestinian state.” The statement went viral. Even I received inquiries, including from friends: There’s a peace plan, they asked. Why is Israel rejecting it?
Safadi mentioned 57 states. Is he serious? One of them is Iran. Syria, Lebanon and Iraq are its proxies. Qatar is also on the list — the same country that has funded Hamas and anti-Israel incitement on campuses for years under the banner of “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” And by “free,” they mean under Islamist Hamas rule.
More importantly, the proposal Safadi referred to is the Arab Peace Initiative. But there’s a vast difference between the original Saudi initiative, which wasn’t adopted at the 2002 Beirut Summit, and the Arab Peace Initiative which was later pushed through under pressure from rejectionist states.
The Saudi plan didn’t include the so-called “right of return,” while the Arab Peace Initiative does, incorporating UN Resolution 194, which calls for the “right of return” and opposes granting citizenship to Palestinian refugees in Arab countries. These are not just words.
The Palestinians rejected the Clinton Parameters presented in December 2000. They rejected Olmert’s 2008 offer. They rejected John Kerry and Barack Obama’s proposals in 2014. And Safadi himself has repeatedly stated his support for the “right of return,” which, in practice, would mean the end of Israel. Even the Olmert-Qudwa peace proposal suffers from the same problem. It largely reiterates the Clinton Parameters, except that it leaves the refugee issue unresolved — an issue too significant to ignore.
Ben-Dror YeminiPhoto: Avigail UziSafadi’s message of peace quickly shifted to his usual rhetoric: “After 30 years of efforts to convince people that peace is possible, the Israeli government has killed it.” The Israeli government? Is Safadi so deeply caught up in self-deception? What about Hamas’ murderous attack on Israel? Where is the rhetoric condemning the call for the annihilation of Jews? What about the acts of rape? The axis of evil? Safadi paid lip service to peace only to return to the familiar narrative of demonizing Israel.
Regarding Netanyahu, Safadi said, “He is the one endangering Israel because he’s not interested in a two-state solution.” For once, I’ll defend Netanyahu. It was Netanyahu who repeatedly declared his support for “two states.” It was Netanyahu who agreed to Kerry’s 2014 framework, which called for an Israeli withdrawal from over 90% of the territories to establish a Palestinian state. And it was Netanyahu who endorsed Trump’s 2020 peace vision, which also included a Palestinian state.
Today’s Netanyahu is different, but that’s primarily because of the Palestinians. When they reject every peace initiative, and many of them choose to align with Iran’s axis of evil, Safadi should direct his frustrations at the Palestinians — only then at Netanyahu.
The main obstacle to peace is the axis of evil. We need to fight it to pave the way for peace. Safadi should understand this, but he’s more focused on propaganda than promoting reconciliation and peace.
Get the Ynetnews app on your smartphone: