Recent Articles
The Final Reckoning
The Grand Bargain
The Tragedy of Arabia
Israel’s Challenge
The Third Lebanon War
Embracing Delusions
Boumediene vs. Bush: A Case of National Denial
Rachel’s Law
Closing Pandora's Box
America’s War on Words
When Dialogue Becomes Dangerous
To Seek a Newer World
Why the Dutch are Wrong
Changing the Rules of War
Lessons from Lebanon
When Hypocrisy Becomes Policy

About Mark Silverberg
Mark Silverberg is an attorney with a Masters Degree in Political Science and International Relations from the University of Manitoba, Canada. A former member of the Canadian Justice Department and a past Director of the Canadian Jewish Congress (Western Office) based in Vancouver, he served as a Consultant to the Secretary General of the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem during the first Palestinian intifada. He is a member of Hadassah's National Academic Advisory Board, a foreign policy analyst with the Ariel Center for Policy Research (Israel) and the International Analyst Network (U.S.), and has been interviewed on Israel National Radio as an authority on American foreign policy in the Middle East. His editorials and articles on Middle East affairs have appeared in the Hebrew and English editions of the NATIV Journal of the Ariel Center for Policy Research (Israel), American Thinker, Israel Insider, the Conservative Voice, Israel Unity Coalition, Midstream and Outpost magazines and Arutz Sheva (Israel National News). He has lectured extensively on subjects of counterterrorism, jihadism, homeland security issues and intelligence matters and is a Featured Writer with the New Media Journal
(Chicago) and a Contributing Editor for Family Security Matters. He is the author of "The Quartermasters of Terror: Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Jihad (Wyndham Hall Press, 2005).


Mark Silverberg

The Final Reckoning
November 27, 2008

On November 25th, TIME magazine reported that the Bush administration was in the process of establishing relations with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas and has warned Israeli Prime Minister Olmert against resorting to any military action against it or Iran before he leaves office. If true, the US and Israel are on a collision course. Nations not only have the right, but the obligation to defend their citizenry and territory from attack. As such, it is only a matter of time before Hamas and its Palestinian sympathizers are called to account for the death and destruction wrought by thousands of missiles they have fired into Israeli cities, towns and kibbutzim over the past three years.

Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar noted recently: "We do not recognize the State of Israel or its right to control any of the land of Palestine. Palestine is holy Islamic land. Our national problem is not related only to the West Bank, Gaza, and al-Quds (Jerusalem)...but to Palestine, all [the territory of] Palestine." By that he meant Israel proper or what he terms "the Zionist entity." Unfortunately, Zahar is not alone in this thinking. A recent poll of Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza asked: "Do you support or oppose suicide bombings against Israeli civilians?" Fifty-six percent (56%) said they support it. This parallels the results of an earlier survey conducted jointly by Public Opinion Research of Israel and the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion. That survey found that only 13% of Palestinians agreed with the statement that "Hamas was a terrorist group"; 82% agreed that Hamas was a "freedom-fighting organization"; and a mere 10% believed that bombings targeting Israeli civilians in buses and restaurants could be classified as "acts of terrorism."

 

These attitudes suggest an enormous ethical and moral divide between Palestinian and Israeli cultures. What the Bush administration fails to understand is that Hamas didn't get elected by accident. It got elected because its very rationale for existence reflects the prevailing attitude within mainstream Palestinian society. For the Palestinians, terrorism is not a weapon borne of desperation but a strategic choice. If Hamas and its Palestinian supporters seek the annihilation of Israel, they had best understand the ultimate consequences.

 

Military historian Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institute writes: "Real peace and successful reconstruction are in direct proportion to the degree to which an enemy has been vanquished - the aim being that an enemy will come to understand that it cannot go on being what it has been." In effect, only after eradicating the reasons for which wars are fought - slavery, fascism, Nazism and Japanese militarism - can real peace and re-construction follow. According to Hanson, an enemy is vanquished when it is rendered incapable and unwilling to continue the conflict. Only then can its terror apparatus be dismantled; its leadership replaced, its capacity to wage further war be eliminated; its weapons seized; its militias hunted down; its propaganda machine terminated; its educational system reformed; its human and financial resources channeled back into massive social and economic reconstruction, and its population prepared for a new and better future. If his historical analyses of war, victory and defeat are correct, neither Israel nor the US will be able to accommodate or moderate an enemy whose entire rationale for existence is its divinely-inspired mission to conquer Israel and compel its citizens to submit to Islam.

 

Faced with a choice between annihilation and survival, Israel will choose survival. War is neither pleasant nor desirable, but in an environment where Palestinian suicide bombers are trained from infancy to hate Jews and are revered as "martyrs," where Palestinian children play soccer with the decapitated head of a fallen Israeli soldier and have an orgy in the blood of their Israeli victims, where Palestinian mothers celebrate the "martyrdom" of their children, and where Palestinians are taught a culture of death in their textbooks, schools and summer camps, in their mosques and marketplaces, in their radio and television programs, in their video games and on the Internet, total war becomes necessary to eradicate the culture that breeds such pathologies. Churchill, Eisenhower and Patton understood this. They understood that it would have been impossible to dismantle the Hitler Youth, the Nazi SS, the death camps and the cult of Aryan supremacy without the complete and total destruction of the Third Reich. Only such destruction permitted the re-birth of a new Germany from the ashes of World War II. The idea that a genocidal, messianic regime like Hamas can be bribed or cajoled into denying its rationale for existence is the height of folly and flies in the face of history.

 

Eventually, a point will be reached when Israel will be forced to act with or without America’s blessing. Just as the creation of free and democratic societies in Germany and Japan after World War II necessitated a comprehensive purge of their pre-war political, economic, military, social and cultural infrastructures, including the re-education of their entire populations and the rebuilding of their societies over many years, so Palestinian society must undergo a profound upheaval followed by an equally profound metamorphosis that will sweep away the concept of "martyrdom" and religiously-inspired genocide and sow the seeds for a new tomorrow. Like it or not, the "death cult" must be extirpated from the Palestinian psyche. That will not be achieved by forcing the Israelis to concede Palestinian statehood to terrorists, relinquishing the Golan Heights to Syria, returning the Sheba ‘a Farms area to Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon, dividing Jerusalem, rectifying Israel’s borders, or settling on a refugee compensation formula – at least, not in the first instance. Real peace will be achieved only after the Palestinians have been brought to the realization that their dream of conquering Israel is futile, and that whatever the future holds for them, it will be far better than the hell of war they have brought upon themselves.

The US administration and the Europeans are wrong in believing that there is "no military solution" here. As Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute points out: "Peace cannot be accomplished simply because some visiting envoy, with or without an advanced degree in negotiating from the Harvard Business School, sits everyone down around a table so they can all reason together." Eventually, Israel will be forced to re-occupy Gaza and possibly the West Bank, and return to its pre-Oslo administration for the foreseeable future. Prior to Oslo, Israel controlled the curriculum in Palestinian schools and prevented hate-mongering clerics from preaching in the mosques. Israeli military officers served as mayors in Palestinian cities and the Israeli civil administration assumed control over water and land rights as well as economic activity. An acceptable level of prosperity, order and security was maintained - unlike today. A return to pre-Oslo would also permit Palestinian society to be restructured and rebuilt until such time as a new generation of moderate Palestinian leaders can assume responsibility for the future of their nation.

 

In the end, the Palestinians will eventually learn to reject violence not because it is politically ineffective, but because it is morally wrong. To achieve that level of understanding may take decades, but one thing is certain - only a society freed from the demons of its past can succeed. The scourge of "martyrdom" and the jihadist rationale that epitomizes Hamas must be eradicated from Palestinian society. Anything short of this merely prolongs Palestinian agony, delays Palestinian reconciliation and re-construction, sows the seeds for continuing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and renders a new Palestinian rebirth impossible.

Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The New Media Journal, BasicsProject.org, its editorial staff, board or organization. Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The New Media Journal. The New Media Journal is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. The New Media Journal is not supported by any political organization. The New Media Journal is a division of BasicsProject.org, a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational initiative. Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org is copyrighted. Basics Project’s goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

The New Media Journal.us © 2010
A Division of BasicsProject.org