PaulL,

Re 'Zionism',

"a worldwide movement founded with the purpose of establishing a national home for the Jews in Palestine, which now provides support for the state of Israel." (Macquarie Dictionary).

So, unless you're a character from 'Alice in Wonderland' and decide to define a word more or less as you choose, that's the accepted definition. I doubt that the distinction between 'Zionist' and 'supporter of Israel' makes any material difference.

As to the 'disappearance of the Palestinians', the trend since 1948 has been towards the steady expansion of Israel and the loss of Palestinian patrimony.

"At current birth rates, Arabs in Israel will outnumber Jews in 50 years"- a rather disingenuous statement(does that include Jewish immigration?)
In 50 years the Palestinians will have disappeared given the expansion of the 'settlers', there will be only 'Arabs in Israel'. Are you seriously suggesting the Palestinians choose to live in ghettos now in the hope that in 50 years time they will 'take over'? Sounds like another self-serving conspiracy theory to me, most Palestinians are concerned with day to day survival and enduring the humiliations the Isarelis inflict on them. What do they care about master plans?

Dear editors,

Is there a requirement on On Line Opinion for writers who submit articles in their own name to actually submit original material? Dr Lamm's article looked familiar to me. I seemed to have read it before. Check out http://grendelreport.posterous.com/israel-responds-to-un-hrc-committee-report-on and tell me if certain parts do not telepathic communication that stretched credulity. What you do with it is up to you it is your reputation that may be harmed by publishing this kind of article.

Mac,
Says Zionism is "... "

I agree. Since the support for a national home for Jews in a Israel is nigh on UNIVERSAL, it seems to me that a lot of people are using the term Zionist as code for Jew.

There are significantly more Palestinians today than there were in 1948 or at any time in the past 60 years. Whether they have a state they are happy with, depends to a large extent on them. After the recent refusal to accept that Israel should remain a Jewish state it seems highly unlikely they will be getting one any time soon.

Israel will not, quite understandably, give up their major negotiating position, without appropriate concessions. Because it is counterproductive.

Gaza is a perfect point in example. After leaving Gaza the attacks on Israel did not pause.In fact,it just gave Hamas better positions from which to attack Israel. Neither was the freeze on settlement matched by any significant Palestinian gesture of peace.

It is not possible to unilaterally impose peace. Israel cannot expect to remain a viable state, if they are perceived in the region to be weak. They have too many enemies. Any significant concessions without reciprocation will be seen by the Palestinians, and Israels neighbours in the region, as weakness and is more likely to be met with further violence. Pressing home a perceived advantage.

You say “Are you seriously suggesting the Palestinians choose to live in ghettos now ... ”

A nation as reverent of suicide bombers as the Palestinians are, would seem to me to have a very different outlook on what victory entails and what is acceptable sacrifice. The Palestinians choose to live in ghettos rather than allow Israel to live in peace as a separate state. The price Acceptinging a Jewish homeland on “Arab” soil is unacceptable, at least according to their elites, Hamas, Hezbollah etc. I think that there is widely held belief that they will prevail, and that time is on their side.

PaulL,

You made some excellent observations.

However, I believe that you are too optimistic (from Israel's POV). You write: "I think that there is widely held belief [among Arabs] that they will prevail, and that time is on their side". Well, if Israel continues to do nothing (but talk), then time is indeed on the Arab's side.

The occupied territories are not mere bargaining-chips as you attempt to portray - they are also a bitter reality. Israel has taken this poisonous bait in 1967 and as a result it is being corroded from within and is slowly but surely losing its moral basis of existence. Indeed, those reverent of suicide bombers are still worse, but not by far any more, and once the remaining moral gap between Arabs and Jews closes completely, there will be no Israel left.

It is a huge mistake to believe that one can be a conqueror/occupier yet somehow remain morally untainted. To recover from her poison, Israel must let go of the occupied territories, unilaterally if needs be (or better still, by signing some inferior agreement despite knowing that the Arabs have no intention of keeping it - that would at least be a propaganda victory).

Yes, there are terrible security risks, but the total-collapse and destruction of Israel that will result from continuing to hold onto the territories is more than a risk: it is a certainty!

Better withdraw now to the 1967 border. Find some pretext if needs be to mitigate the Arab sense of "smelling weakness". It could be an agreement (like in Lebanon, where it is clear that Hezbollah has no intention to keep it), or a UN security-council resolution ("Oh, we did not retreat in war, we only obeyed the UN commands"), or whatever, but this way or the other, JUST DO IT, just get out of there, Israel MUST restore its moral superiority, before it is really too late!

Moral superiority is far more powerful than territorial depth: with it, in conjunction with a strong army and nuclear weapons, Israel can win and survive. Without it, it will not.

Yuyutsu,,

I appreciate much of what you say. The occupied territories are a bitter reality. There is a settler movement within Israel who believe they can keep the occupied territories. However there's a far greater proportion of Israelis who know that they cannot.

Israel has lost significant support in the West and some of its actions cannot be condoned. But I would also suggest that Israel is held to a standard which no Western democracy would meet, were it in Israel’s position. Further, I believe Israel suffers from its alliance with the US, which is universally hated among global leftists, and thus makes an easy target. Nevertheless, Israel needs to take some responsibility for the current predicament

I wonder what benefit you believe Israel can gain from holding the moral high ground, were I to accept that they have lost it (and I would dispute that they have) Moral superiority only curries favour with the educated western middle class (a group well known for its handwringing but little else). It has no use for a country defending its existence. To put it another way, how do you see Israel's situation getting worse by losing the moral high ground.

Israel is already roundly criticized by the UN, which is dominated by allies of the Palestinians, (or more accurately, enemies of Israel and the US). The UN has lost its relevance in that respect. If Israel does not get the peace concessions now, they are much less likely in the future. Even less so if the Palestinians and their allies begin to believe that their campaign will be successful.

The fact is the Palestinians don’t want a two-state solution. Giving up something for nothing (and moral superiority isn’t much more than nothing when you're dodging bullets and bombs) will invite more, not less violence. It’s like negotiating with the Ethiopian pirates. Every time they get a payout, more turn up for work. You’re effectively saying, “if you're violent and committed” we'll give in every time. That’s a sure path to giving away everything you own

These are excllent questions, PaulL.

So what is the value of morality?

I rely on spiritual principles, so for me the answer is simple: you get what you deserve. I do understand however, that for some, a translation into concrete, mundane terms is necessary, and that's not always easy.

I say, that if you are immoral, if you take away the freedom and dignity of others, are arrogant, worship your military might, see yourself superior, believe yourself to be invincible, sing derogatory songs about your enemies, lack humility, take bad friends as allies, if you do not listen to the cries of your fellow, than you are preparing for your own destruction. It may be a while before your former merits are exhausted, but your destruction is guaranteed.

I wouldn't continue talking and dealing with the Palestinians: it has not worked and will not work, because they are only a symptom, not the problem, just like the words of the prophet Isaiah, Chapter 10, Verses 5-6: "O Assyrian, the rod of my anger, and the staff in their hand is my indignation. I will send him against a hypocritical nation, and against the people of my wrath will I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets". Indtead, I would only deal with the Divine, directly, I would find out how I can mend my own ways, then the rest will fall into place without further effort.

Translating the above into mundane concepts, I would use terms such as:
Determination, Unity, Integrity, Self-Assuredness, Clarity, Fortitude, Fearlessness: all these are products of morality.
Also, honour your enemy - never despise him. Some enemies are absolutely determined and cannot be avoided, but one can use sweet speech and manners to avoid having many more enemies than are really necessary.

It is not about some technical "moral high ground", but about authentic morality: true morality brings true respect from all others.

It is only fortunate for Israel to be held to a higher standard than others!