Los Angeles Times

19 May 1999
The election of Ehud Barak as Israel's new prime minister changes nothing: The terms of the Jewish state's surrender and the methods that will be used to annihilate it remain the same.

From the Clinton White House, to State Department Arabists, to Israeli secularists who define evil as something done by Israeli leaders but not by their enemies, there is the misplaced hope that the election is an indication that "peace" is at hand.

A top official in the outgoing government of Benjamin Netanyahu, who wishes to remain anonymous, tells me he believes the "moderate" Barak like the late former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, will be quickly pushed to the left by the Labor Party. That party leadership reflects Neville Chamberlain's philosophy that appeasing tyrants satisfies their lusts. Offer them a partial payment, goes this thinking, and the rest of the "loan" will never be called. Throwing the bone of Czechoslovakia to Hitler only increased the Nazi leader's appetite for the entire body of Europe. Yossi Beilin, a Labor Party Knesset member who will be an influential player in the new government, wrote in Tuesday's Jerusalem Post: "There can be no peace without compromise and without peace there will never be real security." Israel has frequently compromised. It has lived up to its commitments in the Oslo accords, asking only that the Palestinians do the same, which they have not. When Israel relinquished control of Gaza and its sacred city of Hebron, there was a momentary lull. But soon it was back to diplomatic and physical terrorism because the goal of Palestinians is not compromise and coexistence. For them, such things are not ends but means to complete and total control of all the land and the elimination of every Jew (in fact, every non-Muslim "infidel"), living and dead, from it.

When the policies of the Clinton administration (and Bush's before it) of unrelenting pressure on Israel provoke another war, will the weakened U.S. military come to Israel's aid? If we aren't sending ground troops into Kosovo to stop the slaughter of hundreds of thousands, where will we acquire the will to intervene on the ground to save Jews? The United States turned away from the Jews once before in this century. To repeat that error would be an unpardonable sin.

Barak is celebrating the spoils of political victory, but he will be under intense pressure to deliver on a mirage. President Clinton, lusting after a honorable legacy and running out of time, will use the "Jewish Mafia" in the State Department and the anti-Israel cabal in the United Nations to try to force Israel to cave and deliver. Look for Beilin and former Prime Minister Shimon Peres to pressure Barak from within to surrender the Golan Heights down to the border of Israel's main water supply, the Sea of Galilee. But when war breaks out, launched from territory recently acquired by the Palestinians, will the leftists stay and fight? Or will they catch the first plane or boat to safety and indulge in "what might have been" theorizing if Likud had never ruled? Their line will be that Israel didn't compromise fast enough and so made her enemies angry.

This is the stuff of the morally challenged who see not evil but potential goodness in us all. The evil ones use such notions against the naive and allow them to dig their own graves.

Now the Palestinians have resurrected the original 1947 U.N. proposal to partition "Palestine," allowing Jews and Palestinians to live side by side. Then, it might have worked, but it was rejected by the Palestinian side, which began a war against Israel that has never stopped. Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat senses this fraudulent diplomatic ploy might be another means by which he can seize land for his ultimate and never-changing objective: the consignment of the Jewish state to the dustbin of history.