Seeing each of his illusions shot down in flames one after
the other, John R. Bolton is reviving an old illusion which, to my knowledge,
was not his. The illusion is to do away with the idea of Palestine
altogether (originally a vague Golda Meier notion) by giving the 20 percent
that is left of the land to both Jordan
and Egypt
following the Jewish looting of the 80 percent.
Bolton discusses the idea in an article that came under the
title: “A 'three-state-solution' for Middle East peace” and the subtitle:
“Reality calls for attaching Gaza to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan .” It was
published in the Washington Times on April 16, 2014. The problem with this
piece of writing is that you realize at the outset it is a dishonest piece like
dishonesty can ever get. Look how he begins: “Obama's efforts to force a
'negotiated' settlement.” Hey, John, many of us became almost deaf having to
hear the Jewish cry: Only negotiation will ... only negotiation will ... only
negotiation will...
After accusing Obama of delivering on what the Jews have
been demanding, he does the very Jewish thing of denigrating the delivery man,
then sets the rules for a new game which he wants to see replace the old one.
He predicts that the new one will also fail, and leaves it up to the reader to
surmise that he will blame future failures on someone he picks randomly. It is
logical horror of the most demonic kind.
Moreover, he now says he wants to play the game that the
Jews always denied they were playing. Look how he does that: “U.S.
policymakers have acceded to Palestinian insistence that a new state be created
for them … These territories have no history of national identity or economic
interdependence.” In other words, he now says that the Jews never wanted to see
the establishment of a Palestinian state.
And yet, every time someone reached that conclusion, they
vehemently attacked them, even called them antisemitic. But why the denial then
and the admission now? Because the only excuse they could give then is the one
they are giving now. It is the following: “These territories have no history of
national identity or economic interdependence.” But if that was true for the
Palestinians who lived on the land since the beginning of time, it was more so
for the Jews who never lived there. Well, that's what the world was saying ...
but the world is not saying it now because it got tired. And this is why John
Bolton is taking the chance of admitting it at this time.
Still, he raises the logic of a case that is in his
imagination, and here is how he does that: “The logic underlying the demand for a
Palestinian state is the imperative of Israel 's
opponents to encircle the Jewish state, thereby minimizing its potential to
establish defensible borders … using the Palestinian people as the tip of the
spear against Israel .”
When he says Israel 's
opponents, he means to say the Arab front-line states. However, he does not
specify what exactly he accuses them of, or how they use the Palestinians like
a spear.
Hoping to see him shed light on those questions, you keep
reading the article, and discover something. It is not what you hoped for but
something that is very much in the Jewish style. It is that to make more points
than he could possible handle, he blows his entire thesis to kingdom come. And
depending on your mental disposition at the time of reading the pertinent
passage, you consider the discovery to be a good thing or a bad one. Look what
that's all about: “After 1940, Jordan
successfully governed the West Bank until
1967. Today … Jordan could
resume sovereignty over the West Bank … Gaza is
a harder problem, but incorporating it into Egypt is clearly a better
solution.”
What was that again? Is he saying he wants to go back to the
status quo ante which, a few moments ago, he was saying was but the tip of an
Arab spear pointed at Israel ?
Wow! There is enough here to make you dizzy, my friend, but is there anymore
surprises? Oh yes, oh yes; there is at least one more surprise to blow your
mind. Guess what it is. Believe it or not, his gut feeling tells him that no
Arab state would want to shoulder that burden, and so he has a suggestion. Look
at the following and marvel: “Egypt
and Jordan
will be understandably reluctant to take control of the troubled territories...”
So then what to do? Here is what to do: “...which therefore warrants
significant international assistance for their efforts.” In other words bribe
them.
Bribe them? Did you say bribe them? Who is going to bribe Egypt and Jordan
to adopt the status quo ante, and go back to pointing the Palestinian spear at Israel ?